A Case Study of a Decision Support System on Mango Fruit Maturity

K.B. Walsh1, P. Subedi1 and P. Tijskens2

1
Plant Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton 4702, Australia
2
Horticultural Supply Chains, Wageningen University, The Netherlands

Keywords: biological shift factor, fruit maturation, Mangifera indica, modelling

Abstract
Mango fruit maturity can be difficult to determine from external attributes.
Assessment of parameters of fruit on tree (dry matter, internal flesh colour) relevant
to estimation of fruit maturity was undertaken with a handheld (near infrared
spectroscopic) system. Measurement error on dry matter was low (typical RMSEP
0.6% DM). Repeated measurements on the same individual fruit from 78 different
blocks across two farms demonstrated that each piece of fruit was on a similar, but
individual, maturation trajectory, with a time offset. The offset was presumably
related to date of pollination or environmental conditions around the fruit (e.g.,
inner or outer canopy). A non-linear indexed regression model, coupled with the use
of a ‘biological shift factor’, was used to describe the time series data. Estimated
biological shift factors were larger for dry matter than flesh colour, indicative of an
earlier change in dry matter, albeit at a lower rate. Differences between blocks
within a farm and between two farms were small, indicating the maturation
processes were independent of local conditions. This technique could be used to trace
the source of variation within a block (e.g., to location in canopy or plant water
status), towards the goal of reducing this variation, leading to crops of greater
uniformity.

INTRODUCTION
The readiness of the mango crop (Mangifera indica) for harvest is typically judged
using several complimentary approaches. Fruit shape and skin colour of fruit is useful for
only some cultivars, heat sums can be used to give an approximate window for harvest,
and fruit dry matter (DM) and flesh colour (FC) can be used in the final decision to
harvest (Diczbalis and Wicks, 1997; Johnson and Hofman, 2009). Fruit DM is an
indication of total carbohydrate content, with the DM of immature fruit increasing as
photosynthate is imported into the fruit. After harvest and during ripening, fruit DM is
effectively constant (with change mostly related to water loss by the fruit), although
starch reserves are converted to soluble sugars (TSS). DM at fruit harvest thus relates well
with TSS of fully ripened fruit (e.g., Subedi and Walsh, 2011). Mango fruit DM is thus an
index of maturity, but the level of DM that signifies harvest readiness is expected to vary
by growth conditions (canopy photosynthetic capacity). Mango FC is associated with
carotenoid content. The level of this attribute associated with maturity depends on the
cultivar (with some cultivars accumulating more of this pigment than others) and growing
conditions. Flesh colour also continues to change postharvest, during ripening. Therefore
specifications on both DM and FC attributes in relation to fruit maturity need to be
cultivar and possibly growing condition specific.
Near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) can be used to assess the parameters of FC and
DM non-invasively, e.g., Sarawong et al. (2004), Subedi et al. (2006), allowing repeated
measures of fruit on tree, over time. Our group has been involved in the development of
both in-line and hand-held NIRS technology, routinely achieving an R>0.9 and a RMSEP
<0.8 for assessment of DM of mango fruit (independent of the calibration set). Given
acceptable measurement accuracy, the NIRS technology can be used to guide orchard
management decisions around timing of harvest, and as a tool supporting investigation
into the process of fruit ripening.
Much previous work on the rate of fruit development has been based on data
obtained using destructive techniques, using mean values over a number of individuals.

