Fruits 74(6), 259–272 | ISSN 0248-1294 print, 1625-967X online | https://doi.org/10.17660/th2019/74.6.
1 | © ISHS 2019
Original article
Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect fruit colour,
chilling injury and quality of Indian gooseberry fruit (Emblica
officinalis Gaertner)
Veerpartap Singh1, Anirudh Thakur1, S.K. Jawandha1 and Som Pal Singh2
1
Department of Fruit Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141004, India
2
Department of Climate Change and Agricultural Meteorology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141004, India
Summary
Introduction  –  The climatic conditions during grow-
ing season affect fruit quality and storage behaviour
of Indian gooseberries. The objective was to study the
different harvest stages and storage temperatures in
order to influence the storage quality of this fruit. Ma-
terials and methods –  Fruit of the cultivar Neelum was
harvested at three maturity stages, packed in plastic
crates and stored at 6, 9 or 12 °C with 90–95% rela-
tive humidity, or at room temperature (RT). Commer-
cial fruit quality traits were recorded along 12 days
of storage (DOS): colour, firmness, weight loss (WL)
and fruit spoilage. Sweetness and acidity were mea-
sured through soluble solid content (SSC) and titrat-
able acidity (TA). Biochemical measurements were
also performed on fruit juice: pH and ascorbic acid
content. Results and discussion  –  The lightness (L*) and
chromatic values increased, and the hue angle (ho)
decreased with the storage period with no specific
influence of the storage temperature. Fruit firmness
declined from harvest to lowest levels at 12 DOS with
minimum decrease at 9 °C. Lightness was negatively
correlated with firmness and positively with WL and
spoilage, while hue angle was positively correlated
with firmness and negatively with WL and spoilage.
The fruit from second and third harvest had higher
L*, firmness; and lower spoilage and ho. The fruit har-
vested from second and third harvest showed lower
WL over first harvest. The minimum WL during 12
DOS was recorded at 6 °C (5.52%) followed by 9 °C
(6.70%). Chilling injury (CI) developed in shorter du-
ration at 6 °C than 9 °C; no CI was observed at 12 °C.
The sugars, SSC, SSC:TA and phenolics increased
with storage interval, whereas TA decreased. Conclu-
sion  –  In subtropical regions, Indian gooseberry fruit
can be harvested 207–209 days after full bloom for a
fortnight or till the daily mean temperatures remain
> 18 °C. The fruit quality parameters coinciding with
the second harvest viz. dry matter, firmness levels
and SSC:TA ratio can be considered as the reference.
Keywords
India, aonla, Phyllanthus emblica, fruit quality traits,
postharvest management
Introduction
Indian gooseberry (Emblica officinalis Gaertner syn.
Phyllanthus emblica Linn.) or yuganzi in Chinese is known
Volume 74 | Issue 6 | November-December 2019
Significance of this study
What is already known on this subject?
• Indian gooseberry fruit are perishable in nature which
makes it difficult to store for long duration or trans-
port over long distances.
What are the new findings?
• Harvest maturity indices for Indian gooseberry based
on DFFB, dry matter, fruit colour, SSC and SSC:TA. Ideal
storage temperature for better shelf life of the fruit.
What is the expected impact on horticulture?
• The findings will help the growers to harvest Indian
gooseberry fruit at proper maturity and store at right
temperature for better postharvest life and quality.
with many popular names viz. amla, aonla, amlaki, emblic
and Malacca tree. This subtropical deciduous tree belongs
to the Euphorbiaceae family. The genus Emblica comprises
about 350–500 species, mostly shrubs, few herbs or trees.
It is indigenous to tropical South East Asia, particularly in
India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and China (Bhattacherjee et al.,
2013). It is cultivated for its fruit throughout the natural area
of distribution in China, India, Indonesia, Thailand, Mauri-
tius, Cuba, Trinidad, Central Honduras, Costa Rica, West In-
dies and Japan (Li et al., 2015). It is suitable for growing in
saline, alkaline, sodic and poor quality soils in arid regions.
The cultivation of Indian gooseberry aonla is increasing in
China due to its potential of growing in wastelands and dry
lands. In India, the area of aonla is increasing at a fast rate. In
early 1980s, around 3,000 ha area was under Indian goose-
berry; it increased to 25,000 ha in 2000, and 49,620 ha in
2007. Now, with an area of 93,000 ha it has surpassed the
area under many fruit viz. litchi, pear, peach, Indian jujube
and plum (Anon., 2019). In India nowadays, large number of
aonla varieties can be found, but ‘Neelum’ is the most pre-
dominant variety due to its short juvenile period, large fruit
size and high yield potential (Figure 1).
Indian gooseberry acquired wide popularity all over the
world owing to its medicinal properties and therapeutic val-
ues as all parts of the tree and fruit can be used in one form
or the other. It is extensively used in Chinese, Indian, Tibet-
an and Arabian system of medicine. Aonla fruit is used for
antioxidant, antitumor, gastroprotective, antitussive, hepa-
toprotective, antidiabetic, hypolipidemic, antibacterial, an-
tiulcerogenic and chemopreventive properties (Chaphalkar
et al., 2017). It is an important component of the famous In-
259
 Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

Figure 1.  Fruits of Indian gooseberry (aonla) cv. Neelum on a tree at maturity. Fruit diameter: about 3.5 cm.

