ISSN e:2007-4034 / ISSN print: 2007-4034

English | Español

     

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Vol. 25, issue 1 January - April 2019

ISSN: ppub: 1027-152X epub: 2007-4034

Scientific article

Effect of preharvest growth bioregulators on physicochemical quality of saladette tomato

http://dx.doi.org/10.5154/r.rchsh.2018.06.013

Martínez-Damián, María Teresa 1 ; Cano-Hernández, Rene 1 ; Moreno-Pérez, Esaú del Carmen 1 ; Sánchez-del Castillo, Felipe 1 ; Cruz-Álvarez, Oscar 2 *

  • 1Universidad Autónoma Chapingo, Departamento de Fitotecnia. Carretera México-Texcoco km 38.5, Chapingo, Estado de México, C. P. 56230, MÉXICO.
  • 2Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua, Facultad de Ciencias Agrotecnológicas. Campus 1 s/n, Chihuahua, Chihuahua, C. P. 31350, MÉXICO.

Corresponding author: ocruz@uach.mx, tel. (625) 108 1294.

Received: June 28, 2018; Accepted: November 09, 2018

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License view the permissions of this license

Abstract

Solanum lycopersicum L. is one of the most consumed horticultural products in the world, due to its wide versatility in use (fresh and processed) and high nutraceutical value. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effect of preharvest spraying of ethephon, calcium prohexadione, iodine and sodium selenite on some physicochemical quality parameters in greenhouse-grown saladette tomato fruits. The experimental design was completely randomized and the evaluated variables were color, weight, equatorial and polar diameter, roundness index, firmness, total soluble solids (TSS), titratable acidity (TA) and lycopene concentration. Individual application of ethephon (1.6 mL·L-1) and iodine (5 mL·L-1) significantly increased fruit weight (133.71 g) and firmness (3.26 N), with respect to the control (80.36 g and 0.95 N). Fruits that showed the highest TA (0.34 % citric acid) were those sprayed with 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite. On the other hand, the equatorial and polar diameter, TSS and lycopene concentrations, brightness, hue and roundness index did not differ statistically among treatments. Preharvest foliar application of ethephon, iodine and sodium selenite could be considered as an agronomic management alternative in greenhouse tomato production systems.

Keywords:Solanum lycopersicum L.; ethephon; calcium prohexadione; iodine; sodium selenite

Introduction

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is one of the most popular vegetables among consumers, as it is a main ingredient in the preparation of sauces, traditional dishes and processed foods (Islam, Mele, Baek, & Kang, 2018), in addition to its nutritional contribution (Figueroa-Cares et al., 2018). Globally, the area harvested amounts to 5 786 746 ha, in which China, India and Nigeria stand out with a production of 233 466 175 million tons, although the highest yields are reported in China, India and the United States (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAOSTAT], 2016), countries where the use of greenhouses and shade mesh with different degrees of technology predominates (Becvort-Azcurra et al., 2012).

The increase in tomato productivity has contributed to the monthly variation in prices; that is, its availability during the year is associated with the concentration of production in a short period of time, so negative effects are observed in both producers and consumers (Casierra-Posada & Aguilar-Avendaño, 2008). In addition to the above, postharvest problems related to mechanical damage are also frequent, caused by inadequate handling, storage, transport and packaging conditions, as well as by the physiological characteristics of the fruit (Carrillo-López & Yahia, 2014; Pezzarossa, Rosellini, Borghesi, Tonutti, & Malorgio, 2014).

Application of plant hormones is associated with various agronomic practices (control of vegetative growth, increase in fruit set and size, sprouting of floral buds, among others) (Ramírez et al., 2012), within which ripening is one of the physiological processes that receives the most attention due to the impact it has on the quality characteristics of horticultural products during postharvest handling (Jiang et al., 2011); in addition, these hormones are a complementary tool that helps increase crop productivity (Ramírez et al., 2008). However, other compounds (growth bioregulators) promote, inhibit or modify the behavior of morphological and physiological processes of plants (Barry & Roux, 2010), and it is common to classify them according to the physiological processes with which they are associated and their response when applied (Çetinbaş, Butar, Atasay, Isci, & Kocal, 2015; Kiferle, Gonzali, Holwerda, Real-Ibaceta, & Perata, 2013).

From a physiological point of view, ethephon (2-chloroethyl phosphonic acid) is considered an ethylene precursor, as it is a gaseous plant hormone that regulates growth (Crisosto, Bremer, Norton, Ferguson, & Einhorn, 2010). Calcium prohexadione (3-oxyde-4-propionyl-5-oxo-3-cyclohexano-carboxylate) is a chemical compound that when applied on a foliar basis in several crops (pear, apple, pepper and tomato) inhibits the synthesis of gibberellins present in the apexes of the stems, thus reducing their vegetative growth (growth retardant) (Ramírez et al., 2008). On the other hand, iodine and selenium in the form of sodium selenite are trace minerals with beneficial effects in higher plants (Islam et al., 2018; Lee, Kang, Kim, & Kim, 2007).

The above is a product of the evaluation of their hormonal behavior, that is, their relationship with the growth and development of leaves, branches and fruits. However, the information associated with the response to their preharvest application on the physicochemical quality of tomato fruit is little or nil. In this context, the physicochemical quality of the fruit determines the level of consumer acceptance, as well as the consumption time of the product, where the beginning of the ripening process and the softening of the cell wall are the main attributes of perishability in climacteric fruits such as tomato (Pezzarossa et al., 2014; Uchanski & Blalock, 2013). However, at this stage the synthesis and accumulation of various nutraceutical compounds (ascorbic acid, citric acid, tocopherol, polyphenols, lycopene and volatile compounds) are present in greater proportion (Carrillo-López & Yahia, 2014), which could be altered by the preharvest application of compounds with growth regulating activity (Kiferle et al., 2013; Schmitzer, Veberic, & Stampar, 2012). This is important because this compound contributes significantly to the physicochemical quality of tomatoes (Becvort-Azcurra et al., 2012; Caicedo-Orjuela & Galvis-Venegas, 2012); therefore, the objective of this research was to evaluate the effect of preharvest spraying of ethephon, calcium prohexadione, iodine and sodium selenite on some physicochemical quality parameters in greenhouse-grown saladette tomato fruits.

