Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Scientia Horticulturae
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scihorti
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 20 February 2015
Received in revised form 26 August 2015
Accepted 28 August 2015
Keywords:
Raspberry
Color
Sensory evaluation
Chemical composition
Ripening
Storage
a b s t r a c t
In order to identify the optimal harvest time and monitor changes in raspberry (Rubus idaeus L. cv. Glen
Ample) fruit quality during ripening and storage, quality was assessed and compared by physical, chemical and sensory fruit quality criteria. Visual classication of fruit colour according to the Natural Colour
System (NCS) chart and by physical measurement of fruit adherence to the receptacle or fruit compression resistance yielded parallel and highly signicant results. The light red colour stage corresponding
to NCS S code 3060-Y90R was identied as the optimal harvest stage for commercial fresh marketing of
the Glen Ample cultivar. Fruit harvested at this stage developed the same chemical and sensory qualities as in situ matured fruits and maintained high sensory quality after 8 days of storage in the dark at
23 C. As the fruits mature, the concentration of titratable acids decreases, whereas the concentrations
of anthocyanins and the sugar:acid ratio increase in parallel with colour development. While correlation
analysis revealed a correlation between sensory traits like sweetness and acidity with sucrose and the
sugar:acid ratio, respectively, the overall fruit tastefulness was not strongly correlated with any specic
phytochemical component, thus illustrating the complex nature of this sensory trait. Due to its ease of
performance, picking raspberry fruits related to a standardised colour chart is recommended for picking
raspberry fruits with optimal quality.
2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Red raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) is grown throughout the temperate regions of the world as a commercially important berry crop.
The fruit is highly valued for its avour and high content of potentially important health-benecial constituents (Mullen et al., 2002;
Liu et al., 2002; Anttonen and Karjalainen, 2005; Rao and Snyder,
2010). It is a perishable commodity, and although new cultivars
with rmer fruit have been released (Finn et al., 2008) the shelf life
of raspberry is generally short. Identication of the optimal maturity stage for harvesting and correct post-harvest handling and
storage of the fruit, are therefore, essential for successful marketing
of fresh consumption raspberries.
Fruit colour and adhesion to the receptacle plug are the main
criteria used by the producer for practical assessment of the right
maturity stage for harvesting, while colour is also the main criterion
used by the consumer to judge fruit quality. The main contributors to the red colour of the raspberry fruit are the anthocyanins.
Only cyanidin-and pelargonidin-type anthocyanins are present in
red raspberry, the former type predominating (Wang et al., 2009;
Remberg et al., 2010; Mazur et al., 2014). Their synthesis is inuenced by a number of environmental factors in both green leaves
and in fruits. According to Grisebach (1982), light is the most
important factor inuencing anthocyanin biosynthesis in plants
in general, and in vegetative tissues, anthocyanin biosynthesis is
induced by UV light as an important photo-protective mechanism
(Steyn et al., 2002). In Glen Ample raspberry fruit, the concentration of total monomeric anthocyanins (TMA) was not signicantly
affected by post-owering growth temperature in the 1224 C
range or by photoperiod at 18 C (Remberg et al., 2010; Mazur et al.,
2014). It is well known and documented however, that postharvest
colour changes and anthocyanin synthesis take place in immaturely
harvested fruit of red raspberry (Wang et al., 2009) as well as in
other berry species (Kalt et al., 1993; Sachs and Shaw, 1993), thus
demonstrating de novo synthesis in detached fruits. Synthesis can
occur in darkness, but the rate is slightly enhanced in light (Austin
217
Fig. 1. The numbered colours selected for classication of the maturity stage at
harvest in Glen Ample raspberry.
218
dilution (1:20) by anion exchange HPLC on a Dionex IonPac AS11HC 4 250 mm column [Dionex (UK) Ltd. Camberley, UK] tted
with a 4 50 mm guard column utilising gradient of NaOH in 10%
methanol (see supplementary Table 1) as described in Mazur et al.
(2014). Sugars were quantied following extract dilution (1:500)
by anion exchange chromatography on a Dionex Carbopac PA-100
250 4 mm column [Dionex (UK) Ltd. Camberley, UK] utilising an
isocratic elution with 200 mM NaOH prepared in degassed water
at a ow rate of 1 mL min1 for 15 min, as described by Mazur et al.
(2014).