dian ayurvedic medicines viz. chyavanprash, a general tonic
and trifla used for digestive disorders. While reviewing the
validated work on the role of Indian gooseberry in preven-
tion and cure of cancer, Baliga and Dsouza (2011) concluded
that it is a wonder berry, which has a role in prevention and
Fcure
IGURE 1. Fruits
of many of Indian
ailments, gooseberry
including cancer. The (aonla) cv. Neelum
ascorbic acid
content ranges between 500–1,500 mg 100 g-1 of fruit pulp
(Kore et al., 2013) depending upon the genotype. The aonla
fruit has an astringent note and tastes sour with a sweet sec-
ondary taste hence, generally not consumed fresh (Adsare et
al., 2016). The fruit is processed into delicious value added
products viz. preserves, jam, candy, dried chips, jellies, pick-
les, juice, toffee, sweets and powder for year round consump-
tion. In fresh form it is eaten after minimal processing like
fresh shreds sprinkled with salt or dried shreds with salt. In-
dian gooseberry is in high demand for processing by big food
processing companies viz. Dabur, Zandu, Himalaya, Patanjali
Ayurved, etc. Indian gooseberry has become an important
industrial crop and healthy fruit. The fruit processing indus-
tries store the harvested fruit in brine for long duration stor-
age until it is processed. The fruit stored in brine can be used
for making pickle and powder, but the fruit is not suitable for
making products like juice, preserve, jam, jelly, sweets and
candy. Hence, fresh Indian gooseberry fruit is in very high de-
mand. It is a non-climacteric fruit and highly perishable with
a storage life of around four days under ambient conditions
(Pathak et al., 2009), and it is rarely stored due to such a high Materials and methods
perishability (Doreyappa Gowda et al., 2011).
Its perishable nature makes it difficult to store the fruit
for long duration or transport over long distances. Among
the environmental factors influencing plant growth and
productivity, atmospheric temperature has the major effect
(Benkeblia et al., 2011). The variation in fruit ripening and
quality is mostly due to variation in growing condition of the
trees, especially the growing season temperature (Woolf and
Ferguson, 2000). Temperatures during the growing season
influence plant metabolism, cellular structure and compo-
on a tree
nents related at maturity.
to fruit Fruit
texture (Rivera et diameter:
al., 2017). Inabout
apples, 3.5 cm.
the final fruit quality can be strongly influenced by high
levels of light, temperature and humidity combined with
soil characteristics (Musacchi and Sera, 2018). The grow-
ing temperatures have been reported to affect fruit colour
(Wang and Zheng, 2001), flavonoids and phenols (Wang et
al., 2007), sugars (Ali, 2012) and ascorbic acid levels (Mag-
waza et al., 2017) in various fruit crops. A wide variation of
the temperature has been reported for the storage of aonla,
from 0–2 °C (Goyal et al., 2008), 5–7 °C (Pathak et al., 2003),
12 °C (Pareek and Kitinoja, 2011), up to 15 °C (Doreyappa
Gowda, 2011). Usually reported 30–40% postharvest losses
in Indian gooseberry (Pareek and Kitinoza, 2011) are due to
poor shelf life that could be reduced by staggered harvest.
It was hypothesized that a combination of staggered harvest
and low temperature storage would extend the availability of
good quality fresh Indian gooseberry fruit for the processing
industry. Our objective was therefore, to study the effect of
maturity at harvest and storage temperature on the storage
life and commercial quality of Indian gooseberries.
Fruit sampling
The experiment was conducted in the Postharvest Lab-
oratory, Department of Fruit Science, Punjab Agricultural
University, Ludhiana, India during two consecutive seasons

260 International Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture

Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

during 2013–14 and 2014–15. Fruit of the Indian goose- polyethylene crates (HDPE, Nilkamal Plastics Ltd., Mumbai,
berry cv. Neelum were harvested early morning from thir- India) with outer dimensions of 500 × 325 × 360 mm having
teen-year-old plants planted at the Fruit Research Farm (Lat. perforated sides and flat bottom. The crates were lined with
30°91’N, Long. 75°80’E, and 262 m a.s.l.), located at a dis- a single paper lining and 18 kg fruit were packed in each
tance of around one km from the postharvest laboratory. All crate. The top of the plastic crates was covered with a single
trees were clonally propagated by budding. The experimen- paper layer. The crates were divided into four lots containing
tal site falls in sub-tropical semi-arid (steppe) region (BSh) 72The
kg fruit
firstper treatment.
harvesting Theplace
took fruit were
193 stored
and 195 in cold
dayscham-
after full bloom (DA
as per the Koppen-Geiger climate classification (BSh) region subsequent
bers at 6, 9 and harvests
12 °C withwere90–95%
done at 207 and humidity
relative 209 DAFB(RH) in year 1, and 225 a
(Peel et al., 2007). and ambient
after room temperature
a fortnight (Figure were
of the third harvest 2) in the
not laboratory.
used for storage studies a
The fruits were harvested at three stages at 15-days in- The observations
incidence regarding
of fruit rot. After theharvest,
fruit were repeated
fruits after 3, 6,
were brought to laboratory in 2
terval from the first week of November to mid-December those
9 and 12free
daysfrom any visible defects were dipped into aqueous solution of 1
of storage.
over two consecutive years (2013 and 2014). The goose- Laboratories, India) for 5 min and air-dried. A batch of 10-kg fruits was r
berry trees were bearing more than 200 kg fruits per tree. Fruit colour,offirmness
initiation and dry matter
storage experiment from each harvest. The rest of the fruit w
At every harvest, around 325 kg fruits were harvested from crates (HDPE,
Fruit skin Nilkamal
colour Plastics by
was measured Ltd., Mumbai,
a Hunter LabIndia)
Colourwith outer dime
three trees. A set of three trees were used to harvest the perforated
difference sides
meter and flat
(Color Flexbottom.
®
The crates
, EZ, USA) from two were lined with a single pape
equatori-
fruits at each harvest stage. The stage of first harvest was al each
regions of the
crate. Thefruit.
top ofThe theCIE 1931
plastic colorwas
crates space valueswith
covered L*, a single paper
estimated by the change of fruit surface from dull greenish a* lots
and containing 72 kg fruit
h° were obtained fromper thetreatment.
Hunter Lab The fruit meter.
Colour were stored in cold ch
yellow to translucent, and by a dry matter content ≥ 27%. At relative L*
Lightness humidity
ranges(RH) fromand ambienttoroom
0 (black) 100 temperature
(white) which (Figure 2) in the
first harvest, the fruits had average fruit height (H) of 32–33 the fruit were
represents repeatedofafter
the lightness 3, 6, 9colour;
the fruit and 12whereas
days of storage.
a* rep-
mm, diameter (D) of 39–40 mm, and fruit weight of 30–32 g. resents redness (+a) or greenness (-a) and b* depicts yellow
The following two harvests were done at fortnightly inter- Fruit
(+b) colour,
or blue (-b)firmness
colour. The andhue dryangle
matter (h°) was calculated
vals with dry matter stabilized at ≥ 30%. At the second and Fruit skin
by equation tan-1 colour was measured
b/a; represents red at by a Hunter
0° or Lab Colour
360°, yellow at difference m
third harvests, fruit size was 35–36 (H), 40–41 (D) mm and equatorial
90°, regions
green at 180° andofblue
the at
fruit. The CIE 1931 color space values L*, a* and
270°.
36–37 (H), 40–41 (D) mm; and fruit weight was 33–34 and Fruit firmness
Colour L* rangescriterion
is an important
meter. Lightness for thetomarket
from 0 (black) 100 (white) which rep
34–35 g, respectively. The first harvesting took place 193 and value
whereas a*and
of fruit loss of fruit
represents firmness
redness (+a) orresults in loss(-a)
greenness and b* depicts yellow
of com-
195 days after full bloom (DAFB) in year 1 and 2, respective- (h°) was
mercial calculated
quality. Firmness by equation
of fruit was tanmeasured
-1 b/a; represents
with a pen-red at 0° or 360°, y
ly. The subsequent harvests were done at 207 and 209 DAFB etrometer
270°. (Model FT-327, USA) using stainless steel probe
in year 1, and 225 and 227 DAFB in year 2. Fruits harvested (8 mm). About
Fruit one cm
firmness is 2anpeel of the fruit
important was removed
criterion from value of fruit an
for the market
after a fortnight of the third harvest were not used for stor- commercial
equatorial planesquality.
withFirmness
the help of ofafruit
peeler wasand
measured with a penetrometer (
pulp firmness
age studies as delaying the harvest led to very high incidence was recorded
probe (8 mm).andAbout
expressed
one cm as2 newton
peel of the (N).fruit
Thewas fruitremoved
sam- from equator
of fruit rot. After harvest, fruits were brought to laboratory in ples were
pulp dried by
firmness wasplacing
recorded them andinexpressed
a hot air as oven (Narang
newton (N). The fruit samp
20-kg plastic crates, sorted by hand and those free from any air ovenWorks,
Scientific (Narang NewScientific
Delhi, Works,
India) at New 68 Delhi,
°C forIndia)
72 h. atThe68 °C for 72 h. Th
visible defects were dipped into aqueous solution of 100 ppm percentage
by using thedryfollowing
matter was calculated by using the following
formula:
sodium hypochlorite (Himedia Laboratories, India) for 5 min formula:
and air-dried. A batch of 10-kg fruits was retained for day-ze- Fresh weight − Dry weight
ro analysis before the initiation of storage experiment from DM% = [ ] × 100
Fresh weight
each harvest. The rest of the fruit was packed in high-density