Proc. VIth International Conference on Managing Quality in Chains 195

Eds.: L.A. Terry et al.
Acta Hort. 1091, ISHS 2015
This averaging masks the mechanism at work, as it is the individual fruit that is the
physiological unit, and the item of interest to the consumer. Jordan and Loeffen (2013)
describe a method based on quantile functions for describing population spread during
fruit maturation, providing a tool that should be of practical value in orchard
management. In this study we return to a consideration of the maturation trajectories of
individual fruit, to demonstrate the utility of the NIRS measurement technique and
towards developing an understanding of the factors influencing these trajectories.
Variation in DM and FC of fruit from a given harvest event will reflect the time of
flowering, the position of the fruit within the plant canopy, variation in growing
conditions within the orchard, and other factors. This constitutes ‘biological variation’ in
maturation as defined by Schouten et al. (2004). A ‘biological shift factor’ can be
estimated for individual fruit (Tijskens et al., 2005), with remarkable success when the
technical variation (i.e., the real measuring error) is rather small (e.g., as Schouten et al.,
2004, demonstrated for tomato shelf life). A primary requirement for this method is a
time series of non-destructive measures of the attribute of interest for individual fruit.
Thus we test the utility of the biological shift factor technique for the application of
estimation of mango fruit maturation, with consideration of: (i) what model can be used to
describe the observed behaviour, and (ii) how can the effects of technical measuring error
be separated from the biological variation?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Plant Material and Measurements

Mango (Mangifera indica ‘B74’) fruit DM content and FC were assessed of fruit
on tree using a hand-held vis-NIR instrument (300-1100 nm, interactance optics; Nirvana,
Integrated Spectronics, Sydney). The instrument was calibrated against destructive
measures of DM (weight loss on drying) and FC (Lab ‘b’ value of a surface of a slice
through the fruit cheek), assessed using a Minolta CR400 colorimeter (see Subedi and
Walsh, 2006). Briefly, the ‘b’ value colour readings were converted into a scale that
relates to a set of colour cards used by the industry (1 being pale yellow, 10 being deep
yellow-orange). Typical standard error of prediction (root mean square error of residuals,
i.e., difference between predicted and actual values) was 0.6% DM and 0.8 colour units
(Subedi and Walsh, 2006).
Mango fruit were accessed at two commercial plantations in the Northern
Territory, Australia, during the 2009 season. The plantations were about 200 km apart on
a north south axis. Flowering occurs in several waves on mango trees. The selected fruit
were from one flowering event. However, pollination within a flowering event will have
occurred over a period of time, and the rate of fruit development will have varied by
canopy position (radiation, temperature), leading to differences in the timing of fruit
reaching maturity for harvest of fruit within one flowering event. Four fruit on each of
five trees were selected and tagged in each of 56 and 22 blocks (groups of about 1000
trees) on farm 1 and 2, respectively. The five trees were selected at uniform spacing
across a diagonal transect in each block. Fruit were selected to be representative of fruit
from a given flowering ‘event’ on the tree, with three fruit selected from different
positions in the outer canopy, and 1 fruit selected from within the canopy. The selected
fruit were marked and repetitively assessed at the same spot using the vis-NIR tool, at
approximately weekly intervals from stone hardening stage (end of September 2009 and
end of first week of October for farms 1 and 2, respectively) to commercial harvest
(beginning 29 October 2009 and 16 November for farms 1 and 2, respectively). The
period covered approximately 45 of a 90-day fruit development period. This period
covers the last part of the total sigmoidal curve, with a range of DM from 12 to 18% DM;
Fig. 1).

Modelling
Dry matter accumulation within fruit on tree was assumed to increase in an

196
asymmetrical sigmoidal fashion (Tijskens et al., 2006). This behaviour is often modelled
using the completely empirical Richard function (Richards, 1959; Martinez et al., 2008).
The same behaviour can, however, be described by an uncoupled autocatalytic reaction
(Tijskens et al., 2006). Similarly, change in fruit colour is frequently modelled using a
logistic function based on the usually observed sigmoidal behaviour (Tijskens et al.,
2008). A simple logistic equation was therefore used for both attributes, neglecting the
different curvatures at the start and the end of development for dry matter. When
expressed in terms of biological shift factor (for deduction, see Tijskens et al., 2005), the
behaviour can be described as shown in Equation 1.

