Post Harvest Disease Management in Mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Kesar B.M. Kapsea and V.N. Pawar B.K. Sakhale b

Marathwada Agricultural University Department of Chemical Technology Parbhani-431402 Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar India Marathwada University Aurangabad-431 004 Maharashtra State India Keywords: pre-harvest spray, post harvest dip, ripening, disease reduction index shelf

life, sensory quality Abstract

The Kesar is a precious variety of Mangifera indica from western India, which has good potential domestic as well as for the export market. The studies on the effect of preharvest sprays and post harvest dip of Bavistin (1000 ppm) and Dithane M-45 (2000 ppm) and harvesting with 1 cm stalk and conventional harvesting were undertaken. After these treatments, the fruits were packed in corrugated fiber board (CFB) boxes. These boxes were loaded with sapota boxes in regular Sapota transporting trucks, which were transported over a distance of 1150 km. After transport, the storage and ripening studies were carried out. The results revealed that the pre or post harvest treatments of both the fungicides i.e. Bavistin (1000 ppm) and Dithane M-45 (2000 ppm) were found equally good in controlling stem end rot and anthracnose. However, Bavistin treatment has slightly extended the shelf life. Harvesting of mango fruits with 1 cm stalk was found better than the conventional method of harvesting with better shelf life, quality of fruits, reduced Physiological loss in weight (PLW) and decay losses. The various parameters related to quality and disease reduction index were studied during transport and storage and discussed in the paper. INTRODUCTION

The commercial viability of mango production ultimately depends on its final marketability and marketability is mainly governed by fruit quality, less by physiological loss in weight (PLW) and being free of diseases like anthracnose (ACN) and stem end rot (SER). Kesar, the most important cultivars of mango in Gujarat and Maharashtra states of India, stood better in the international market. In that the controls of post harvest diseases like ACN and SER is the need of an hour. In a study conducted by Roy and Pal (1991) of fungicidal spray on the basis of decay reduction index, Dithane M-45 (0.2%) and captain (0.2%) were found to be effective on Neelum and Totapuri mangoes. As reported by Om Prakash (1993) Topsin M or Bavistin (0.1%) as pre harvest spray have given the best control over post harvest diseases of mango.

During the recent years, the use of post harvest treatments has gained recognition as promising a method of reducing decay in mango; Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth Dapoli (Anon., 1991) recommended the Bavistin treatment for controlling the post harvest diseases in Maharashtra. Ladger (1991) mentioned that the standard post harvest treatment for control of all diseases of mango in Australia is not benomyl dip for 5 minutes at 52°C temperature within 24 hours of harvest. According to Shanta Krishnamurthy (1992), the reduction of spoilage can be obtained by hot water dip at 52-56°C for 5minutes with or without Benomy1, Kapse (1993) and Katrodia (1996) obtained promising results in control of ACN and SER by hydro cooling the fruits of Kesar mango and also with preharvest spray and Post harvest dip in Bavistin (1000 ppm) and Dithane M-45 (2000 ppm). Some workers (Anon., 1992) reported that the fruits harvested without a E-mail: bmkapse@yahoo.com; bbksakhale@rediffmail.com

493Proc. VIIIth Int. Mango Symposium Ed.: S.A. Oosthuyse Acta Hort. 820, ISHS 2009

stalk recorded slightly more PLW and less shelf life and more losses due to diseases. Similar results were also reported by Kapse (1993). The losses due to ACN and SER were also significantly higher in fruits harvested conventionally as compared to fruits harvested with 1 cm stalk (Anon., 1992).

Considering the above points, the present investigation was undertaken to standardize the suitable type of fungicidal treatment and method of harvesting to control post harvest diseases like ACN and SER and to extend the shelf life of Kesar mangoes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Treatment of Fruits

In order to study the effect of preharvest sprays of fungicides Viz. Bavistin (1000 ppm) and Dithane M-45 (2000 ppm) on transportation and storage. The developing fruits were sprayed with above fungicides twice on three replicated trees separately at an interval of 15 days. Last spray was given 15 days prior to harvest. The fruits of control trees were sprayed with water.