2.4.2.2. Extraction and quantication of individual polyphenols. For
extraction and quantication of individual polyphenols 100 2 mg
of freeze dried berry powder was weighted into 15 mL amber glass
vials sealed with a screw cap containing a PTFE liner (SULPELCO,
SigmaAldrich, UK) and extracted with 3 mL of a water, acetonitrile and acetic acid mixture in the ratio of 60:40:1 at 20 C for
1-h in a rotary shaker as described by Mazur et al. (2014). The
supernatant was diluted in 1:10 ratio utilising extraction solved and
subsequently transferred into lter vials and sealed with a 45 m
PTFE line screwcap (Thomson Instrument Company, London, UK).
The chemical analysis of the berry extracts was performed on
a high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) system consisting of a quaternary pump (Agilent 1260), a DAD (Agilent 1260), a
column temperature control device (Agilent 1260) and an autosampler Thermostat (Agilent 1290) coupled to a Triple Quadrupole
Mass Spectrometer (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA)
with the instrument settings described in Mazur et al. (2014).
The chromatography was performed on a Phenomenex C18(2)
2 150 mm (4 m) column tted with a C18 4 2 mm Security
GuardTM cartridge (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA) at ow rate
of 0.3 mL min1 utilising a gradient consisting of 3 phases (see
supplemental table X). Individual polyphenols were quantied by
reference to an external calibration curve generated using purchased standards.
2.5. Data analysis
Using GenStat for Windows, 16th Edition [16.2.11713 (64-bit
edition) VSN International Ltd., Hemel Hempstead, UK], an analysis of variance with linear model was applied to the data set which
tested for a linear relationship to colour. For the sensory, sugar,
organic acid and polyphenol data a two-factor model was used
to test for signicant differences between the storage treatment,
colour class and the interaction. For adhesion, weight and compression data a single factor model was applied to test for signicant
difference in the colour variable.
For the sensory analysis the judges were treated as a random
effect, and all the data for colour 5 was excluded in the statistical
analysis of the sensory evaluations of acidity, sweetness, bitterness,
freshness and overall tastefulness as the data for this colour was
missing for berries stored for 8 d.
Pearsons correlation analysis and regression analysis were
statistical methods of choice for the analysis of phytochemical
properties. Results for regression analysis gave the following information: (a) whether the slope for regression on the colour was
signicantly different to zero when combining the two treatments
(e.g. Colour at harvest and Storage) (b) whether the intercept of 1
or 8 d storage for individual compounds was signicantly different, while having the same slope and (c) whether slopes for short
and long term storage for individual compounds were signicantly
different from each other. Furthermore, correlation analysis was
applied in order to investigate the internal relationship between
organic acids, sugars and avonoids. Finally, correlation analysis
was applied in order to analyse the relationship between sensory
scores and fruit chemical content.
219
Table 1
Physical traits of Glen Ample raspberry fruits harvested at ve dened colour stages. Results from the ANOVA with linear model are presented, rstly the ANOVA test, then
the test for linearity given as the signicance of the slope in relation to colour. Different letters indicate a signicant difference.
Colour at
harvest
Pull force
(g) SD
(n = 12)
Berry weight
(g FW) SD
(n = 3, 10 in each)
Compression (%) SD
(3) (n = 3)
1
2
3
4
5
183.4 35a
138.5 44b
94.7 35c
53.7 16d
33.2 15d
4.9 0.30a
5.3 0.06ab
5.6 0.03b
6.5 0.30c
6.7 0.50c
30.74a*
28.30 4.3a
32.70 1.7ab
34.69 1.1ab
38.84 4.3b
<0.001
13.35
<0.001
38.5
2.990
<0.001
0.238
<0.001
0.488
0.053
0.046
2.749
0.008
2.26
0.615
3. Results
Acidity as judged by the sensory panel was found to be dependent on both colours at harvest and length of storage (P = 0.016,
standard error of difference (s.e.d) 0.539 and P = 0.008 s.e.d. 0.381,
respectively), with no signicant interaction term. Thus, lightcoloured berries were judged to be more acid than darker coloured
berries, and this was also the case after 8 d of storage (Table 2).
However, the longer storage period resulted in higher scores for
acidity from the judges for each colour class.
Likewise, the taste of sweetness was also dependent on both
storage (P = 0.007, s.e.d. 0.359) and colour at harvest (P = 0.028, s.e.d.