Materials and methods

Plant material

The commercial saladette tomato hybrid 'Condor' (Ahern Seeds) with indeterminate growth was used. The experiment was carried out from April to August 2016 in a greenhouse located in the Plant Science Department’s Experimental Field at Autonomous Chapingo University, State of Mexico, Mexico (19° 29’ 25” LN and 98° 52’ 23” LW, at 2,240 masl), with an average annual temperature of 15.9 °C.

Growth bioregulators applied

Four commercial chemicals with growth bioregulatory activity were used: ethephon (Ethrel 240, Bayer®, Mexico), calcium prohexadione (Apogee®, BASF, USA), iodine (Q-2000 Plus®, Quimcasa, Mexico) and sodium selenite (45 % sodium selenite®, Retorte, Germany). First, 2.5 L of each bioregulator were prepared under laboratory conditions, transported to the experimental site (greenhouse) in amber bottles with a screw cap, and coated with aluminum foil to prevent their degradation by light. Each bioregulator was individually applied to the experimental units on a foliar basis with a 20-L portable manual backpack (Swissmex®, Mexico).

Crop management

Sowing was carried out in 200-cavity polystyrene trays, with a mixture of peat moss and vermiculite (90:10) as substrate. After 35 days the transplant was carried out in gutters (with dimensions of 25 x 1 x 0.6 m) at a density of 8 plants·m-2 of useful greenhouse area (without considering aisles), for which the plants were pruned at the fifth cluster and led to a single stem. The gutters were filled with red tezontle (igneous volcanic rock with high iron dioxide content), with a particle size of 3 to 5 mm in diameter.

The supply of essential elements for crop growth and development was carried out according to the parameters established by Steiner’s solution (Steiner, 1984) (Table 1), supplemented with micronutrients (mg·L-1) (iron [2], manganese [1], copper [0.05] and zinc [0.05]), with electrical conductivity values fluctuating between 2.5 and 3.0 dS·m-1. Nutrients were supplied via irrigation (3 to 5 irrigations per day) with 0.30 to 3.0 L·plant-1, depending on the weather conditions (environmental temperature and relative humidity) and phenological stages of the crop. Temperature was controlled manually by opening and closing the side windows protected with anti-aphid mesh. The fruits used for laboratory analysis were from the second and third bunches, with maturity stage six, that is, when the fruit had 90 % red coloration (Choi, Lee, Han, & Bunn, 1995), which coincides with ripeness for consumption.

Table 1. Ionic balance (meq·L-1) of the nutrient solution used for the nutritional supply of greenhouse-grown saladette tomato plants.

Concentration (%) Anions Cations
NO3 - H2PO4 SO4 Total K+ Ca2+ Mg2+ Total
73.81 10.02 16.17 100 26.78 52.3 20.92 100
100 14.29 1.94 3.13 19.36 6.4 12.5 5 23.9

Experimental design

The experiment was conducted under a completely randomized experimental design with ten replicates, where the experimental unit consisted of eight plants. In total, two foliar applications of bioregulators (Table 2) were made per treatment, at 45 and 60 days after transplanting (dat). The control was maintained without application.

Table 2. Concentration and active ingredient of growth bioregulators applied in greenhouse-grown saladette tomato plants.

Activeingredient Concentration Chemical name
Ethephon 0.8 1.2 1.6 2-Chloroethylphosphonic acid
Pro-Ca1 (mg·L-1) 50 100 200 3-oxyde-4-propionyl-5-oxo-3-cyclohexane carboxylate
Iodine (mL·L-1) 1 3 5 Free iodine
SS (mg·L-1) 75 125 175 Na2SeO3
1Pro-Ca = calcium prohexadione; SS = sodium selenite.

Evaluated variables

Fruit color. It was determined on the epidermis, in the equatorial part of the fruit, by means of a portable sphere spectrophotometer (SP-62, X-Rite®, USA). The CIE 1976 color coordinates (L* a* b*) (Voss, 1992) were obtained, and from there the values of chromaticity (C* = [a2+b2]1/2) and hue angle or °h (arctan-1 [b/a]).

Fruit weight (g). It was obtained by means of a digital electronic scale (Scout Pro SP 602, Ohaus®, USA), with a capacity of 0.6 kg and sensitivity of 0.01 g.

Polar and equatorial diameter (mm). They were measured with a Vernier caliper (CAL-6MP, Truper®, Mexico) on the polar and equatorial plane of the fruit.

Roundness index (dimensionless). With polar and equatorial diameter data, this index was calculated using the expression RI = pd/ed, where pd and ed are the polar and equatorial diameter, respectively.

Firmness (N). It was determined on the epidermis and in the equatorial zone of the fruit with a digital texturometer (Compact Gauge, Mecmesin CE™, USA).

Total soluble solids (TSS, °Brix). They were quantified with a portable digital refractometer (PAL-1, Atago®, USA), for which two drops of fruit juice were placed on the device’s optical reader.

Titratable acidity (TA, % citric acid). It was determined in accordance with the methodology proposed by the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC, 1990). First, 20 g of fruit were homogenized with 50 mL of distilled water, then 10 mL of the mixture were taken and neutralized with a NaOH solution (0.1 N), in which 1 % phenolphthalein was used as an indicator.