Weight loss, chilling injury and spoilage

The weight of 50 fruits in each replication stored at different storage te
RH mean 12 daysTinterval
mean by using an electronic scale (A&D Co. Ltd., Japan; Model EK
was calculated by subtracting the fruit weight at the particular interval fro
90 as weight loss percentage in reference to the40 initial fruit weight. Similarly,
by counting the number of fruit showing chilling injury (CI) and decay in
spoilage to the initial spoilage. The spoilage of fruit was due to chilling inj
80 which was identified on the basis of characteristic visual symptoms. The
assessment of the severity of the chilling30 symptoms using a 4-stage sca
Relative humidity (%)

discoloured and brown spots; 2 = discolouration and browning coveri

Temperature (°C)

70 discolouration and browning covering 5 to 25% of the fruit surface; and 4

more than 25% of the fruit surface. The chilling injury index was determin
60 20and then dividing this sum by
each category with their chilling injury score

Ascorbic acid and total phenolics

50 These variables (mean values) were determined on the freshly ex
10
replication and the analysis was done in triplicate for each replication. Th
manual squeezing immediately after taking out the fruit from the co
40
conditions. Ascorbic acid content was determined by titration method usi
solution (0.4%), which was standardized against standard ascorbic acid (A
30 0
1 fresh weight (FW). The total phenolic content was determined from fruit

based method using the colorimetric redox reactions of phenols (Single

1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
41
43
45
47
49
51

recorded at 738 nm against a blank using spectrophotometer (Spectro

Pooled weeksexpressed as mg gallic acid equivalents (GAE) 100 g-1 FW.
(Year 2013-15)
Determination
Figure 2.  Mean ambient temperature (T) and relative humidity (RH) of SSC,development
during the growth, total sugars,and
acidity andperiod
storage pH of
Indian gooseberry in the two cropping years 2013–15. The arrows on bottom right represent the dates of harvesting.