0.508). Berries stored for 1 d scored on average higher for sweetness
than berries stored for 8 d, with colour four scoring the highest
(Table 2). There was no signicant interaction between colour at
harvest and storage regarding scores for sweetness.
The sensory panel gave generally low scores for bitterness
(Table 2). There was a trend that bitterness was reduced after 8
d of storage (the average was reduced from 2.2 to 1.7), but this
trend was not signicant (P = 0.151).
Overall tastefulness scores were dependent on the storage treatment (P < 0.001) and interaction between colour and storage time
(P = 0.039). It was evident that the sensory panel preferred colour
Table 2
Means of sensory traits SE after one or eight days of storage of Glen Ample raspberry fruits harvested at ve dened colour stages. In addition, a Sweetness/Acidity ratio
where calculated for each judge based on the scores that were given in the sensory evaluation. ANOVA results are presented with P - value and s.e.d. of each model factor.
Storage
Colour at harvest
Overall tasteSE
AciditySE
SweetnessSE
BitternessSE
FreshnessSE
AttractivenessSE
Sweetness/AciditySE
1
d
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
4.33 0.39
4.67 0.55
5.44 0.80
6.00 0.58
4.00 0.67
5.11
6.11 0.77
5.33 0.67
4.89 0.73
5.22 0.66
3.56 0.53
5.39
4.11 0.63
3.89 0.54
5.22 0.70
6.22 0.52
5.11 0.56
4.86
1.78 0.55
2.22 0.55
2.22 0.54
2.44 0.60
2.00 0.47
2.17
5.22 0.40
5.22 0.40
5.33 0.57
5.67 0.55
3.67 0.37
5.36
5.67 0.76
6.78 0.47
6.89 0.33
5.67 0.50
4.33 0.47
5.87
0.73 0.12
0.81 0.14
1.17 0.20
1.42 0.33
1.57 0.21
1.14
8
d
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
3.56 0.50
4.56 0.44
3.44 0.65
3.18 0.41
n.a.
3.68
7.78 0.28
6.44 0.58
6.22 0.62
5.29 0.53
n.a.
6.43
3.44 0.50
4.11 0.45
3.56 0.47
4.28 0.62
n.a.
3.85
1.78 0.43
1.56 0.34
1.67 0.44
1.83 0.49
n.a.
1.71
6.33 0.55
6.22 0.36
5.44 0.58
4.74 0.53
n.a.
5.69
6.89 0.54
7.00 0.53
5.44 0.60
4.13 0.61
1.00 0.00
4.89
0.46 0.08
0.72 0.13
0.67 0.15
0.96 0.26
n.a.
0.70
<0.001
0.351
0.508
0.497
0.039
0.702
0.008
0.381
0.016
0.539
0.486
0.762
0.007
0.359
0.028
0.508
0.142
0.719
0.151
0.315
0.878
0.446
0.867
0.631
0.306
0.314
0.522
0.444
0.091
0.627
0.003
0.318
<0.001
0.503
<0.001
0.711
Data in italic were omitted in the statistical analysis due to lack of data for colour 5 after 8 d of storage.
n.a. - not applicable.
220
Table 3
Means SD of SS, TA and SS/TA ratio after one or eight days of storage of Glen
Ample raspberry fruits harvested at ve dened colour stages. ANOVA results are
presented with P - value and s.e.d. of each model factor.
Storage
Colour at harvest
SS (%) SD
TA (%) SD
SS/TA SD
1
d
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
9.25 0.1
9.95 0.1
9.38 0.2
10.00 0.0
9.70 0.0
9.66
9.60 0.0
9.45 0.1
10.10 0.0
9.80 0.0
9.00 0.0
9.59
2.8 0.06
2.7 0.04
2.4 0.05
2.1 0.06
1.9 0.01
2.4
2.7 0.02
2.4 0.01
2.1 0.04
1.8 0.01
1.6 0.05
2.1
3.3 0.05
3.7 0.09
4.0 0.16
4.7 0.14
5.2 0.02
4.2
3.5 0.03
3.9 0.02
4.8 0.10
5.4 0.02
5.5 0.17
4.6
0.058
0.030
<0.001
0.048
<0.001
0.068
<0.001
0.019
<0.001
0.029
0.071
0.041
<0.001
0.043
<0.001
0.068
<0.001
0.096
8
d
term colour at harvest x storage (P < 0.001) were highly significant factors inuencing the rating of the berries (Table 2). After
1 d of storage, berries of colour two and three scored the highest,
while light coloured berries (colour one), and darker berries (colour
four and ve), scored the least (Table 2). After 8 d of storage, however, there was a shift in the preferences towards berries that were
harvested with lighter colours, i.e. colour one and two scored the
highest. Dark-coloured berries were judged as less attractive than
bright-coloured berries, regardless of storage time. In this regard, it
is important to note that the berries increased their pigmentation
during storage, and that the berries with the lightest colour at harvest darkened the most. After 8 d of storage, berries with colour one
and two at harvest could be classied to colour three, and berries
with colour three, four and ve at harvest could be classied to
colour four and ve, respectively.