For studying the effect of post harvest fungicidal dip with Bavistin (1000 ppm) and Dithane M-45 (2000 ppm), the fruits were subjected to cold-water solution dip of above fungicides for 10 minutes. After treatments the fruits were air dried properly. The fruits were dipped in plain water for control.

The fruits were harvested from sprayed and non-sprayed trees with 1 cm stalk and without stalk (Conventional harvesting) for studying the effect of harvesting with above treatments. The fruits having uniform maturity and size were used for the experiment. Handling and Transport of Fruit

The treated fruit (40) of each replication were packed in conventional wooden boxes with paddy straw and newspaper as cushioning material. After filling the wooden box, it was tied with coir string on all sides. The boxes were loaded in a truck which was meant for the transport of sapota in mix with sapota boxes and transported to New Delhi to cover 1150 km. Distance within 36 hours. Storage

Immediately after the fruits arrived in Delhi, the boxes were partially opened and kept in a well-ventilated room at ambient conditions (26.4 to 35.3°C temperatures and 27 to 63 per cent relative humidity) for storage and ripening. Observations Recorded

During storage, the observations were recorded at a particular interval. The percent TSS was recorded with the help of hand Refractometer and physiological loss in weight (PLW) percentage as per the method described by Ranganna (1980). The firmness was measured with the help of Penetrometer and disease reduction index (DRI) was calculated as suggested by Gutter (1969). The organoleptic tests were carried out as described by Kapse (1976) and Kapse et al. (1985). RESULTS Physiological Loss in Weight (PLW)

The data on PLW are presented in Table 1 reveals that PLW was significantly low in fruits harvested with 1cm. stalks. Methods of fungicidal application as well as types of fungicides recorded the similar trend till the end of storage. Both the fungicides showed their significance over respective controls. Total Soluble Solids (TSS)

It is seen from the Table 2 that the TSS was increased continuously till 11th day in all treatment. The increase was faster in fruits harvested by conventional method.

494

Preharvest spray and post harvest dip treatments of both the fungicides did influence the TSS significantly. Firmness (kg/cm2)

The data from Table 3 clearly show that the type of fungicides applied could not affect the firmness but preharvest spray of these chemicals could retain the firmness significantly. The highest values were obtained from preharvest spray of both fungicides in fruits harvested with 1 cm stalks. Organoleptic Score for Different Tests 1. Taste. Table 4 shows that the organoleptic score for taste was significantly superior in fruits harvested with stalk on 11th day after storage. The highest score was observed till 13th day in the fruits harvested with stalk coupled with preharvest spray of Bavistin. 2. Color. The data from Table 5 reveals that the score for color was statistically superior over absolute control in fruits harvested with stalk treated by Bavistin post harvest dip. 3. Overall Acceptability. It is seen from Table 6 that the Bavistin treatment by both the methods of application showed its superiority over Dithane M-45. The fruits harvested with stalk have shown dominance over conventional harvesting. Disease Reduction Index (DRI) for SER

The data on DRI is presented in Table 7, which reveals that the disease incidence started from 8th day onwards. The DRI recorded in all the treated fruits were significantly higher as compared to respective controls till the end of storage. Bavistin in both the methods of application could record the highest DRI. The fruits harvested with stalk could maintain the significantly higher DRI than the fruits harvested conventionally. Disease Reduction Index (DRI) for ACN

As is seen from the Table 8, the incidence of ACN was observed from 8th day of storage. It was significantly higher in fruits harvested with stalk over fruits harvested conventionally. The method of fungicidal application and type of fungicide could not influence DRI significantly. However the highest DRI was recorded in fruits harvested with stalk and treated with Bavistin. Shelf Life