Lycopene (mg·100 g-1 fresh weight). The lycopene concentration was quantified according to the method modified by Sadler, Davis, and Dezman (1990). First, 20 g of tissue were taken and homogenized with 50 mL of distilled water. The mixture obtained was placed in a flask covered with aluminium foil and dried at 38 °C. Subsequently, 0.1 g of the pulp was taken and placed in a test tube covered with aluminium foil, to which 30 mL of a mixture of hexane, ethanol and acetone (2:1:1) were added and stirred for 10 min. After this time, 18 mL of distilled water were added and stirred again for 5 min. The mixture was separated into two phases (aqueous and organic). With separation flasks, the volume of the organic phase was taken and indicated, and its absorbance was determined at 470 nm. The lycopene content was calculated using the formula indicated by Inbaraj and Chen (2008).

With one fruit per experimental unit and ten replicates, color, weight, polar and equatorial diameter, and roundness index were evaluated. For firmness, TSS, TA and lycopene content, two fruits per experimental unit and three replicates were used.

Statistical analysis

The data obtained were verified for normality and homogeneity of variances with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Bartlett tests, respectively (Sokal & Rohlf, 1995). Subsequently, one-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s test (P ≤ 0.05) were performed using Statistical Analysis Software (SAS Institute, 2002).

Results and discussion

Color

No statistical differences were detected in the brightness and hue (°h) of the fruits among the evaluated treatments (Table 3), which was confirmed visually with the presence of red fruits, but with orange hue tendencies (°h between 51.88 and 59.51) and with low brightness values (L* between 29.33 and 31.07). In this regard, the onset of tomato fruit ripening is characterized by the production of phytoene, a colorless compound related to color development, as it induces the synthesis and accumulation of lycopene (red) (Carrillo-López & Yahia, 2014; Casierra-Posada & Aguilar-Avendaño, 2008), which coincides with the decrease in brightness of the red color (Becvort-Azcurra et al., 2012).

Table 3. Mean comparisons of color, weight and firmness of saladette tomato fruits among treatments.

Treatment Color Fruit weight (g) Firmness (N)
Brightness Chromaticity Hue (°h)
E11 29.53 az 34.32 ab 54.12 a 90.32 b-d 1.00 ed
E2 30.71 a 37.31 ab 53.66 a 91.32 bc 0.57 e
E3 30.47 a 37.34 ab 56.10 a 133.71 a 1.59 cd
P-Ca 1 29.48 a 37.09 ab 53.43 a 65.30 ef 2.06 cb
P-Ca 2 30.42 a 36.44 ab 55.62 a 76.31 c-f 1.73 cd
P-Ca 3 30.83 a 43.18 a 51.88 a 104.43 b 2.18 bc
Y1 29.88 a 37.50 ab 56.15 a 65.00 ef 1.24 ed
Y2 29.33 a 40.53 ab 56.37 a 68.70 e-d 2.43 b
Y3 29.42 a 42.50 a 53.86 a 74.21 c-e 3.26 a
SS1 29.94 a 34.00 ab 59.51 a 84.42 b-e 1.44 cd
SS2 30.38 a 36.70 ab 53.03 a 73.76 c-f 1.68 cd
SS3 31.07 a 40.49 ab 53.90 a 60.85 f 1.42 cd
Control 30.74 a 33.10 b 56.10 a 80.36 c-f 0.95 ed
LSD 2.62 9.29 11.12 21.85 0.79
1E1 = 0.8 mL·L-1of ethephon; E2 = 1.2 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E3 = 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon; P-Ca1 = 50 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca2 = 100 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca3 = 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; Y1 = 1 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y2 = 3 mL·L-1 ofiodine; Y3 = 5 mL·L-1 of iodine; SS1 = 75 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS2 = 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS3 = 175 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; LSD: least significant difference. ZMeans with the same letters within each column do not differ statistically (Tukey, P ≤ 0.05).

Fruits from plants treated with 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione and 3 mL·L-1 of iodine showed greater color purity with respect to the control (33.10); however, they did not surpass what was shown by the other treatments, with values fluctuating between 34.00 and 40.53. In contrast, Islam et al. (2018), when evaluating various growth bioregulators (sodium selenate and potassium iodide at a concentration of 1 mg·L-1) in ‘Unicorn’ cherry tomato at harvest, reported no significant variation in relation to color (a*/b*), with values between 0.65 and 0.66. On the other hand, Pezzarossa et al. (2014) indicate that selenium decreases the ripening rate by temporarily inhibiting the ethylene biosynthesis pathway, in addition to contributing to the antioxidant defense system against reactive oxygen species, caused by abiotic factors (presence of salts or heavy metals) (Caffagni et al., 2012).

Fruit weight

Among the fruits harvested, the heaviest (133.71 g) were those from plants sprayed with 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon (Table 3), representing a 62.65 % increase with respect to the control plants (80.36 g). In this sense, Atta-Aly, Riad, Lacheene, and Beltagy (1999), when making foliar applications with 100 mg·L-1 of ethephon on 'Castle Rock' tomato flower bunches, obtained a significant increase in fruit fresh weight (123 g) compared to the control (113 g). These same authors point out that the dose used is not the most suitable for inducing flower abscission, but it is sufficient to change the growth pattern of the fruit; that is, it increases the cell division and elongation processes (Marzouk & Kassem, 2011). This may suggest that applying a lower concentration, such as the one used in this study, may be positively involved in cell division and elongation of newly-set fruits, favoring a larger size, as indicated by Uchanski and Blalock (2013).