Varmax  Varmin
Var  k v Varmax  Varmin ( t  t )
 Varmin (1)
1 e

For dry matter analysis, Var is dry matter content (DM, in % w/w) and kv = kDM
(day-1), the rate constant of the process of DM accumulation. For FC analysis, Var is the
colour, and kv=kc (day-1), the rate constant of the process of colour development. For
both variables, t is time (days) and Δt the biological shift factor (days) relative to the
midpoint of the logistic behaviour. Subscript min refers to the lower and max to the upper
asymptotic value at -infinite time and +infinite time, respectively.
Due to the limited range in the data of both variables assessed (from stone-
hardening stage to commercial harvest), neither of the asymptotic values could be
estimated directly. In preliminary analyses, the minimum value for FC tended consistently
to a value of almost zero, and was therefore fixed to zero. For DM, this minimum value
was fixed to the value of 4. For both variables, the upper asymptote seemed to vary over
the individual fruit in a batch. This stochastic parameter was therefore considered in two
parts: one part that varies per fruit and another that is common to all fruit. The maximum
value observed per fruit (max(Var)IFN), assessed just prior to fruit harvest, was assumed
to be an indication for the first part. The second part, which is to be estimated, was then
added to this value per fruit to assess a first estimate of the maximum value attainable by
each piece of fruit (Varmax) (Eq. 2). The fixed component of DMmax (d.Varmax) was
empirically determined at a value of 10 to achieve the best results across all blocks and
both farms. When a fruit dropped off the tree before commercial harvest, the mean value
of DMmax was used for that particular fruit. Thus a slightly different value of DMmax was
used for each fruit.

Varmax  max(Var ) IFN  d .Varmax (2)

Re-arranging Equation 2, the stochastic parameters (∆t and Varmax) are separated
(Eq. 3). The left side of Equation 3 contains all variation in end value (Varmax), while the
right hand side contains all the variation in biological time (t+Δt). This arrangement
ensures that in graphical representations all the biological variation accounted for by the
model is properly included, while the remaining (mainly measuring error) variation
remains visible as the width of the cloud of points around the simulated lines.

Var  Varmin 1
Vars tan    (3)

Varmax  Varmin 1  e vk  Varmax  Varmin ( t  t )

Statistical Analysis
All statistical analyses were conducted using the non-linear regression procedure
(‘nls’) of the package R. Rate constants (kDM and kc) were estimated in common for all
individuals within a block (fixed effects), while the biological shift factor Δt was
estimated for individual fruit (random effects). The normality of distributions was tested
using the Shapiro-Wilk test in the package R. All model development was conducted

197
using Maple (Release 12 Maplesoft, Waterloo Maple Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, Canada), a
software package for symbolic manipulation.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Application Development
The vis-NIR instrument performed well under field conditions (high ambient
temperature and light), courtesy of an internal referencing step associated with every
sample and the interactance optical geometry employed. Applications (data not shown)
for non-invasive assessment of mango fruit DM and FC include consideration of fruit
maturity in context of (i) within tree variation (guiding decisions on whether to ‘strip’ or
selectively’ harvest fruit), (ii) selective picking effectiveness (comparison of harvested to
remaining fruit); (iii) within orchard variation (towards a decision on timing of harvest);
(iv) repeated measures over time to estimate rate of change (towards a decision on timing
of harvest); (v) analysis of incoming lots at the pack house as quality control on harvest
timing; and (vi) development of postharvest knowledge (e.g., relationships between DM
at harvest and fruit shelf life, and final ripe eating quality).
These practical applications are underpinned by an understanding of the sources of
variation in fruit maturation, and of the rate of fruit maturation. Therefore our attention
focussed on the modelling of maturation, as indexed by DM and FC.