four after 1 d of storage, while they preferred colour two for berries
stored for 8 d. Furthermore, the maximum score for 8 d of storage
was signicantly lower than the maximum score for 1 d storage
(Table 2).
In the judgement of visual attractiveness both the storage treatment (P = 0.003), colour at harvest (P < 0.001) and the interaction
Table 4
Concentrations of phytochemicals in raspberry Glen Ample harvested at ve different colour stages as determined in samples stored for 1 d and 8 days.
Colour stage
Phytochemicals
Organic acids (g mg1 dry weight)
Malate (1 d)
Malate (8 d)
Citrate (1 d)
Citrate (8 d)
Oxalate (1 d)
Oxalate (8 d)
16.5
4.7
253.6
186.8
0.5
0.6
9.9
6.3
206.3
243.3
0.5
0.6
4.6
3.0
175.5
158.5
0.5
0.5
3.1
2.0
193.0
146.0
0.5
0.5
0.4
1.0
118.3
165.0
0.5
0.4
137.3
125.1
112.2
103.9
100.8
72.1
117.2
182.0
99.5
144.9
122.7
108.7
126.0
125.0
111.9
101.1
111.3
91.9
123.0
173.3
114.4
145.7
133.9
129.1
126.9
191.4
120.4
175.7
141.3
86.2
18.2
43.3
12.9
19.1
1170.5
2543.6
6.3
30.9
4.9
852.9
265.0
322.1
281.0
360.3
39.8
64.5
22.4
43.6
17.3
23.6
1378.0
2433.9
9.1
33.0
8.1
1015.9
240.2
349.9
253.0
382.4
39.8
56.7
34.5
37.7
30.9
30.8
1893.9
2111.9
17.0
31.0
18.1
1197.8
349.4
320.7
341.8
324.7
53.0
55.7
52.0
58.0
52.0
56.6
2449.5
2829.9
35.9
82.3
49.3
2042.0
568.9
657.2
469.3
480.2
80.0
78.6
60.2
61.3
72.0
65.5
2581.8
2841.3
62.3
88.2
118.4
2400.6
1032.9
846.4
631.7
564.3
83.4
77.2
4.0
5.6
1.5
2.5
2.8
4.8
1.0
1.7
5.4
3.9
2.7
2.1
4.3
4.1
1.7
1.6
7.6
5.5
3.2
2.7
221
Table 5
Probability levels of signicance (P - value) and standard errors (s.e.) are presented for regression analyses of organic acids, sugars, anthocyanins and avonols in raspberry
samples harvested at different colour (maturity) stages and stored for 1 d or 8 d in darkness at 23 C.
Phytochemicals
Colour at harvest
Storage
Malate
s.e.
Cyanidin-3-O-sambubioside
s.e.
Cyanidin-3-2-xylosyl-rutinoside
s.e.
Cyanidin-3-O-sophoroside
s.e.
Pelargonidin-3-O-sophoroside
s.e.
Oxalate
s.e.
Pelargonidin-3-glucosyl-rutinoside
s.e.
Cyanidin-3-O-rutinoside
s.e.
Cyanidin-3-O-glucoside
s.e.
Cyanin
s.e.
Citrate
s.e.
Glucose
s.e.
Sucrose
s.e.
Hyperoside
s.e.
Quercetin-3-O-glucuronide
s.e.
Fructose
s.e.
0.008
3.23
0.005
9.57
<0.001
6.09
n.s.
478
0.007
19.0
n.s.
0.045
<0.001
21.9
<0.001
135
0.002
67.6
0.006
10.6
0.011
29.1
n.s.
22.2
n.s.
20.9
n.s.
1.25
n.s.
0.662
n.s.