The data on shelf life of mango are presented in Table 9. It reveals that shelf life was found significantly higher in fruits harvested with stalk than control. Among fungicides the Bavistin 1000 ppm significantly extended the shelf life over Dithane M–45 in both the methods of applications. DISCUSSION Fungicidal Treatments 1. Bavistin. The Bavistin (1000 ppm) as pre harvest spray as well as post harvest dip could influence the ripening and storage after transportation slightly over Dithane M–45 but showed its significance over ripening and storage after transportation slightly over Dithane M–45. Almost all ripening parameters were benefited by Bavistin treatments with lowering the PLW and controlled both the diseases i.e. SER and ACN till the end of shelf life in Kesar mangoes. Bavistin is a systematic fungicide and tended to slightly retard the ripening, reduce the PLW and tended to slightly retard the ripening, reduce the PLW, SER and ACN. Similar results were also reported by Kapse (1993) and Kapse and Katrodia (1996). 2. Dithane M-45. The treatment of Dithame M-45 (2000 ppm) as preharvest sprays as well as postharvest dip showed a beneficial effect on ripening of Kesar fruits after transportation, over control but in preharvest sprays the shelf life in days was found significantly inferior over Bavistin treatments. The DRI was significantly higher than

495

control but considerably lower than Bavistin treatment. The effective control of SER and ACN by Dithane M-45 was reported by Dasgupta and Mandal (1989) and Roy and Pal (1991). Better organoleptic score could be related with development of desirable ripening parameter like TSS, firmness, color etc. Gradual ripening and delayed shelf life relate with delayed and lower infection of diseases. Method of Fungicide Application

Pre harvest sprays of Dithane M-45 (2000 ppm) and Bavistin (1000 ppm) when compared to post harvest dip of same fungicides with same concentrations did not differ significantly for any ripening parameters. The most important aim behind the study was to compare the preharvest spray with post harvest dip of fungicides in regard with controlling the diseases i.e. SER and ACN. Similar reports were also made by Dasgupta and Mandal (1989) and Kapse (1993). Methods of Harvesting

The fruits harvested with stalk showed significantly more shelf life as compared to fruits harvested conventionally. The conventional harvesting is a most unscientific method, which results into more visible and invisible mechanical damages and brushes. This favors the attack of fungus, ethylene production and increased respiration and thereby early ripening of fruits. If the fruits are harvested without stalk, the pathogen can get an easy entry through the stalk end, which could result in early ripening and reduced shelf life. Similar results were also reported by Roy and Pal (1991). The DRI for SER and ACN was higher in fruits harvested with stalk than fruits harvested conventionally. The results are conform with Kapse (1993). Literature Cited Anonymous, 1991. Mango and Cashew: Maturity of mango fruits. Res. Bulletin Konkan

Krishi Vidyapeeth Dapoli. 8-13. Anonymous, 1992. Post harvest losses during marketing channel. Presentation of Trial

Data in Group Meeting of AICRP on PHT of Hort. Crops ICAR, New Delhi, CINP. 1-3.

Dasgupta, M.K. and Mandal, M.C. 1989. Control of Post harvest diseases of perishables. In: Post harvest Pathology of perishables. Oxford and IBH Pub. Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Gutter, Y. 1969. Plant Disease Reporter 53:474-478. Kapse, B.M. 1993. An integrated approach to post harvest handling of Mango CV kesar

Ph.D. Thesis, Gujrat Agril. Uniersity, Navsari, India. Kapse, B.M. 1976. Study on physiological and biochemical changes in mango fruits

stored at ambient and Low temperature. M.Sc.(Agri.) Thesis, Marathwada Agril University, Parbhani, India.

Kapse, B.M. and Katrodia, J.S. 1993. Studies on hydrocooling in Kesar Mango. Acta Hort. 455:707-717.

Kapse, B.M., Rane, D.A., Salunke, D.K. and Khedkar, D.M. 1985.Sensory evaluation of different varieties of Mango during storage. Indian Food Packer. 39:43-48.

Ladger, S.N. 1991. Post harvest handling of mangoes. Acta Hort. 291:479-488. Om, Prakash. 1993. Post harvest diseases of mango and their control. A paper presented

at Golden Jubilee Symposium at Banglore organized by HIS, Abstr: 287. Ranganna, S. 1989. Mannual of analysis of fruits and vegetables. Tata McGraw Hill

Pub.Co.Ltd. New Delhi. Roy, S.K. and Pal, S. 1991. Multi locational studies to reduce Post harvest losses during

harvesting, handling, packing, transport and marketing of mango in India. Acta Hort. 291:499-507.