Modelling of Change in Dry Matter and Flesh Colour

The raw data of DM accumulation over time by individual fruit (example data for
one block in Fig. 1) demonstrated a large variation between fruit. It is not obvious
whether the variation is located in the time shift factor (maturity) or in the final level
(asymptote) of DM at infinite time.
Data were analysed using non-linear indexed regression analysis per block of fruit.
Parameters σ[DMmax], DMmax. kDM, and Δt were estimated for all 56 and 22 blocks of
the two farms, respectively (see some examples in Table 1). Δt represents the mean value
estimated for all individual fruit in a given block, with an associated standard deviation
(σ[Δt]) caculated for each block. The variance explained by the model (R2adj) was
extremely high (well over 90%) for all blocks, while the standard error of estimates of the
rate constant were all small (well below 10% of the mean). These values are consistent
with the interpretation that all individual fruit of all blocks accumulated DM according to
the same mechanism, with the same rate constant.
A plot of DM against biological time (t+Δt) for individual fruit demonstrated a
greatly decreased variation between fruit compared to the plot of DM against calendar
time (Fig. 1). Note that since Δt is different for each individual fruit, the biological time
axis is also different for each individual fruit. The remaining variation is seen in the width
of the cloud of points and depends on the variation in the asymptotic end value (DMmax),
and on the technical measuring error. The mean asymptotic end value DMmax was
remarkably similar for all blocks, as was the observed standard deviation over the
individual fruit within each maturity block (σ[DMmax]) (Table 1). These results indicate
that there was, within the single season of this exercise, little difference between blocks or
farms, although the asymptotic end value (DMmax) tended to be somewhat lower for fruit
harvested at the second farm. This result probably expresses either difference in flowering
time, or the effects of position within the canopy, with attendant variation in light and
temperature, on rate of maturation.
Similar analyses were undertaken for FC (example raw data shown for one block,
Fig. 2). Compared to farm 2, the data for farm 1 have more measurement or conversion
errors (as seen in R2adj, Δt, kc, d.Colmax and standard error values) (data not shown). The
mean upper asymptote (Colmax) and the mean estimated difference to the mean (d.Colmax)
were remarkably similar for all series. Estimated rate constants ranged from 0.0012 to
0.0018, apparently independent of the farm. This result could indicate that a difference in
rate constant of colour development existed between the different blocks, but it is more

198
likely that these differences are a coincidence of sampling and of measurement variation
in the data.
The effect of data standardisation, as described in Equation 3, was minimal
(Figs. 1 and 2). This comparison indicates that the effect of the relatively small variation
in asymptotic end value is not very important from a statistical point of view. The
remaining variation is ascribed to measurement errors, including the uncertainty of the
vis-NIR measurement.
The mean values of the biological shift factor (Δt in Table 1) differed between
blocks by up to about 10 d for both quality aspects. This result is consistent with an effect
by location in the orchard on the average maturity stage of the fruit. Standard deviations
of the factor for DM were remarkably similar for all blocks (Table 1), while that of colour
was prone to larger differences. The latter result may be a consequence of the lesser
reliability of the colour data (more technical error). The mean biological shift factor can
therefore be used as an indicator to map the average maturity per location over seasons,
while the standard deviation can be used to decide on the need for repeated harvests.
All distributions of the biological shift factor appeared to be normally distributed
as indicated by the p-value (Shapiro-Wilk test, p[Δt]>0.05) (Table 1). The biological shift
factor (Δt) for DM ranged from -17 to -35, while the standard deviation over all values
(σ[Δt]) was quite large and very variable (varying from 2.4 to 8.7 days across blocks).
The biological shift factor for FC ranged from about -66 to -39 days across all blocks,
while its standard deviation ranged from 3.3 to 10.5 days. Thus quite a large difference in
maturity existed between blocks.

Modelling across Blocks

Based on the results of the analyses per maturity block, it is to be expected that the
data can be pooled. One large analysis was conducted per farm (1160 and 440 fruit for
farm 1 and 2, respectively). The results (Table 3; high R2adj, low standard error of
estimate) indicate that the rate constants can be considered the same for all blocks
irrespective of the circumstance (canopy position, tree position, etc.) and that a combined
analysis is permitted. Whether this holds true for all orchards or only for these two
relatively young orchards cannot be concluded from these data.
The biological shift factors (∆t) for DM and colour from the combined analysis
(not shown) hardly differed from that estimated in the separate analysis (Tables 1 and 2),
although the resulting distributions (p[Δt] was no longer normally distributed, as expected
for the combination of variation within and between blocks. The distributions of Δt,
however, are different as can be taken from the low values of p[Δt], induced by clear
differences in mean value. This result means that for further investigation of the effects of
blocks and orchard on the estimated biological variation, the results of the separate
analyses can be used.