28.5
0.008
2.74
0.004
7.68
<0.001
6.39
0.008
327
0.001
12.3
0.014
0.032
0.002
21.6
0.005
145
0.008
70.4
0.018
10.4
0.046
30.6
n.s.
19.5
n.s.
16.9
n.s.
1.33
n.s.
0.706
n.s.
23.0
<0.001
1.60
0.002
5.96
<0.001
6.44
0.003
233
0.005
13.1
0.015
0.028
0.01
23.2
0.016
149
0.014
66.1
0.012
8.6
n.s.
30.3
n.s.
18.4
n.s.
17.9
n.s.
1.15
n.s.
0.675
n.s.
21.4
0.99
0.99
0.98
0.99
0.86
0.74
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.83
0.71
-0.85
-0.76
-0.61
0.52
-0.01
0.78
0.81
0.89
0.86
0.91
0.96
0.99
0.99
0.96
1.00
-0.83
-0.67
-0.66
0.04
0.24
0.85
0.48
0.70
0.71
0.75
0.82
0.86
0.83
0.81
0.86
0.87
-0.81
-0.69
-0.76
-0.14
0.19
0.78
0.36
0.61
0.68
0.68
0.74
0.74
0.71
0.72
0.72
0.74
0.96
0.96
0.96 1.00
0.81 0.86 0.87
0.72 0.72 0.74 0.96
-0.33
-0.70
-0.80
0.63
0.79
0.91
0.22
0.88
0.88
0.98
0.93
-0.55
-0.81
-0.79
0.48
0.69
0.80
0.38
0.94
0.85
0.98
0.98
0.95
0.94
0.73
0.88
0.85
0.72
0.80
0.83
0.42
0.14
0.92
0.98
0.98
0.91
0.95
0.96
0.26
0.14
0.93
0.98
1.00
0.99
0.98
0.03
0.15
0.95
0.92
0.96
0.98
0.33
0.25
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.09
0.10
-0.61
-0.88
-0.85
0.46
0.65
0.77
0.35
0.86
0.72
0.91
1.00
0.92
0.98
-0.54
-0.85
-0.87
0.57
0.68
0.81
0.26
0.89
0.80
0.95
0.99
0.96
0.98
0.99
Querc Gluc
-0.58
-0.87
-0.86
0.49
0.67
0.79
0.33
0.86
0.73
0.92
Hyperoside
-0.40
-0.70
-0.74
0.54
0.75
0.85
0.33
0.95
0.94
Cy-3-O-Rut
-0.25
-0.49
-0.57
0.54
0.67
0.75
0.26
0.93
FL
Pel-Gluc-Rut
Pel-3-O- Soph
0.93
0.95
0.86
0.88
0.94
0.86
0.89
0.89
0.22
0.17
Cy-3-O-Gluc
-0.58
-0.75
-0.73
0.54
0.52
0.65
0.27
Cy -Gluc- Rut
Cy-3-O-Samb
Fructose
0.98
0.99
1.00
0.96
0.96
0.82
0.74
Querc Gluc
0.99
0.96
0.96
0.99
0.91
0.91
0.75
0.68
-0.86
-0.77
-0.62
0.54
-0.05
0.75
0.83
0.88
0.85
0.91
0.96
0.98
0.99
0.96
Hyperoside
0.99
0.97
0.92
0.92
0.97
0.85
0.86
0.71
0.68
-0.87
-0.89
-0.73
0.56
-0.15
0.76
0.87
0.97
0.97
0.99
1.00
0.99
0.99
Cy-3-O-Rut
Pel-3-O- Soph
-0.87
-0.83
-0.67
0.57
-0.10
0.76
0.86
0.93
0.92
0.96
0.99
0.99
Pel-Gluc-Rut
Cy-3-O-Gluc
-0.83
-0.81
-0.65
0.51
-0.01
0.83
0.81
0.95
0.92
0.96
0.98
Cy-Xyl-Rut
Cy -Gluc- Rut
-0.89
-0.90
-0.76
0.54
-0.17
0.76
0.86
0.96
0.97
0.99
Cy-3-O-Soph
0.88 0.65
0.91
0.91
-0.52 -0.80
-0.22 -0.34
-0.41 -0.56
-0.08 0.19
-0.75 -0.73
-0.49 -0.57
-0.70 -0.74
-0.87 -0.86
-0.70 -0.80
-0.81 -0.79
-0.88 -0.85
-0.85 -0.87
-0.81 -0.86
0.07 -0.31
-0.33 -0.62
Quinate
Oxalate
Malate
Citrate
0.88
0.65
-0.26
0.20
0.04