On the other hand, applying calcium prohexadione caused an alteration in the synthesis of active gibberellins in the apexes of the stems (Altintas, 2011) and an increase in the translocation of photoassimilates via phloem by the fruit (Çetinbaş et al., 2015), as also reported by Uchanski and Blalock (2013) in cayenne pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) ‘Mesilla’. In contrast, Meland and Kaiser (2011) found a linear reduction between fruit weight and an increase in ethephon concentration applied to apple (Malus sylvestris [L.] Mill. var. domestica [Borkh] ‘Summerred’) two weeks after flowering. On the other hand, the treatment with calcium prohexadione showed a reduction in the number of fruits and a better distribution of available photoassimilates (Jiang et al., 2011). These results contrast with those reported in date palm (Phoenix dactylifera L.) (Mohammed-Al-Saif, Issa-Alebidi, Sultan-Al-Obeed, & Saad-Soliman, 2017), fig (Ficus carica) (Crisosto et al., 2010) and macadamia (Macadamia integrifolia) (Trueman, McConchie, & Turnbull, 2002). The variability is attributed to the planting season, the applied concentration and the phenological state of the crop (Crisosto et al., 2010; Shinozaki et al., 2015).

Firmness

Among the fruit quality parameters most appreciated by the consumer is the firmness of the pulp (Figueroa-Cares et al., 2018), which is related to its morphological characteristics and the agronomic management provided in pre- (adequate nutritional and water input, as well as the control of fungal and bacterial diseases) and postharvest (harvest index and appropriate conservation methods) (Casierra-Posada & Aguilar-Avendaño, 2008). In this research, applying 5 mL·L-1 of iodine resulted in the highest firmness value (3.26 N) with respect to the control, while the values obtained with 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione and 3 mL·L-1 of iodine were the lowest for this variable (Table 3).

Saure (2014) indicates that obtaining adequate fruit growth requires increasing the synthesis and concentration of gibberellins (GB), of which the most important in the pericarp of the tomato fruit are those of the GB1 and GB20 types (Bohner, Hedden, Bora-Haber, & Bangerth, 1988). The GB1 content during fruit growth and development is high, and the Ca2+ concentration is reduced; this is generated by the plant to allow cell expansion and increase membrane permeability, which is restored when the fruit has reached physiological maturity (Marschner, 1995). In this sense, applying a GB synthesis inhibitor, such as calcium prohexadione, is usually an alternative to reduce the risk of calcium deficiency in the early stages of fruit growth and development (Saure, 2014).

For its part, iodine is a non-essential microelement for plants (except for some aquatic species); however, it does have some beneficial effects (Caffagni et al., 2012) as it has been reported that it can induce a decrease in the respiration process and ethylene synthesis in cherry tomato fruits (Islam et al., 2018), which maintains the integrity of the cell wall (Dhall & Singh, 2013; Saure, 2014). This is desirable if the fruit’s shelf life is to be increased.

Islam et al. (2018) mention that 'Unicorn' cherry tomato fruits sprayed with 1 mg·L-1 of potassium iodide had firmness values of approximately 15.86 N, which was similar to the application of 1 mg·L-1 of sodium selenate (16.82 N). In this study, sodium selenite treatments showed no significant variation (Table 3). The disparity between what has been studied and what has been reported in the literature, according to Caffagni et al. (2012), may be associated with the iodine uptake and accumulation capacity of the tissues, which in most cases is a function of the applied concentration, time of application, age, and type and morphology of the organs (leaves, roots and fruits) (Kiferle et al., 2013; Landini, Gonzali, & Perata, 2011).

Equatorial and polar diameter

Fruit growth directly influences its characteristic shape, and a quantitative way to determine it is by equatorial and polar diameter (Figueroa-Cares et al., 2018; Montoya-Holguin, Cortés-Osorio, & Chaves-Osorio, 2014). In this study, none of these variables showed significant statistical differences among treatments, whose values were 43.33 to 55.6 mm and 59 to 77.14 mm, for equatorial and polar diameter, respectively (Table 4). In contrast, Atta-Aly et al. (1999), with the application of 100 mg·L-1 of ethephon in ‘Castle Rock’ tomato (S. lycopersicum L.) plants at 10, 12, 18, 24, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55 and 60 days after floral opening, found a greater response from day 30 in fruit diameter (from 5.71 to 6.98 cm), behavior associated with the increase in the number and size of cells (Shinozaki et al., 2015). These same authors mention that concentrations of 300 mg·L-1 of ethephon, applied in days after floral opening, cause the formation of abscission points and flower fall, a situation that did not occur in this study because the applied ethephon dose was much lower.

Table 4. Mean comparisons of fruit shape parameters evaluated in saladette tomato among different treatments.

Treatment Equatorial diameter (mm) Polar diameter (mm) Roundness index
E11 46.55 abz 64.11 ab 0.80 a
E2 48.91 ab 69.61 ab 0.78 a
E3 55.66 a 77.14 a 0.75 a
P-Ca1 43.33 ab 60.04 ab 0.79 a
P-Ca2 43.80 ab 62.10 ab 0.80 a
P-Ca3 49.58 ab 68.18 ab 0.74 a
Y1 44.14 ab 59.00 b 0.77 a
Y2 45.25 ab 61.13 ab 0.78 a
Y3 47.67 ab 70.09 ab 0.79 a
SS1 44.47 ab 61.47 ab 0.81 a
SS2 46.87 ab 64.63 ab 0.80 a
SS3 49.18 ab 71.09 ab 0.81 a
Control 40.79 b 55.22 b 0.79 a
LSD 12.50 17.10 0.07
1E1 = 0.8 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E2 = 1.2 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E3 = 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon; P-Ca1 = 50 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca2 = 100 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca3 = 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; Y1 = 1 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y2 = 3 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y3 = 5 mL·L-1 of iodine; SS1 = 75 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS2 = 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS3 = 175 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; LSD: least significant difference. ZMeans with the same letters within each column do not differ statistically (Tukey, P ≤ 0.05).