Shantakrishnmurthy. 1992. Studies on storage of mango. Abstr. IV International mango symposium sponsored by University of Florida and ISHS. 101.

496

Tables Table 1. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments during

transport and storage on changes in physiological in weight (%). Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk Preharvest spray 0.00 3.36 11.43 17.83 21.83 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm 0.00 4.20 12.36 18.60 22.73 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 0.00 4.00 12.00 18.56 22.50 Preharvest dip T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm 0.00 4.70 12.30 19.43 22.20 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 0.00 5.00 12.76 20.07 24.67 T-5 Control (water dip) 0.00 5.23 12.70 19.70 23.66 Conventional harvesting Preharvest spray T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm 0.00 5.30 12.96 20.20 23.76 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 0.00 5.23 13.36 20.50 25.83 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 0.00 5.06 12.10 19.53 23.00 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 0.00 5.60 12.86 20.97 24.53 T-11 Absolute control 0.00 5.73 13.60 21.20 27.90 SEM + --- 0.14 0.22 0.29 0.65 CD at 5% --- 0.42 0.63 0.84 1.91 Table 2. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments during

transport and storage on changes in TSS (%). Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk Preharvest spray 8.25 12.50 14.46 19.33 19.06 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm 8.23 12.50 14.33 19.13 18.06 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 8.15 12.40 13.90 19.13 18.30 Preharvest dip T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm 8.15 12.00 13.50 19.13 18.73 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 8.25 11.53 12.70 18.73 17.30 T-5 Control (water dip) 8.25 11.50 12.80 17.90 15.90 Conventional harvesting Preharvest spray T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm 8.23 11.60 13.00 17.53 16.20 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 8.15 10.93 11.93 17.53 16.00 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 8.15 11.50 12.93 18.07 17.20 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 8.15 11.40 12.70 17.90 17.00 T-11 Absolute control 8.15 10.10 11.50 16.53 15.50 SEM + 0.12 0.25 0.27 0.24 0.26 CD at 5% NS 0.75 0.79 0.70 0.77

497

Table 3. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments during

transport and storage on changes in firmness (kg/cm2). Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk Preharvest spray 3.36 1.90 0.66 0.20 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm 3.00 1.90 0.66 0.20 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 3.03 1.80 0.63 0.16 Preharvest dip T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm 3.06 1.83 0.60 0.33 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm N 1.61 1.60 0.56 0.13 T-5 Control (water dip) o 3.13 1.60 0.63 0.17 Conventional harvesting t Preharvest spray T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm r 3.03 1.60 0.53 0.10 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm e 2.63 1.46 0.46 0.10 T-8 Control (water spray) c Preharvest Dip o T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm r 2.96 1.53 0.60 0.13 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm d 2.76 1.50 0.46 0.10 T-11 Absolute control e 2.60 1.30 0.45 0.10 SEM + d 0.16 0.22 0.06 0.02 CD at 5% 0.34 NS 0.17 0.06 Table 4. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments during

transport and storage on changes in organoleptic score for taste. Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk 5.00 5.13 7.03 8.40 8.36 Preharvest spray 5.00 5.20 7.13 8.00 7.90 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.30 7.26 8.16 8.03 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm Preharvest dip T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.37 7.30 8.17 7.23 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 6.53 7.60 7.96 6.56 T-5 Control (water dip) 5.00 6.70 7.23 8.17 7.83 Conventional harvesting Preharvest spray T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.50 7.27 8.07 7.53 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 6.47 7.73 7.67 7.10 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 6.03 7.56 7.93 7.53 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 5.77 7.36 7.93 6.63 T-11 Absolute control 5.00 6.60 7.43 7.57 6.03 SEM + --- 0.16 0.13 0.14 0.24 CD at 5% NS 0.51 0.38 0.40 0.71