V o l uFIGURE
m e 72.4 Mean
| I sambient
s u e 6 temperature
| Novem (T)b and
e r -relative
D e c e humidity
m b e r 2(RH)
0 1 9during the growth, development and storage period 261
of Indian gooseberry in the two cropping years 2013–15. The arrows on bottom right represent the dates of harvesting.
 solution by reducing sugar as described by Ranganna (2007). Ten mL fruit juice were pr
acetate and de-leaded with 22% potassium oxalate and filtered before u
acetate and de-leaded with 22% potassium oxalate and filtered before use. The non-re
converted
converted into reducing
into reducing sugars forsugars for estimation
estimation of total
of total sugars. Totalsugars. Total sugar
sugar content was es
aliquot aliquot
in in 100-mL
100-mL volumetric
volumetric flask. A flask.ofA 5volume
volume mL of of 5HCl
60% mLwasof 60%
addedHCl wassolu
to this add
Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit
room temperature for acidic hydrolysis. Water bath was given
room temperature for acidic hydrolysis. Water bath was given at 68 °C for 10 min to th at 68 °C fo
used toused to neutralize
neutralize the
the excess of excess of HCl
HCl in the instage.
initial the initial stage. The
The solution solutionagainst
was titrated was t
Weight loss, chilling injury and spoilage using
was using methylene
methylene
expressedblueinas blue as indicator
indicator
percentage with with appearance
appearance
of fresh weight. ofThe
brick of brick
red colour
percentage as red
end colour as
point. Th
percentage of fresh of
percentage weight.
freshThe percentage
weight. of total sugars
The percentage was calculated
of total sugars was by calculated
using the fo
The weight of 50 fruits in each replication stored at dif- of total sugars was calculated by using the following formula:
ferent storage temperatures was recorded at 3, 6, 9 and 12
days interval by using an electronic scale (A&D Co. Ltd., Ja- Total sugars �%� =
Total sugars �%� =
pan; Model EK-1200i, 1,200 g × 0.1 g). The weight loss was Fehling factor �0.05� × Vol. after deleading × Vol. after inversion
[ Fehling factor �0.05� × Vol. after deleading × Vol. after ] × inversion
100
calculated by subtracting the fruit weight at the particular Titre[ × Vol. of fruit juice × Vol. of aliquot for hydrolysis ] × 100
Titre × Vol. of fruit juice × Vol. of aliquot for hydrolysis
interval from the initial fruit weight and expressed as weight
loss percentage in reference to the initial fruit weight. Sim- Titratable
Titratable acidity acidity
(TA) was (TA) was determined
determined by titrating bythe
titrating
fruit juice the(2 mL) against 0.1
ilarly, the spoilage percentage was calculated by counting pinkfruit endpointTitratable
juice (2 mL)
using acidity
against(TA)
phenolphthalein 0.1 was determined
Nindicator
NaOH solution
(Ranganna, bytotitrating
light pink
2007) andthe fruit juice
expressed (2 m
as perce
the number of fruit showing chilling injury (CI) and decay in pink endpoint
endpoint using phenolphthalein
using phenolphthalein indicator indicator
(Ranganna, (Ranganna,
2007) 2007) and exp
each crate and expressing it as percent spoilage to the initial and expressed 0.0064as×percent Titre citric acid:
TA = [ ] × 100
spoilage. The spoilage of fruit was due to chilling injury and/ Volume of 0.0064
fruit juice× Titre
or blue mould and Aspergillus which was identified on the TA = [ ] × 100
Volume of fruit juice
basis of characteristic visual symptoms. The chilling index Digital pH meter (Elico, Hyderabad, India) was used for determining the pH of the
was determined by visual assessment of the severity of the standardizing DigitaltopH pHmeter
4.0, 7.0(Elico,
and 9.2Hyderabad, India) was
with buffer solutions used for
accordingly.
chilling symptoms using a 4-stage scale: 0 = no symptom; 1 = determiningDigitalthe pHpH meter
of the (Elico,
fruit Hyderabad,
juice, and then India) was used for determining
for standard-
few scattered discoloured and brown spots; 2 = discoloura- Experimental standardizing
izing to pHdesign
4.0, 7.0 to
and pHanalysis
and 4.0,
9.2 with7.0 and 9.2 solutions
buffer with buffer solutions accordingly.
accordingly.
tion and browning covering up to 5% of the fruit surface; 3 = Eighteen kg gooseberry fruits were packed in a plastic crate as explained earlier. Four
discolouration and browning covering 5 to 25% of the fruit 72 kg Experimental
fruits
Experimental were included design
design inandaand
single analysis
analysis treatment. Three crates from each treatment w
surface; and 4 = discolouration and browning covering more replications. EighteenOne extra
Eighteen kg kg crate was kept
gooseberry
gooseberry along
fruits
fruits the three
were
were packed
packed cratesin ain
in each treatment
a plastic
plastic crate as to compe
explain
than 25% of the fruit surface. The chilling injury index was destructive72 kg
crate asbiochemical
fruits
explained wereanalysis.
included
earlier. The
Four inexperiment
acrates was laid out
singlecontaining
treatment. Three
aroundas completely
crates from random
eac
replications having 18 kg fruits in each replication. The data were subjected to analysis o
determined by multiplying the number of fruit in each cat- 72 replications.
kg fruits wereOne extra crate
included in a singlewas kept along the
treatment. Three three crates in each treat
crates
the statistics software SAS (V 9.3 SAS Institute Inc., USA). The mean separation was do
egory with their chilling injury score and then dividing this difference
fromdestructive
each biochemical considered
treatment analysis. The experiment was laid out as com
(Fisher’s LSD) at were
P ≤ 0.05 following the as significance
three replications.
F test. The principal comp
sum by the total number of fruit in a replication. doneOne replications
extra
using thecrate having
wassoftware
statistics kept18along
kgPaleontological
fruits
the in eachcrates
three replication.
in each
Statistics The data et
treat-
3.0 (Hammer were subjecte
al., 2001).
mentthetostatistics
compensate software
the use SASof(V 9.3for
fruit SAS Institute Inc.,
destructive biochem-USA). The mean sep
Ascorbic acid and total phenolics icaldifference
Results (Fisher’s
and discussion
analysis. The LSD) atwas
experiment P ≤ 0.05
laid outfollowing the significance
as completely ran- F test. The p
These variables (mean values) were determined on the done using
domized design thewith
statistics
threesoftware
replications Paleontological
having 18 kg Statistics
fruits 3.0 (Hammer
freshly extracted juice from 25 fruits each per replication Fruit in colour
each replication. The data were subjected to analysis of
and the analysis was done in triplicate for each replication. Results
In Indian
variance (ANOVA) andusing
gooseberry discussion
or aonla, thefruit colour issoftware
statistics an essential SAS indicator
(V 9.3that determines fr
The juice was extracted from the fruit by manual squeezing during SAShandling
InstituteorInc.,storage.
USA). There
Thewas mean a significant
separation variation
was done in lightness
using (L*) and hue ang
immediately after taking out the fruit from the cold storage, storage
least period,
Fruit irrespective
significant
colour of the(Fisher’s
difference harvest stage LSD)and at storage
P ≤ 0.05temperature
follow- (Table 1a, b).
under ambient laboratory conditions. Ascorbic acid content values ingfrom
theIn the lowest to the highest during storage indicates that fruit colour was turn
significance
Indian gooseberry F test. The principal
or aonla, fruitcomponent
colour is an analysis
essential indicator tha
green. Irrespective of the harvest stage, fruits stored at 6 °C and 9 °C showed lesser increa
was determined by titration method using 2,6-dichlorophe- (PCA)
during was done using
handling or the statistics
storage. There software
was a Paleontological
significant variation in lightness
a maintenance of darker green colour of the fruit. A significant decrease (6.74%) of h° du(
nol indophenols dye solution (0.4%), which was standard- Indian Statistics
storage 3.0
gooseberries (Hammer
period, confirms et
irrespective
theal., 2001).
loss of the harvest
of green colour of stage and storage
the fruit. The highest temperature
h° value (
ized against standard ascorbic acid (AOAC, 2000), and ex- storagevalues at 6 °C,from
what the lowest
did not differ towith
the h° highest
values during
recorded storage
at 9 andindicates that fruit
12 °C. Conversely, thec
pressed as mg 100 g-1 fresh weight (FW). The total phenolic wasResults green. for
recorded and
Irrespective
storage discussion
of thetemperature,
at room harvest stage, what fruits stored
indicates at 6green
better °C and 9 °Cconserv
colour showe
content was determined from fruit tissue with the Folin-Ci- than ataambientmaintenance conditions.
of darker green colour of the fruit. A significant decrease (6
ocalteu reagent based method using the colorimetric redox Fruit
Fruit
Indiancolour
colour is known toconfirms
gooseberries be sensitive the tolossstorage
of green temperature
colour of (Toivonen
the fruit. The and hig
Bru
reactions of phenols (Singleton et al., 1999). The absorbance horticultural
storage crops,
In Indian at 6 anywhat
°C, loss of
gooseberry didorthe green
aonla,
not colour
fruit
differ colour
with during
h° is an
values postharvest
recordedhandling
essential at 9 and is 12ordin
°C.
was recorded at 738 nm against a blank using spectropho- degradation,
indicator what is a major quality
that determines
was recorded for storagefruit at room concernand
quality as itfreshness
temperature, reflects a during
whatloss in marketable qual
indicates better green
conditions L* values were negatively correlated with firmness (-0.668, R2 =
tometer (Spectronic 200+, Thermo Scientific, USA) and ex- experimental
handling or storage.
than at ambient conditions. There was a significant variation in light-
weight loss (0.886) and spoilage (0.823) (Table 5). In parallel, h° values were positively
pressed as mg gallic acid equivalents (GAE) 100 g-1 FW. ness (L*) andcolour hue angle (h°) ofto fruit during the storage peri-
(0.711, R2 Fruit is known
= 0.43) and negatively withbeweight sensitiveloss to storage
(-0.857) andtemperature
spoilage (-0.850) (Toi
od, irrespective
horticultural of the
crops, harvest
any stage
loss of and
the storage
green temperature
colour
temperature is known to affect the rate of chlorophyll breakdown and carotenoid synth during postharvest ha
Determination of SSC, total sugars, acidity and pH The(Table
reduction 1a, of
degradation,b).theTheratesteady
what is aincrease in L* values
majordegradation
of chlorophyll quality concern
mayfrom
be as theit low-
reflects
responsible forakeeping
loss ina da m
The biochemical variables were determined by doing L* and estexperimental
to theh°)
higher highest 9 during
at 6, conditions
and 12 °C storage
L*
thanvalues indicates
room were that fruit correlated
negatively
temperature. colour with firmne
three analyses of the freshly extracted juice from 50 fruits wasweight
turning loss from green
(0.886) andto spoilage
lighter green. (0.823) Irrespective
(Table 5). In of parallel,
the h° values w
each per replication and repeated for all three replications. harvest
(0.711, stage,
R2 =fruits
0.43)stored at 6 °C andwith
and negatively 9 °C weight
showedloss lesser (-0.857) and spo
Soluble solid content (SSC) was determined with an infra- increase
temperaturein L* values,
is known indicating
to affect athe maintenance
rate of chlorophyll of darker breakdown and ca
red digital refractometer (Atago PAL 1 model 3810, Tokyo, green
Thecolour
reduction of the fruit.
of the rate A ofsignificant
chlorophyll decrease
degradation(6.74%) may ofbe responsible f
Japan) and expressed as °Brix. h° during
L* and the higherstorage
h°) atperiod
6, 9 and of Indian
12 °C than gooseberries confirms
room temperature.
The total sugar content was estimated by the Lane and the loss of green colour of the fruit. The highest h° value
Eynon method based on the reduction of Fehlings’s solu- (103.60) was recorded for storage at 6 °C, what did not differ
tion by reducing sugar as described by Ranganna (2007). with h° values recorded at 9 and 12 °C. Conversely, the lowest
Ten mL fruit juice were precipitated with 45% lead acetate h° value (102.63) was recorded for storage at room tempera-
and de-leaded with 22% potassium oxalate and filtered be- ture, what indicates better green colour conservation at low
fore use. The non-reducing sugars were first converted into temperature than at ambient conditions.
reducing sugars for estimation of total sugars. Total sugar Fruit colour is known to be sensitive to storage tempera-
content was estimated by taking 25 mL aliquot in 100-mL ture (Toivonen and Brummell, 2008). In green horticultural
volumetric flask. A volume of 5 mL of 60% HCl was added crops, any loss of the green colour during postharvest han-
to this solution and left overnight at room temperature for dling is ordinarily due to chlorophyll degradation, what is a
acidic hydrolysis. Water bath was given at 68 °C for 10 min major quality concern as it reflects a loss in marketable qual-
to the flask. NaOH (10%) was used to neutralize the excess ity and shelf life. In our experimental conditions L* values
of HCl in the initial stage. The solution was titrated against were negatively correlated with firmness (-0.668, R2 = 0.31)
Fehling solution A and B using methylene blue as indicator and positively with weight loss (0.886) and spoilage (0.823)
with appearance of brick red colour as end point. The result (Table 5). In parallel, h° values were positively correlated