On the other hand, the use of calcium prohexadione is related to lower vegetative growth; that is, it acts as a growth retardant by inhibiting the synthesis of GB located at the apex of the stems (Schmitzer, Veberic, & Stampar, 2012), which induces the differentiation of floral buds and an increase in fruit set (Altintas, 2011). Çetinbaş et al. (2015) indicate that calcium prohexadione blocks the synthesis route of active GB, since it shortens shoot length, which decreases the competition for photoassimilates among newly-set fruits and reduces vegetative growth (branches and leaves) (Ramírez et al., 2012). This could be associated with the presence of larger fruits (Crisosto et al., 2010).

Roundness index

The relationship between the equatorial and polar index expressed as the fruit roundness index was not significant (P ≤ 0.05) among treatments (Table 4), which indicates the presence of the characteristic "flattened" pattern (values < 1); that is, fruits with greater polar than equatorial diameter (Montoya-Holguin et al., 2014). In this sense, Figueroa-Cares et al. (2018), when evaluating commercial varieties and native genotypes of cherry tomato, also do not report significant statistical variation in this variable. Becvort-Azcurra et al. (2012) mention that this characteristic shows greater correlation with the genotype than with environmental aspects and agronomic management.

Total soluble solids (TSS) and titratable acidity (TA)

Application of ethephon, calcium prohexadione, iodine and sodium selenite did not show significant statistical difference with respect to the control in terms of TSS accumulation in harvested fruits (Table 5), whose values were between 4.15 and 5.15 °Brix. These results coincide with the findings reported by Islam et al. (2018), who indicate that they did not find significant changes in TSS in 'Unicorn' cherry tomato when they evaluated individual applications of potassium iodide (6.67 °Brix) and sodium selenite (6.69 °Brix) at a concentration of 1 mg·L-1 at five weeks after harvest.

Table 5. Mean comparisons of the concentration of total soluble solids, citric acid and lycopene in saladette tomato fruits among treatments.

Treatment Total soluble solids (°Brix) Titratable acidity (% citric acid) Lycopene (mg·100 g-1)
E11 4.65 abz 0.14 f 11.81 bc
E2 4.93 a 0.14 f 11.89 a-c
E3 4.15 b 0.19 dc 13.45 ab
P-Ca1 5.15 a 0.25 b 8.92 d
P-Ca2 4.86 a 0.24 b 11.63 b-d
P-Ca3 4.86 a 0.25 b 14.65 a
Y1 4.71 ab 0.16 fe 11.74 bc
Y2 4.68 ab 0.17 de 9.15 cd
Y3 4.75 ab 0.20 c 11.28 b-d
SS1 4.66 ab 0.16 fe 12.06 ab
SS2 4.77 ab 0.34 a 12.14 ab
SS3 4.87 a 0.23 b 10.85 b-d
Control 4.75 ab 0.14 f 13.16 ab
LSD 0.68 0.02 2.79
1E1 = 0.8 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E2 = 1.2 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E3 = 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon; P-Ca1 = 50 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca2 = 100 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca3 = 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; Y1 = 1 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y2 = 3 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y3 = 5 mL·L-1 of iodine; SS1 = 75 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS2 = 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS3 = 175 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; LSD: least significant difference. ZMeans with the same letters within each column do not differ statistically (Tukey, P ≤ 0.05).

Soluble sugars in the form of disaccharides (sucrose) and monosaccharides (fructose and glucose) are among the main compounds that provide or favor the presence of the characteristic flavor in fruit and vegetable products (Beckles, 2012). However, another minor factor is the synthesis and accumulation of organic acids (citric, malic and tartaric), of which citric acid predominates in the case of tomato (Caicedo-Orjuela & Galvis-Venegas, 2012). In this sense, preharvest application of 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite allowed obtaining fruits with the highest TA (Table 5), while Islam et al. (2018), when applying 1 mg·L-1 of potassium iodide and sodium selenate in 'Unicorn' cherry tomato fruits, found no significant statistical variation in TA; however, their reported values are higher (1.03 and 1.04 % citric acid for each treatment, respectively). Additionally, Lee et al. (2007) report higher TA values in 'Super Momotaro' tomato fruits with sodium selenium applications at 30 dat, that is, under conditions very similar to the present study.

Lycopene

Table 5 shows that the lycopene content of the fruits harvested from plants treated with bioregulators had, in most cases, a similar behavior in relation to the control, except the treatments with 50 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione and 3 mL·L-1 of iodine, whose concentration of this carotenoid decreased significantly (8.92 and 9.15 mg·100 g-1, respectively). In contrast, Ramírez et al. (2012), when applying 125, 175 and 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione in 'Floradade' tomato fruits with 10 true leaves (vegetative growth), report a four- to eight-fold increase compared to the control. These authors found their best result when they evaluated fruits with green shoulders (maturity stage four), that is, when the fruit had more than 30 % red coloration, but not exceeding 60 % (Choi et al., 1995). Altintas (2011) points out that prohexadione may be involved in the modification of the synthesis routes of several secondary metabolites, including carotenoids such as lycopene, and impact on antioxidant capacity, thus providing health benefits (Ramírez et al., 2008).

Based on the conditions of this research and the results obtained, the bioregulators that had a greater response were ethephon, iodine and sodium selenite, without observing significant differences in relation to calcium prohexadione. If the goal is to increase the cell division and elongation processes, and obtain fruits of greater weight, the use of ethephon is suggested. Conversely, if the aim is to decrease respiration and ethylene production, and increase fruit firmness and shelf life, iodine application may be an excellent alternative. These recommendations are related to the fact that they are relatively inexpensive products and are available from commercial agrochemical product stores.