CONCLUSION
Mango fruit DM was reliably assessed with the vis-NIR system, while FC was
more prone to measurement error. Repeated, non-destructive measurement of fruit on-tree
is useful in assessing the maturity of individual fruit, harvest batches and even whole
orchards. While the approach of Jordan and Loeffen (2013) can be used to judge harvest
readiness using such data, indexed non-linear regression analysis, as reported in this
study, can be used to trace the source of variation in a batch of fruit or an orchard, given
appropriate sampling strategies. Such information could be used to reduce this variation,
leading to fruit crops of greater uniformity of maturity.
Variation between fruit across the orchard can be attributed to differences in
development stage, most probably modulated by date of flowering and the amount of
light and temperature received. The estimated biological shift factors for DM were much
larger (less negative) that for colour (Tables 1 and 2). Thus DM changes earlier than
colour, although at a lower rate. No appreciable differences were found between two
different farms, a result that indicates either the maturation processes are generic, and

199
mostly independent of local circumstances, or that the management conditions of the two
farms were very similar.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The support of OneHarvest P/L, Hortical P/L and Horticulture Australia Ltd. is
greatly appreciated, and discussions with O. van Kooten and H. Schepers gratefully
acknowledged. Technology development partner, Integrated Spectronics P/L of Sydney,
Australia, has ceased trading, with related technology now pursued through CID Inc.,
USA.

Literature Cited
Diczbalis, Y. and Wicks, C. 1997. Mango - Harvesting time - Northern Territory. Gordon,
N.S.W.: Horticultural Research & Development Corporation, viii, 28 p.30 CM.
Bibliography: 20-22.
Jordan, R.B. and Loeffen, M.P.F. 2013. A new method for modelling biological variation
using quantile functions. Postharvest Biol. Tech. 86:387-401.
Johnson, G.I. and Hofman, P.J. 2009. Postharvest technology and quarantine treatments.
In: R.E. Litz (ed.), The Mango: Botany, Production and Uses. 2nd edition. CABI.
Martinez, A.S., González, R.S. and Terçariol, C.A.S. 2008. Continuous growth models in
terms of generalized logarithm and exponential functions. Physica A: Statistical
Mechanics and its Applications 387:5679-5687.
R Development Core Team. 2005. A Language and Environment for Statistical
Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. (http://www.R-
project.org).
Richards, F.J. 1959. A flexible growth functions for empirical use. J. Exp. Bot. 10:290-
300.
Saranwong, S., Sornsrivichai, J. and Kawano, S. 2004. Prediction of ripe-stage eating
quality of mango fruit from its harvest quality measured nondestructively by near
infrared spectroscopy. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 31:137-145.
Schouten, R.E., Jongbloed, G., Tijskens, L.M.M. and van Kooten, O. 2004. Batch
variability and cultivar keeping quality of cucumber. Postharvest Biol. Technol.
32:299-310.
Subedi, P.P., Walsh, K.B. and Owens, G. 2006. Prediction of mango eating quality at
harvest using short-wave near infrared spectroscopy. Postharvest Biol. Technol.
43:326-334.
Subedi, P.P. and Walsh, K.B. 2011. Assessment of sugar and starch in intact banana and
mango fruit by SWNIR spectroscopy. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 62:238-245.
Tijskens, L.M.M., Heuvelink, E., Schouten R.E., Lana, M.M. and van Kooten, O. 2005.
The biological shift factor. Biological age as a tool for modelling in pre- and
postharvest horticulture. Acta Hort. 687:39-46.
Tijskens, L.M.M. and van Kooten, O. 2006. Theoretical considerations on generic
modelling of harvest maturity, enzymes status and quality behaviour. International
Journal of Postharvest Technology and Innovation 1:106-120.
Tijskens, L.M.M., Konopacki, P.J., Schouten, R.E., Hribar, J. and Simčič, M. 2008.
Biological variance in the colour of Granny Smith apples. Modelling the effect of
senescence and chilling injury. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 50:153-163.