262 International Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture

 Table 1a.  Effect of stage of harvest and storage temperature on lightness (L*) of aonla fruit cv. Neelum. H: Harvest stage; I: Interval of storage; NS: Not significant; RT: Room temperature
(see Figure 2); T: Temperature of storage.
Harvest stages Storage intervals (days) Means Means Means
Storage temperatures 0 3 6 9 12 (H×T) (harvest) (temperature)
Harvest I RT 47.69 ± 2.3 50.75 ± 2.4 53.23 ± 2.4 56.01 ± 2.4 58.51 ± 2.5 53.24a
6 °C 47.69 ± 2.3 49.31 ± 2.2 51.19 ± 2.2 53.02 ± 2.1 54.94 ± 2.1 51.23a RT = 55.25a
52.22c
9 °C 47.69 ± 2.3 49.85 ± 2.3 51.90 ± 2.2 53.84 ± 2.1 55.75 ± 2.1 51.81a
12 °C 47.69 ± 2.3 50.37 ± 2.3 52.65 ± 2.3 55.05 ± 2.3 57.34 ± 2.3 52.62a
Harvest II RT 50.05 ± 2.0 53.20 ± 2.2 55.79 ± 2.2 58.29 ± 2.2 60.63 ± 2.3 55.59a 6 °C = 54.93a