-0.07
-0.58
-0.25
-0.40
-0.58
-0.33
-0.55
-0.61
-0.54
-0.47
0.29
-0.19
-0.84
-0.91
-0.76
0.57
-0.20
0.74
0.87
0.99
0.99
FL
Anthocyanins
Cyanin
Citrate
Malate
Oxalate
Quinate
Frucose
Glucose
Sucrose
Cyanin
Cy-3-O-Soph
Cy-3-O-Samb
Cy -Gluc- Rut
Cy-3-O-Gluc
Pel-3-O- Soph
Cy-Xyl-Rut
Pel-Gluc-Rut
Cy-3-O-Rut
Hyperoside
Querc Gluc
-0.83
-0.94
-0.80
0.54
-0.25
0.70
0.85
0.98
Sugars
Sucrose
OA
Sugars
Anthocyanins
Fl
8 d storage
0.98
0.99
0.96
0.95
0.93
0.97
0.88
0.89
0.70
0.61
Cy-3-O-Samb
-0.75
-0.86
-0.67
0.59
-0.14
0.76
0.84
Cy-3-O-Soph
OA
Glucose
Fructose
Quinate
Oxalate
0.91 0.90
0.95
0.95
-0.47 -0.21
0.47 0.47
-0.51 -0.40
-0.83 -0.64
-0.86 -0.67
-0.94 -0.80
-0.91 -0.76
-0.90 -0.76
-0.81 -0.65
-0.83 -0.67
-0.89 -0.73
-0.77 -0.62
-0.76 -0.61
-0.67 -0.66
-0.69 -0.76
Cyanin
0.91
0.90
-0.38
0.35
-0.53
-0.78
-0.75
-0.83
-0.84
-0.89
-0.83
-0.87
-0.87
-0.86
-0.85
-0.83
-0.81
Anthocyanins
Sucrose
Citrate
Malate
Oxalate
Quinate
Fructose
Glucose
Sucrose
Cyanin
Cy-3-O-Soph
Cy-3-O-Samb
Cy -Gluc- Rut
Cy-3-O-Gluc
Pel-3-O- Soph
Cy-Xyl-Rut
Pel-Gluc-Rut
Cy-3-O-Rut
Hyperoside
Querc Gluc
Malate
1 d storage
Sugars
Glucose
Fl
Anthocyanins
Sugars
OA
Citrate
OA
Cy-Xyl-Rut
222
-0.47
-0.81
-0.86
0.61
0.72
0.85
0.23
0.89
0.83
0.96
0.98
0.98
0.98
0.97
1.00
0.29
0.07
-0.31
0.81
0.17
0.28
-0.68
0.22
0.42
0.26
0.03
0.33
0.09
-0.01
0.15
0.22
-0.19
-0.33
-0.62
0.90
-0.17
0.04
-0.88
0.17
0.14
0.14
0.15
0.25
0.10
0.13
0.22
0.25
0.76
0.99
0.97 1.00
-0.01 0.15 0.22
0.13 0.22 0.25 0.76
Fig. 2. Correlation matrices of phytochemical parameters of raspberry fruit stored for (A) 1 d and (B) 8 d at 23 C in the dark. The correlation statistic ranges from 1 through
0 to 1, indicating a perfect negative correlation, no correlation, and perfect positive correlation. Correlations of statistical signicance (P < 0.05) are highlighted in red. (For
interpretation of the references to colour in this gure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
berries stored for 8 d (r < 0.75, Fig. 2B), with no signicant correlation present.
Citrate was also strongly negatively correlated with the
avonols hyperoside and quercetin-3-O-glucoside (r < 0.75,
Fig. 2A, P < 0.05) in raspberry samples stored for 1 d, but the effect
was not statistically signicant. In contrast, no signicant relationship for those phytochemical parameters was observed in samples
stored for 8 d (Fig. 2B).