Conclusions

Among the physicochemical quality characteristics evaluated in saladette tomato fruits, weight, firmness and citric acid concentration showed a significant increase with the individual application of 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon, 5 mL·L-1 of iodine and 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite, respectively. On the other hand, preharvest foliar application of bioregulatory compounds, especially those mentioned above, could be considered an interesting and important alternative within agronomic management in a protected agricultural production system, if one takes into account the concentration and phenological state of the crop.

Acknowledgments

  • The authors thank the administrative, technical and economic support granted by Universidad Autónoma Chapingo (UACh), Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua (UACH) and the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT).

References

Altintas, S. (2011). Effects of chlormequat chloride and different rates of prohexadione-calcium on seedling growth, flowering, fruit development and yield of tomato. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10(75), 17160-17169. doi: 10.5897/AJB11.2706

Association of Official Analytical Chemists, International. (1990). Methods of analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Washington, USA: AOAC. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/gov.law.aoac.methods.1.1990

Atta-Aly, M. A., Riad, G. S., Lacheene, Z. S., & Beltagy, A. S. (1999). Early application of ethrel extends tomato fruit cell division and increases fruit size and yield with ripening delay. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 18(1), 15-24. doi: 10.1007/PL00007041

Barry, H. G., & Roux, S. L. (2010). Preharvest foliar sprays of prohexadione-calcium, a gibberellin biosynthesis inhibitor, induce chlorophyll degradation and carotenoid synthesis in Citrus rinds. Hortscience, 45(2), 242-247. Retrieved from http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/45/2/242.full.pdf+html

Beckles, D. M. (2012). Factors affecting the postharvest soluble solids and sugar content of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 63(1), 129-140. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2011.05.016

Becvort-Azcurra, A., Fuentes-Lara, L. O., Benavides-Mendoza, A., Ramírez, H., Robledo-Torres, V., & Rodríguez-Mendoza, M. N. (2012). Aplicación de selenio en tomate: crecimiento, productividad y estado antioxidante del fruto. Terra Latinoamericana, 30(4), 291-301. Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=57325814001

Bohner, J., Hedden, P., Bora-Haber, E., & Bangerth, F. (1988). Identification and quantification of gibberellins in fruits of Lycopersicum esculentum, and their relationship to fruit size in L. esculentum and L. pimpinellifolium. Physiology Plantarum, 73(3), 348-353. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.1988.tb00609.x

Caffagni, A., Pecchioni, N., Meriggi, P., Bucci, V., Sabatini, E., Acciarri, N., Ciriaci, T., Pulcini, L., Felicioni, N., Beretta, M., & Milc, J. (2012). Iodine uptake and distribution in horticultural and fruit tree species. Italian Journal of Agronomy, 7(3), e32. doi: 10.4081/ija.2012.e32

Caicedo-Orjuela, O., & Galvis-Venegas, J. A. (2012). Comportamiento de ácidos cítrico, ascórbico y málico en tomate frente a tres sistemas de conservación. Avances Investigación en Ingeniería, 9(1), 7-13. Retrieved from http://www.unilibre.edu.co/revistaavances/avances%20_9-1/r9-1_art1.pdf

Carrillo-López, A., & Yahia, E. M. (2014). Changes in color-related compounds in tomato fruit exocarp and mesocarp during ripening using HPLC-APcI+-mass Spectrometry. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 51(10), 2720-2726. doi: 10.1007/s13197-012-0782-0

Casierra-Posada, F., & Aguilar-Avendaño, E. (2008). Calidad en frutos de tomate (Solanum lycopersicum L.) cosechados en diferentes estados de madurez. Agronomía Colombiana, 26(2), 300-307. Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.org/html/1803/180314732015/

Çetinbaş, M., Butar, S., Atasay, A., Isci, M., & Kocal, H. (2015). Reduction of apple vegetative shoot growth cv. Starcrimson Delicious/MM 111 with prohexadione calcium application does not decrease fruit quality. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality, 88, 259-263. doi: 10.5073/JABFQ.2015.088.038

Choi, K., Lee, G., Han, Y. J., & Bunn, J. M. (1995). Tomato maturity evaluation using color image analysis. Transactions of the ASAE, 38(1), 171-176. doi: 10.13031/2013.27827

Crisosto, C. H., Bremer, V., Norton, M., Ferguson, L., & Einhorn, T. (2010). Preharvest ethephon eliminates first crop figs. HortTechnology, 20(1), 173-178. Retrieved from http://horttech.ashspublications.org/content/20/1/173.full.pdf+html

Dhall, R. K., & Singh, P. (2013). Effect of ethephon and ethylene gas on ripening and quality of tomato (Solanum Lycopersicum L.) during cold storage. Journal of Nutrition & Food Sciences, 3(6), 244. doi: 10.4172/2155-9600.1000244

Figueroa-Cares, I. E., Cruz-Álvarez, O., Martínez-Damián, M. T., Rodríguez-Pérez, J. E., Colinas-León, M. T., & Valle-Guadarrama, S. (2018). Calidad nutricional y capacidad antioxidante en variedades y genotipos nativos de tomate (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Revista de la Facultad de Agronomía (LUZ), 35(1), 63-84. Retrieved from http://produccioncientificaluz.org/index.php/agronomia/article/view/23155/23203

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAOSTAT). (2016). Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC

Inbaraj, B. S., & Chen, B. H. (2008). Carotenoids in tomato plants. In: Preedy, V., & Watson, R. (Eds.), Tomatoes and tomato products: nutritional, medicinal and therapeutic properties (pp. 133-164). USA: CRC Press, LLC.