498

Table 5. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments during

transport and storage on changes in organoleptic score for color. Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk 5.00 5.53 6.73 8.07 8.73 Preharvest spray 5.00 5.73 6.76 8.30 8.47 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.53 6.56 8.33 8.43 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm Preharvest dip T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.90 7.40 8.13 8.10 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 6.56 6.96 8.06 7.17 T-5 Control (water dip) 5.00 5.90 6.27 8.20 7.80 Conventional harvesting Preharvest spray T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 6.00 6.37 8.13 8.07 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 6.70 7.67 7.90 7.07 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.96 6.70 8.30 7.80 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 6.03 7.07 8.13 7.37 T-11 Absolute control 5.00 6.76 7.43 7.80 6.63 SEM + --- 0.17 0.22 0.16 0.30 CD at 5% NS 0.51 0.64 0.42 0.88 Table 6. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments during

transport and storage on changes in organoleptic score for overall acceptability. Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk 5.00 5.36 6.67 8.00 8.06 Preharvest spray 5.00 5.56 6.63 7.90 8.04 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.7 6.70 8.0 8.50 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm Preharvest dip T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.47 6.47 8.00 8.03 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 6.67 6.90 7.53 6.30 T-5 Control (water dip) 5.00 5.33 7.00 7.90 7.53 Conventional harvesting Preharvest spray T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.46 7.23 7.80 8.10 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 6.87 7.46 7.57 7.20 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 5.00 5.20 7.03 7.87 7.36 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 5.00 5.33 6.93 7.53 7.33 T-11 Absolute control 5.00 6.86 7.23 7.53 6.23 SEM + --- 0.19 0.16 0.11 0.23 CD at 5% NS 0.54 0.46 0.34 0.68

499

Table 7. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments, during

transport and storage on changes in disease reduction index for stem end rot (SER). Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk Preharvest spray N N 98.33 97.33 85.66 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm o o 100.00 85.33 75.67 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 100.00 95.00 73.33 Preharvest dip d d T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm i i 79.00 85.00 56.00 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm s s 73.33 53.33 13.33 T-5 Control (water dip) e e 100.00 83.66 63.33 Conventional harvesting a a Preharvest spray s s T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm e e 96.67 78.67 65.00 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 75.00 39.67 9.33 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 100.00 75.00 67.00 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 100.00 71.33 67.00 T-11 Absolute control 0.00 0.00 0.00 SEM + 1.69 7.60 10.38 CD at 5% 4.95 22.29 30.44 Table 8. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments, during

transport and storage on changes in disease reduction index for anthracnose. Treatments Storage period (in days) 1 4 8 11 13 Harvesting with 1 cm stalk Preharvest spray N N 100.00 84.33 66.33 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm o o 85.00 78.33 63.00 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 100.00 78.33 52.67 Preharvest dip d d T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm i i 83.00 76.33 48.33 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm s s 58.67 48.33 23.00 T-5 Control (water dip) e e 98.67 43.33 33.00 Conventional harvesting a a Preharvest spray s s T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm e e 92.33 50.33 19.33 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 53.00 41.00 10.00 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 91.33 69.67 26.67 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 84.00 65.00 10.67 T-11 Absolute control 0.00 0.00 0.00 SEM + 5.67 6.71 6.81 CD at 5% 16.64 19.68 19.99

500

Table 9. Effect of methods of harvesting of mangoes and fungicidal treatments during

transport and storage on changes in shelf life in days. Treatments Shelf life in days Harvesting with 1 cm stalk Preharvest spray 13.33 T-1 Bavistin 1000 ppm 12.00 T-2 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 12.33 Preharvest dip T-3 Bavistin 1000 ppm 12.33 T-4 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 11.00 T-5 Control (water dip) 12.00 Conventional harvesting Preharvest spray T-6 Bavistin 1000 ppm 11.00 T-7 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 10.33 T-8 Control (water spray) Preharvest Dip T-9 Bavistin 1000 ppm 11.00 T-10 Dithane M-45 2000 ppm 10.00 T-11 Absolute control SEM + 0.35 CD at 5% 1.02

501

502