Glucose and sucrose were strongly positively correlated with
anthocyanins (r > 0.75) in berries stored for 1 d, while only slightly
weak negative correlations were observed between fructose and
all anthocyanins (Fig. 2A, P > 0.05). In contrast, fructose showed
stronger positive correlations (r > 0.5) with all anthocyanins in
berries stored for 8 d (Fig. 2B). The relationship between glucose and all anthocyanins remained similar for both 1 d and 8
d stored berries. Only one signicant correlation was observed
between glucose and cyanidin-3-O-glucoside in samples stored
for 8 days. However, only very weak positive and non-signicant
correlations between sucrose and anthocyanins were observed in
samples stored for 8 d. Furthermore, sucrose and fructose only
showed weak positive and non-signicant correlations with the
avonols hyperoside and quercetin-3-O-glucoside, while glucose
was strongly positively correlated with both avonols after 1 d of
storage (r > 0.75, Fig. 2A). A different result was found for samples
stored for 8 d: While no correlation was found for fructose and glucose with either avonol, a strong negative correlation was present
for sucrose and hyperoside (r = 0.68, P > 0.05) and quercetin-3-Oglucoside (r = 0.88, P < 0.05).
Sucrose was also strongly negatively correlated with both citric and malic acid (r < 0.75, P > 0.05, Fig. 2). A similar but weaker
trend was observed for glucose and organic acids in berry samples
stored for 1 d. No trend for those phytochemical parameters was
observed in samples stored for 8 d. Furthermore, correlation analysis revealed a stronger positive and also signicant relationship
between glucose and fructose (r > 0.75, P < 0.05) in samples stored
for 8 d in comparison to samples stored for only 1 d (Fig. 2).
All regression analysis results of individually quantied phytochemicals are summarised in Table 5. First, the relationship
between chemical compound concentration and maturity stage
was tested across the two storage times. Linear regression analysis revealed that the slopes of all organic acids and anthocyanins
were signicantly different from zero (P < 0.05), thus revealing a
linear relationship between the concentrations of the respective
organic acids or anthocyanins and the maturity stage at harvest.
On the other hand, no signicant linear relationships were observed
between maturity stage at harvest and the concentrations of sugars,
or avonols (Table 5).
223
Sweetness
Acidity
Bitterness
Tastefulness
Visual Attractiveness
Soluble Solids
Titratable Acids
Citrate
Malate
Oxalate
Quinate
Frucose
Glucose
Sucrose
Cyanin
Cy-3-O-Soph
Cy-3-O-Samb
Cy -Gluc- Rut
Cy-3-O-Gluc
Pel-3-O- Soph
Cy-Xyl-Rut
Pel-Gluc-Rut
Cy-3-O-Rut
Hyperoside
Querc Gluc
Chemic al Scores
Freshness
FL
Anthocyanins
Sugars
OA
Se ns ory Sc ores
0.64
0.25
0.62
-0.13
0.13
-0.10
-0.69
-0.36
-0.05
-0.32
-0.67
-0.59
-0.47
-0.70
-0.76
-0.76
-0.40
-0.32
-0.22
-0.33
-0.64
0.25
-0.13
0.18
0.72
0.53
0.22
0.43
0.60
0.55
0.21
0.62
0.43
0.52
0.28
0.21
0.52
0.31
0.75
-0.13
0.16
-0.13
-0.88
-0.36
-0.04
-0.32
-0.69
-0.58
-0.32
-0.72
-0.65
-0.70
-0.35
-0.27
-0.15
-0.10
-0.83
0.53
-0.62
-0.39
0.52
0.13
-0.18
-0.01
0.21
0.10
-0.20
0.25
0.06
0.15
-0.04
0.02
0.34
0.14
-0.49
0.15
-0.28
-0.14
0.36
-0.08
-0.27
-0.17
-0.06
-0.08
-0.45
-0.03
-0.25
-0.11
-0.09
-0.09
0.63
0.38
0.26
-0.08
-0.15
-0.32
-0.53
-0.62
-0.38
-0.57
-0.76
-0.68
-0.76
-0.78
-0.83
-0.76
-0.24
-0.15
-0.47
-0.50
-0.08
0.45
-0.30
-0.25
0.25
0.33
0.27
0.30
0.34
0.15
0.28
0.35
0.25
0.17
-0.30
-0.20
0.81
0.83
0.14
-0.02
-0.22
-0.44
-0.60
-0.80
-0.70
-0.83
-0.92
-0.78
-0.85
-0.91
-0.86
-0.78
-0.35
-0.33
619
620
224
-0.82
-0.80
-0.15
0.10
0.17
0.38
0.59
0.78
0.68
0.80
0.90
0.75
0.86
0.89
0.86
0.77
0.27
0.26
Fig. 4. Pearsons correlation analysis of phytochemical components versus sensory and chemical scores characteristics as determined in raspberry fruits. Correlation is based
on both 1 d and 8 d storage data compiled together. Signicant (P < 0.05) are highlighted in red. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this gure legend, the reader
is referred to the web version of this article.)