Volume 74 | Issue 6 |
6 °C 50.05 ± 2.0 51.81 ± 2.0 53.96 ± 2.0 56.05 ± 2.0 58.10 ± 2.1 53.99a
54.89b
9 °C 50.05 ± 2.0 52.51 ± 2.1 54.93 ± 2.2 57.05 ± 2.2 59.22 ± 2.3 54.75a
12 °C 50.05 ± 2.0 52.87 ± 2.1 55.37 ± 2.2 57.73 ± 2.2 60.02 ± 2.2 55.21a 9 °C = 54.36a
Harvest III RT 51.99 ± 2.3 54.43 ± 2.3 57.07 ± 2.3 59.47 ± 2.4 61.71 ± 2.5 56.93a
6 °C 51.99 ± 2.3 53.62 ± 2.4 55.94 ± 2.5 58.07 ± 2.5 60.11 ± 2.7 55.95a
56.59a
9 °C 51.99 ± 2.3 54.04 ± 2.4 56.62 ± 2.5 58.84 ± 2.6 61.10 ± 2.7 56.52a 12 °C = 53.72a
12 °C 51.99 ± 2.3 54.50 ± 2.4 57.14 ± 2.5 59.53 ± 2.6 61.65 ± 2.7 56.96a
Mean (interval) 49.91e 52.27d 54.65c 56.91b 59.09a
LSD (P ≤ 0.05) H = 1.07, T = NS, I = 1.38, H×T = NS, H×I = NS, T×I = NS, H×T×I = NS.

Table 1b.  Effect of harvest stage and storage temperature on hue angle (h°) of aonla fruit cv. Neelum. H: Harvest stage; I: Interval of storage; RT: Room temperature (see Figure 2);
T: Temperature of storage.
Harvest stages Storage intervals (days) Means Means Means

November-December 2019
Storage temperatures 0 3 6 9 12 (H×T) (harvest) (temperature)
Harvest I RT 107.74 ± 1.5 104.28 ± 1.3 102.48 ± 1.1 101.02 ± 1.1 99.56 ± 1.0 103.02a
6 °C 107.74 ± 1.5 105.84 ± 1.4 103.95 ± 1.3 102.26 ± 1.2 100.79 ± 1.1 104.12a RT = 102.63b
103.55a
Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

9 °C 107.74 ± 1.5 105.22 ± 1.4 103.44 ± 1.3 101.87 ± 1.2 100.38 ± 1.1 103.73a
12 °C 107.74 ± 1.5 104.68 ± 1.3 102.91 ± 1.2 101.42 ± 1.1 99.92 ± 1.0 103.33a
Harvest II RT 106.86 ± 1.4 103.99 ± 1.2 101.92 ± 1.2 100.34 ± 1.1 99.01 ± 1.0 102.42a 6 °C = 103.60a
6 °C 106.86 ± 1.4 105.13 ± 1.3 103.38 ± 1.3 101.82 ± 1.2 100.49 ± 1.1 103.54a
102.99ab
9 °C 106.86 ± 1.4 104.71 ± 1.3 102.91 ± 1.2 101.32 ± 1.1 99.95 ± 1.0 103.15a
12 °C 106.86 ± 1.4 104.32 ± 1.2 102.52 ± 1.2 100.96 ± 1.1 99.59 ± 1.0 102.85a 9 °C = 103.25ab
Harvest III RT 106.61 ± 1.3 103.85 ± 1.1 102.06 ± 1.1 100.60 ± 1.1 99.21 ± 1.0 102.46a
6 °C 106.61 ± 1.3 104.69 ± 1.3 102.96 ± 1.2 101.41 ± 1.2 100.03 ± 1.1 103.14a
102.81b
9 °C 106.61 ± 1.3 104.34 ± 1.2 102.63 ± 1.2 101.08 ± 1.1 99.68 ± 1.1 102.87a 12 °C = 102.99ab
12 °C 106.61 ± 1.3 104.02 ± 1.2 102.51 ± 1.2 101.16 ± 1.3 99.58 ± 1.1 102.78a
Means (interval) 107.07a 104.59b 102.81c 101.27d 99.85e
LSD (P ≤ 0.05) H = 0.60, T = 0.70, I = 0.78, H×T = NS, H×I = NS, T×I = NS, H×T×I = NS.

263
 Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

Table 5.  Pearson’s correlation coefficients between various quality attributes of aonla fruit and fruit juice. CI: Chilling index; SSC: Soluble solid content; TA: Titratable acidity; L*: lightness; with firmness (0.711, R2 = 0.43) and negatively with weight
loss (-0.857) and spoilage (-0.850) (Table 5). Low storage
temperature is known to affect the rate of chlorophyll break-
h° down and carotenoid synthesis (Khairi et al., 2015). The

1
reduction of the rate of chlorophyll degradation may be re-
sponsible for keeping a darker green colour (lower L* and
higher h°) at 6, 9 and 12 °C than room temperature.

-0.974**
L*

1
Fruit firmness
Irrespective of the harvest stage and storage tempera-
tures, fruit firmness declined significantly from harvest to 12
Phenolics

0.589**
-0.485**
days of storage (DOS) (Figure 4a). This decrease was high-
er at room temperature and 12 °C. Aonla fruit firmness was

1
negatively correlated with weight loss (-0.8) and spoilage
(-0.609) (Table 5). The degradation of the middle lamella and
disintegration of cell wall during storage may be responsible
Sugars

0.598**
0.381**
-0.324*
for such a decrease (Ali et al., 2004). Transpiration from the
1

cuticle leads to fruit weight loss, reduction of turgor pressure

and degradation of cell wall by enzymes viz. pectin methyl
esterase and cellulase, all reported to decrease fruit firmness
0.443**
0.717**
0.931**
-0.918**
during storage (Cheng et al., 2009). Fruit firmness is influ-
pH

enced by the plant evapotranspiration and respiration rates,

1

which influence loss of solutes and water. Hence, higher firm-

ness is generally retained at lower storage temperatures.
Firmness

However, a higher chilling injury (CI) incidence was observed

-0.528**

-0.668**
0.711**
0.156
0.030

at 6 °C (Figure 5a), indicating unsuitable temperature for

1

storing Indian gooseberry. This was confirmed with a lower

average fruit firmness (125.2 N) at 6 °C than at 9 °C (126.3 N),
irrespective of the harvest and storage intervals. Eventually,
-0.497**

-0.750**
-0.579**

the fruits from the second harvest stored at 9 °C retained the

-0.214

-0.103
0.003
TA

highest fruit firmness (126.8 N) during the 12 DOS.