Islam, M. Z., Mele, M. A., Baek, J. P., & Kang, H. (2018). Iron, iodine and selenium effects on quality, shelf life and microbial activity of cherry tomatoes. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, 46(2), 388-392. doi: 10.15835/nbha46211012

Jiang, T., Wang, P., Yin, X., Zhang, B., Xu, C., Li, X., & Chen K. (2011). Ethylene biosynthesis and expression of related genes in loquat fruit at different developmental and ripening stages. Scientia Horticulturae, 130(2), 452-458. doi: 10.1016/j.scient.2011.07.019

Kiferle, C., Gonzali, S., Holwerda, T. H., Real-Ibaceta, R., & Perata, P. (2013). Tomato fruits: a good target for iodine biofortification. Frontier in Plant Science, 4, 205. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2013.00205

Landini, M., Gonzali, S., & Perata, P. (2011). Iodine biofortification in tomato. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 174(3), 480-486. doi: 10.1002/jpln.201000395

Lee, G. J., Kang, B. K., Kim, T. I., & Kim, J. H. (2007). Effects of different selenium concentrations of the nutrient solution on the growth and quality of tomato fruit in hydroponics. Acta Horticulturae, 761, 443-448. doi: 10.17660/ActaHortic.2007.761.61

Marschner, H. (1995). Mineral nutrition of higher plants. Amsterdam, Nederland: Academic Press.

Marzouk, H. A., & Kassem, H. A. (2011). Improving yield, quality, and shelf life of Thompson seedless grapevine by preharvest foliar applications. Scientia Horticulturae, 130(2), 425-430. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2011.07.013

Meland, M., & Kaiser, C. (2011). Ethephon as a blossom and fruitlet thinner affects crop load, fruit weight, fruit quality, and return bloom of ‘Summerred’ apple (Malus domestica) Borkh. Hortscience , 46(3), 432-438. Retrieved from http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/46/3/432.full.pdf+html

Mohammed-Al-Saif, A., Issa-Alebidi, A., Sultan-Al-Obeed, R., & Saad-Soliman, S. (2017). Preharvest ethephon spray on fruit quality and increasing the rate of ripening of date palm fruit (Phoenix dactylifera L.) cv. Helali. Progress in Nutrition, 19(1), 97-103. doi: 10.23751/pn.v19i1.4741

Montoya-Holguin, C., Cortés-Osorio, J. A., & Chaves-Osorio, J. A. (2014). Sistema automático de reconocimiento de frutas basado en visión por computador. Ingeniare. Revista Chilena de Ingeniería, 22(4), 504-516. doi: 10.4067/S0718-33052014000400006

Pezzarossa, B., Rosellini, I., Borghesi, E., Tonutti, P., & Malorgio, F. (2014). Effects of Se-enrichment on yield, fruit composition and ripening of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) plants grown in hydroponics. Scientia Horticulturae , 165, 106-110. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2013.10.029

Ramírez, H., Herrera-Gámez, B., Méndez-Quiroa, Y. M., Benavides-Mendoza, J. A., de la Cruz-Breton, J. A., Álvarez-Mares, V., Rancaño-Arrioja, J. H., & Villarreal-Quintanilla, J. A. (2008). Prohexadiona de calcio disminuye el contenido de giberelinas endógenas en ápices de tomate saladette y chile pimiento. Revista Chapingo Serie Horticultura, 14(2), 193-198. doi: 10.5154/r.rchsh.2007.12.058

Ramírez, H., Leza, P. C., Rivera, C. E., Amado, C., Benavides, A., Herrera, B., Martínez, A., & Méndez, O. (2012). Prohexadione-Ca reduces plant height, improves yield and fruit quality on solanaceous crops. Acta Horticulturae , 936, 457-462. doi: 10.17660/ActaHortic.2012.936.61

Sadler, G., Davis, J., & Dezman, D. (1990). Rapid extraction of lycopene and b-carotene from reconstituted tomato paste and pink grapefruit homogenates. Journal of Food Science, 55(5), 1460-1461. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1990.tb03958.x

Saure, M. C. (2014). Why calcium deficiency is not the cause of blossom-end rot in tomato and pepper fruit - a reappraisal. Scientia Horticulturae , 74, 151-154. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2014.05.020

Schmitzer, V., Veberic, R., & Stampar, F. (2012). Prohexadione-Ca application modifies flavonoid composition and color characteristics of rose (Rosa hybrida L.) flowers. Scientia Horticulturae , 146, 14-20. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2012.07.035

Shinozaki, Y., Hao, S., Kojima, M., Sakakibara, H., Ozeki-Iida, Y., Zheng, Y., Fei, Z., Zhong, S., Giovannoni, J. J., Rose, J. K., Okabe, Y., Heta, Y., Ezura, H., & Ariizumi, T. (2015). Ethylene suppresses tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) fruit set through modification of gibberellin metabolism. The Plant Journal, 83(2), 237-251. doi: 10.1111/tpj.12882

Sokal, R. R., & Rohlf, F. J. (1995). Biometry the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. New York, USA: W.H. Freeman.

Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc.). (2002). Software product support manual , ver. 9.0. Cary, N. C.: Author.

Steiner A. A. (1984). The universal nutrient solution. Proceedings sixth international congress on soilless culture, 633-650.

Trueman, S. J., McConchie, C. A., & Turnbull, C. G. N. (2002). Ethephon promotion of crop abscission for unshaken and mechanically shaken macadamia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 42(7), 1001-1008. doi: 10.1071/EA01164

Uchanski, M. E., & Blalock, A. (2013). Ethephon improved pigmentation but had no effect on cayenne pepper fruit yield in southern New Mexico. Hortscience , 48(6), 738-741. Retrieved from http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/48/6/738.full.pdf+html

Voss, D. H. (1992). Relating colorimeter measurement of plant color to the royal horticultural society color charts. HortScience, 27(12), 1256-1260. Retrieved from http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/27/12/1256.full.pdf

Tables:

Table 1. Ionic balance (meq·L-1) of the nutrient solution used for the nutritional supply of greenhouse-grown saladette tomato plants.
Concentration (%) Anions Cations
NO3 - H2PO4 SO4 Total K+ Ca2+ Mg2+ Total
73.81 10.02 16.17 100 26.78 52.3 20.92 100
100 14.29 1.94 3.13 19.36 6.4 12.5 5 23.9
Table 2. Concentration and active ingredient of growth bioregulators applied in greenhouse-grown saladette tomato plants.
Activeingredient Concentration Chemical name
Ethephon 0.8 1.2 1.6 2-Chloroethylphosphonic acid
Pro-Ca1 (mg·L-1) 50 100 200 3-oxyde-4-propionyl-5-oxo-3-cyclohexane carboxylate
Iodine (mL·L-1) 1 3 5 Free iodine
SS (mg·L-1) 75 125 175 Na2SeO3
1Pro-Ca = calcium prohexadione; SS = sodium selenite.
Table 3. Mean comparisons of color, weight and firmness of saladette tomato fruits among treatments.
Treatment Color Fruit weight (g) Firmness (N)
Brightness Chromaticity Hue (°h)
E11 29.53 az 34.32 ab 54.12 a 90.32 b-d 1.00 ed
E2 30.71 a 37.31 ab 53.66 a 91.32 bc 0.57 e
E3 30.47 a 37.34 ab 56.10 a 133.71 a 1.59 cd
P-Ca 1 29.48 a 37.09 ab 53.43 a 65.30 ef 2.06 cb
P-Ca 2 30.42 a 36.44 ab 55.62 a 76.31 c-f 1.73 cd
P-Ca 3 30.83 a 43.18 a 51.88 a 104.43 b 2.18 bc
Y1 29.88 a 37.50 ab 56.15 a 65.00 ef 1.24 ed
Y2 29.33 a 40.53 ab 56.37 a 68.70 e-d 2.43 b
Y3 29.42 a 42.50 a 53.86 a 74.21 c-e 3.26 a
SS1 29.94 a 34.00 ab 59.51 a 84.42 b-e 1.44 cd
SS2 30.38 a 36.70 ab 53.03 a 73.76 c-f 1.68 cd
SS3 31.07 a 40.49 ab 53.90 a 60.85 f 1.42 cd
Control 30.74 a 33.10 b 56.10 a 80.36 c-f 0.95 ed
LSD 2.62 9.29 11.12 21.85 0.79
1E1 = 0.8 mL·L-1of ethephon; E2 = 1.2 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E3 = 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon; P-Ca1 = 50 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca2 = 100 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca3 = 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; Y1 = 1 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y2 = 3 mL·L-1 ofiodine; Y3 = 5 mL·L-1 of iodine; SS1 = 75 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS2 = 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS3 = 175 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; LSD: least significant difference. ZMeans with the same letters within each column do not differ statistically (Tukey, P ≤ 0.05).
Table 4. Mean comparisons of fruit shape parameters evaluated in saladette tomato among different treatments.
Treatment Equatorial diameter (mm) Polar diameter (mm) Roundness index
E11 46.55 abz 64.11 ab 0.80 a
E2 48.91 ab 69.61 ab 0.78 a
E3 55.66 a 77.14 a 0.75 a
P-Ca1 43.33 ab 60.04 ab 0.79 a
P-Ca2 43.80 ab 62.10 ab 0.80 a
P-Ca3 49.58 ab 68.18 ab 0.74 a
Y1 44.14 ab 59.00 b 0.77 a
Y2 45.25 ab 61.13 ab 0.78 a
Y3 47.67 ab 70.09 ab 0.79 a
SS1 44.47 ab 61.47 ab 0.81 a
SS2 46.87 ab 64.63 ab 0.80 a
SS3 49.18 ab 71.09 ab 0.81 a
Control 40.79 b 55.22 b 0.79 a
LSD 12.50 17.10 0.07
1E1 = 0.8 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E2 = 1.2 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E3 = 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon; P-Ca1 = 50 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca2 = 100 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca3 = 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; Y1 = 1 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y2 = 3 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y3 = 5 mL·L-1 of iodine; SS1 = 75 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS2 = 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS3 = 175 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; LSD: least significant difference. ZMeans with the same letters within each column do not differ statistically (Tukey, P ≤ 0.05).
Table 5. Mean comparisons of the concentration of total soluble solids, citric acid and lycopene in saladette tomato fruits among treatments.
Treatment Total soluble solids (°Brix) Titratable acidity (% citric acid) Lycopene (mg·100 g-1)
E11 4.65 abz 0.14 f 11.81 bc
E2 4.93 a 0.14 f 11.89 a-c
E3 4.15 b 0.19 dc 13.45 ab
P-Ca1 5.15 a 0.25 b 8.92 d
P-Ca2 4.86 a 0.24 b 11.63 b-d
P-Ca3 4.86 a 0.25 b 14.65 a
Y1 4.71 ab 0.16 fe 11.74 bc
Y2 4.68 ab 0.17 de 9.15 cd
Y3 4.75 ab 0.20 c 11.28 b-d
SS1 4.66 ab 0.16 fe 12.06 ab
SS2 4.77 ab 0.34 a 12.14 ab
SS3 4.87 a 0.23 b 10.85 b-d
Control 4.75 ab 0.14 f 13.16 ab
LSD 0.68 0.02 2.79
1E1 = 0.8 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E2 = 1.2 mL·L-1 of ethephon; E3 = 1.6 mL·L-1 of ethephon; P-Ca1 = 50 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca2 = 100 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; P-Ca3 = 200 mg·L-1 of calcium prohexadione; Y1 = 1 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y2 = 3 mL·L-1 of iodine; Y3 = 5 mL·L-1 of iodine; SS1 = 75 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS2 = 125 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; SS3 = 175 mg·L-1 of sodium selenite; LSD: least significant difference. ZMeans with the same letters within each column do not differ statistically (Tukey, P ≤ 0.05).