225
Finn, C.E., Moore, P.P., Kempler, C., 2008. Raspberry cultivars: Whats new? Whats
succeeding? Where are breeding programs headed? Acta Hortic. 777, 3340.
Grisebach, H., 1982. Biosynthesis of anthocyanins. In: Markakis, P. (Ed.),
Anthocyanins as Food Colours. Academic Press, NY, USA, pp. 4767.
Haffner, K., Rosenfeld, H.J., Skrede, G., Wang, L., 2002. Quality of red raspberry
Rubus idaeus L: cultivars after storage in controlled and normal atmospheres.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 24, 279289.
Hyun, T.K., Lee, S., Rim, Y., Kumar, R., Han, X., Lee, S.Y., Lee, C.H., Kim, J.Y., 2014.
De-novo RNA sequencing and metabolite proling to identify genes involved
in anthocyanin biosynthesis in Korean black raspberry (Rubus coreanus
Miquel). PLoS One 9 (2), e88292, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0088292, eCollection.
Kalt, W., Prange, R.K., Lidster, P.D., 1993. Postharvest colour development of
strawberries inuence of maturity, temperature and light. Can. J. Plant Sci. 73,
541548.
Kalt, W., Forney, C.F., Martin, A., Prior, P.L., 1999. Antioxidant capasity, vitamin C,
phenolics, and anthocyanins after fresh storage of small fruits. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 47, 46384644.
Krger, E., Schopplein, E., Rasim, S., Cocca, G., Fischer, H., 2003. Effects of ripening
stage and storage time on quality parameters of red raspberry fruit. Eur. J. Hort.
Sci. 68, 176182.
Krger, E., Dietrich, H., Schopplein, E., Rasim, S., Kurbel, P., 2011. Cultivar, storage
conditions and ripening effects on physical and chemical qualities of red
raspberry fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 60, 3137.
Liu, M., Li, X.Q., Weber, C., Lee, C.Y., Brown, J., Liu, R.H., 2002. Antioxidant and
antiproliferative activities of raspberries. J. Agric. Food Chem. 50, 29262930.
Mazur, S.P., Snsteby, A., Wold, A.-B., Foito, A., Verrall, S., Conner, S., Stewart, D.,
Heide, O.M., 2014. Post-owering photoperiod has marked effects on fruit
chemical composition in red raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.). Ann. Appl. Biol. 165,
454465.
Mullen, W., Stewart, A.J., Lean, M.E.J., Gardner, P., Duthie, G.G., Crozier, A., 2002.
Effects of freezing and storage on the phenolics, ellagitannins, avonoids, and
antioxidant capacity of red raspberries. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 50, 51975201.
Rao, A.V., Snyder, D.M., 2010. Raspberries and human health: a review. J. Agric.
Food Chem. 58, 38713883.
Remberg, S.F., Snsteby, A., Aaby, K., Heide, O.M., 2010. Inuence of postowering
temperature on fruit size and chemical composition of Glen Ample raspberry
(Rubus idaeus L.). J. Agric. Food Chem 58, 91209128.
Sachs, E.J., Shaw, D.V., 1993. Colour change in fresh strawberry fruit of seven
genotypes stored at 0 C. HortScience 28, 209210.
Steyn, W., Wand, S., Holcroft, D., Jacobs, G., 2002. Anthocyanins in vegetative
tissue: a proposed unied function in photoprotection. New Phytol. 155,
349361.
Snsteby, A., Myrheim, U., Heiberg, N., Heide, O.M., 2009. Production of
high-yielding raspberry long canes in a Northern climate. Sci. Hortic. 121,
289297.
Wang, S.Y., Liu, H.S., 2000. Antioxidant activity in fruit and leaves of blackberry,
raspberry, and strawberry varies with cultivar and developmental stage. J.
Agric. Food Chem. 48, 140146.
Wang, S.Y., Chen, C.-T., Wang, C.Y., 2009. The inuence of light and maturity on
fruit quality and avonoid content of red raspberries. Food Chem. 112,
676684.