1
-0.486**

0.776**
0.657**
0.913**
0.645**
-0.585**

aa
SSC

-0.052
1
SSC:TA

0.587**
-0.387**

0.735**
0.563**
0.395**
0.681**
-0.743**
-0.270*
ratio

** Significant at P ≤ 0.01 level (2-tailed); * Significant at P ≤ 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Ascorbic

-0.654**

0.769**
-0.697**

-0.790**
0.859**
-0.190
-0.253

-0.013
-0.061
acid

bb
1
0.543**

-0.345**

0.393**
-0.265*

0.267*

-0.275*
0.311*
0.139

0.090

0.205
CI

1
Spoilage

cc
0.547**
-0.767**
0.692**
0.453**

-0.609**
0.846**

0.444**
0.823**
-0.850**
0.259*
-0.113
1
Weight loss

0.623**

-0.758**
0.451**
0.459**

-0.800**
0.767**

0.341**
0.886**
-0.857**
-0.181

0.192

0.244
1

Figure 4. Effect of harvest stage (I, II, III) and storage

h°: hue angle.

Ascorbic acid

FIGURE 4. Effect of harvest stage (I, II, III) and storage temperature (RT, 6, 9, 12 °C) on: (a) Firmness (in N);
Weight loss

temperature (RT, 6, 9, 12 °C) on: (a) Firmness (in N);

(b) Weight loss (in %); and (c) Spoilage (in %). Vertical bars represent standard errors and are not visible when
Phenolics
Firmness
Spoilage

values are too small.

SSC:TA

(b) Weight loss (in %); and (c) Spoilage (in %). Vertical bars
Sugars
SSC

represent standard errors and are not visible when values

pH
TA

h°
CI

L*

are too small.

23

264 International Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture

 Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

Figure 3.  Progressive development of chilling injury on aonla fruits after storage at 6 °C for 12 days. Fruit diameter: 3.5 cm.

Aonla is a tropical fruit growing at average temperatures and 6.46%, respectively) in comparison with those from the
> 18 °C around the year. The sharp decrease (7.8–13.8%) of first harvest (7.58%). Irrespective of the stage of harvest, the
fruit firmness during the 12 DOS of the third harvest might minimum average physiological weight loss over the 12 DOS
be due to a sudden decrease of the weather temperatures was recorded at 6 °C (3.35%) followed by weight loss at 9 °C
and a related increase of relative humidity (RH) preceding (4.21%). The highest weight loss (10.88%) was recorded
harvesting (Figure 2). Temperature and humidity are key at room temperature that was significantly higher than the
Fagronomic factors affecting postharvest quality of the fruit,
IGURE 3. Progressive development of chilling injury onweight
aonlaloss at 12 °C (7.87%).
fruits after storage at 6 °C for 12 days. Fruit
as they affect water movement in the plant through vapour The interaction study between harvest stage, storage
diameter: 3.5 cm. (VPD). The VPD is determined by the
pressure difference temperature and period shows the lowest fruit weight loss
temperature of the fruit, difference in temperatures of fruit (5.52%) from the second harvest after 12 DOS at 6 °C, fol-
and air and RH of the air (Joubert, 2016). The changes from lowed by the same at 9 °C (6.70%). Fruit weight loss was
low to high relative humidity following rehydration of the positively correlated with spoilage (R2 = 0.36) and negatively
fruit has been reported to induce turgor-stress in fruit with with fruit firmness (-0.8) (Table 5). It was probably due to
shrunken cytoplasm and tonoplast disruption (Alquezar et the loss of water through evapotranspiration, and loss of car-
al., 2010), what might lead to poor shelf life of the fruit. bon during respiration cycles (Kablan, 2008). Fruits stored
at low temperature were firmer than those stored at ambient
Weight loss room temperature (Figure 4a) probably due to lesser weight
Fruit weight loss increased progressively with the stor- loss. The higher dry matter content (> 30% DM) of fruits
age period (Figure 4b). Fruits from the second and third from the second and third harvests may explain lower fruit
harvests showed significant lower average weight loss (5.70 weight loss from the first harvest (27% DM).
Aonla is a non-climacteric fruit (Pareek and Kitinoja,
2011) that follows a double sigmoid growth curve. After fruit
aa setting, it undergoes dormancy for 100–120 days and grows
rapidly from 120–125 to 180–190 DAFB on the onset of rainy
season followed by a period of slow fruit growth from 190–
200 days onwards during maturation. The main accumula-
tion of fruit dry matter in Indian gooseberry fruit occurred
during the last phase of fruit maturity and stabilized during
the last three weeks of harvest (Singh et al., 2015).

Spoilage and chilling injury

bb
cc
Figure 5.  Effect of harvest stage (I, II, III) and storage
temperature (RT, 6, 9, 12 °C) on: (a) Chilling index (CI);
FIGURE 5. Effect of harvest stage (I, II, III) and storage temperature (RT, 6, 9, 12 °C) on: (a) Chilling index (CI);
(b) Vitamin C (in mg ascorbic acid 100 g-1 FW); and (c) Total phenolics (in mg -1 GAE 100 g FW). Vertical bars
-1
(b) Vitamin C (in mg ascorbic acid 100 g FW); and (c) Total
represent standard errors and are not visible when values are too small.
phenolics (in mg GAE 100 g-1 FW). Vertical bars represent
standard errors and are not visible when values are too small.
24
Harvest stage significantly affected the spoilage of Indi-
an gooseberry fruit during storage (Figure 4c). The lowest
average spoilage was recorded on fruits from the second
harvest (13.05%), followed by the one from the first harvest
(14.92%). The highest average spoilage was recorded on
stored fruits from the third harvest (16.32%). The growing
site of the plants is known to determine fruit quality and its
susceptibility to mechanical damage and spoilage during
harvesting and handling operations (Kader and Rolle, 2004).
As discussed earlier, low fruit spoilage postharvest should be
related to a high dry matter (> 30%). Conversely, a high fruit
spoilage may be related to low air temperature and high rela-
tive humidity preceding harvesting (Figure 2), as seen earlier
for fruit firmness.
The Indian gooseberry fruit developed chilling injury only
at 6 and 9 °C storage temperatures (Figure 5a). Irrespective
of the harvest stage, higher CI (0.21) was observed after
12 DOS at 6 °C than at 9 °C (0.15). The storage temperature
with highest fruit spoilage (20.70%) corresponded to those
with highest CI (Figure 3): 6 °C. Fruit spoilage during storage
was significantly (0.55) correlated with the CI (Table 5). On
the other hand, high fruit spoilage (20.70%) was recorded at
12 °C along the 12 DOS, what may be caused by fungal decay
as result of suitable temperature and RH (90–95%) during