200
 Tables

Table 1. Results of the indexed non-linear regression analysis of mango fruit dry matter (DM) accumulation per block, from data of
individual mango fruit on tree. Reported parameters relate to Eqn. 1. Parameters DMmax, σ[DMmax], kDM, and Δt were estimated for all
56 and 22 blocks of the two farms, with results for 17 and 8 blocks from farms 1 and 2, respectively, presented here.

Parameters St. Err. Administrative Stochastic

Farm BN
DMmax σ[DMmax] DMmin kDM Δt kDM Δt R2adj Nobs Ngr σ[Δt] p[Δt]
1 1 28.08 0.914 4 0.00090 -26.15 0.00002 1.164 0.96 140 20 2.47 0.75
1 2 25.99 1.673 4 0.00095 -30.60 0.00002 1.469 0.96 130 20 4.03 0.25
1 3 27.02 0.727 4 0.00099 -30.28 0.00002 1.409 0.94 140 20 3.76 0.49
1 4 26.87 0.896 4 0.00095 -29.90 0.00002 1.235 0.96 139 20 4.50 0.17
1 5 26.59 1.276 4 0.00099 -31.74 0.00002 1.234 0.96 140 20 4.28 0.13
·· ····· ·· ··· ··
·· ····· ·· ··· ··
2 1 27.21 0.593 4 0.00095 -26.43 0.00002 1.618 0.92 140 20 3.08 0.85
2 2 27.20 1.222 4 0.00099 -21.65 0.00003 1.495 0.94 117 20 3.35 0.93
2 3 27.54 1.795 4 0.00089 -26.26 0.00002 1.785 0.94 140 20 5.46 0.22
2 4 27.99 1.194 4 0.00091 -23.37 0.00003 1.903 0.92 140 20 5.63 0.04
2 5 27.80 1.112 4 0.00079 -23.29 0.00002 1.895 0.92 140 20 4.67 0.30
·· ····· ·· ··· ··
·· ····· ·· ··· ··

Table 2. Results of the analyses on DM and colour using Equation 1 for data combined over all blocks for each farm.

Parameters St. Err. Administrative Stochastic

Var Farm
Varmax σ[Varmax] Varmin kv Δt kc Δt R2adj Nobs Ngr σ[Δt p[Δt]
DM 1 26.75 1.12 4 0.0010 -24.71 0.000003 1.49 0.94 7115 1160 5.82 0.52
DM 2 28.38 1.39 4 0.0008 -27.46 0.000004 1.80 0.93 3339 440 6.68 0.01
Colour 1 16.59 1.06 0 0.0018 -50.78 0.000011 2.73 0.82 7225 1160 6.26 0.00
Colour 2 17.93 1.36 0 0.0016 -55.66 0.000008 1.76 0.94 3339 440 8.04 0.02

201
201
Figures

Fig. 1. Dry matter plotted against calendar time (top left panel) and biological time (top
right panel), and standardised dry matter (Eq. 2 plotted against biological time
(t+Δt) (bottom left panel). Data are presented for one block of one farm (Block 14,
Farm 2). Each line and symbol represents an individual fruit, repeatedly assessed,
with 20 fruit assessed (four fruit from each of five trees from the block).
Measurements began at the stone-hardening stage of fruit development. Frequency
distribution of the biological shift factor (Δt) (bottom right panel) represents for all
fruit (four fruit per tree, five trees per block, 78 blocks across two farms).

202
Fig. 2. Change in fruit skin colour, with graph legends as for Figure 1.

203
204