Volume 74 | Issue 6 | November-December 2019 265

266
Table 2.  Effect of harvest stage and storage temperature on the pH of the fruit juice of aonla cv. Neelum. H: Harvest stage; I: Interval of storage; NS: Not significant; RT: Room temperature
(see Figure 2); T: Temperature of storage.
Harvest stages Storage intervals (days) Means Means Means
Storage temperatures 0 3 6 9 12 (H×T) (harvest) (temperature)
Harvest I RT 2.32 ± 0.1 2.75 ± 0.2 3.02 ± 0.1 3.28 ± 0.0 3.40 ± 0.0 2.95a
6 °C 2.32 ± 0.1 2.68 ± 0.1 2.96 ± 0.1 3.15 ± 0.1 3.30 ± 0.1 2.88a RT = 2.96a
2.87a
9 °C 2.32 ± 0.1 2.63 ± 0.1 2.89 ± 0.1 3.05 ± 0.1 3.19 ± 0.1 2.82a
12 °C 2.32 ± 0.1 2.58 ± 0.1 2.90 ± 0.1 3.07 ± 0.2 3.20 ± 0.1 2.81a
Harvest II RT 2.36 ± 0.0 2.86 ± 0.1 3.12 ± 0.1 3.31 ± 0.1 3.42 ± 0.1 3.01a 6 °C = 2.89ab
6 °C 2.36 ± 0.0 2.81 ± 0.1 3.07 ± 0.1 3.21 ± 0.1 3.33 ± 0.1 2.95a
2.92a
9 °C 2.36 ± 0.0 2.76 ± 0.1 2.95 ± 0.1 3.11 ± 0.1 3.22 ± 0.1 2.88a
12 °C 2.36 ± 0.0 2.71 ± 0.1 2.86 ± 0.1 3.00 ± 0.1 3.16 ± 0.2 2.82a 9 °C = 2.84bc
Harvest III RT 2.31 ± 0.1 2.78 ± 0.1 3.02 ± 0.1 3.17 ± 0.1 3.31 ± 0.1 2.92a
6 °C 2.31 ± 0.2 2.73 ± 0.1 2.92 ± 0.1 3.07 ± 0.1 3.20 ± 0.1 2.84a
2.84a
9 °C 2.31 ± 0.1 2.69 ± 0.1 2.86 ± 0.1 3.10 ± 0.1 3.19 ± 0.1 2.83a 12 °C = 2.80c
12 °C 2.31 ± 0.1 2.63 ± 0.1 2.80 ± 0.1 2.99 ± 0.1 3.13 ± 0.1 2.77a
Means (interval) 2.33e 2.72d 2.95c 3.12b 3.25a
LSD (P ≤ 0.05) H = NS, T = 0.07, I = 0.08, H×T = NS, H×I = NS, T×I = NS, H×T×I = NS.

Table 3a. Effect of harvest stage and storage temperature on the soluble solid content (SSC in %) of the fruit juice of aonla cv. Neelum. H: Harvest stage; I: Interval of storage; NS: Not
significant; RT: Room temperature (see Figure 2); T: Temperature of storage.
Harvest stages Storage intervals (days) Means Means Means
Storage temperatures 0 3 6 9 12 (H×T) (harvest) (temperature)
Harvest I RT 6.93 ± 0.1 8.12 ± 0.4 8.72 ± 0.2 8.90 ± 0.3 9.10 ± 0.3 8.35d
6 °C 6.93 ± 0.1 8.05 ± 0.4 8.38 ± 0.3 8.63 ± 0.3 8.82 ± 0.3 8.16e RT = 8.71b
8.32c
Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

9 °C 6.93 ± 0.1 8.23 ± 0.4 8.68 ± 0.2 8.75 ± 0.3 8.95 ± 0.3 8.31de
12 °C 6.93 ± 0.1 8.28 ± 0.4 9.07 ± 0.2 8.92 ± 0.3 9.02 ± 0.4 8.44d
Harvest II RT 7.40 ± 0.1 8.67 ± 0.4 8.92 ± 0.4 9.15 ± 0.3 9.25 ± 0.4 8.68c 6 °C = 8.67b
6 °C 7.40 ± 0.1 8.87 ± 0.4 9.02 ± 0.4 9.18 ± 0.4 9.37 ± 0.4 8.77c
8.82b
9 °C 7.40 ± 0.1 9.25 ± 0.5 9.40 ± 0.5 9.57 ± 0.6 9.70 ± 0.6 9.06b
12 °C 7.40 ± 0.1 8.85 ± 0.4 9.05 ± 0.4 9.22 ± 0.4 9.32 ± 0.5 8.77c 9 °C = 8.85a
Harvest III RT 8.23 ± 0.1 9.08 ± 0.6 9.28 ± 0.6 9.38 ± 0.6 9.47 ± 0.7 9.09ab
6 °C 8.23 ± 0.1 9.12 ± 0.6 9.08 ± 0.7 9.42 ± 0.7 9.57 ± 0.7 9.08ab
9.14a
9 °C 8.23 ± 0.1 9.18 ± 0.6 9.30 ± 0.7 9.48 ± 0.7 9.63 ± 0.7 9.17ab 12 °C = 8.82a
12 °C 8.23 ± 0.1 9.30 ± 0.6 9.40 ± 0.7 9.53 ± 0.7 9.72 ± 0.7 9.24a
Means (interval) 7.52e 8.75d 9.03c 9.18b 9.33a
LSD (P ≤ 0.05) H = 0.09, T = 0.10, I = 0.11, H×T 0.17= , H×I = 0.19, T×I = NS, H×T×I = NS.

International Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture

 Table 3b.  Effect of harvest stage and storage temperature on titratable acidity (TA in %) of the fruit juice of aonla cv. Neelum. H: Harvest stage; I: Interval of storage; NS: Not significant;
RT: Room temperature (see Figure 2); T: Temperature of storage.
Harvest stages Storage intervals (days) Means Means Means
Storage temperatures 0 3 6 9 12 (H×T) (harvest) (temperature)
Harvest I RT 1.75 ± 0.1 2.25 ± 0.3 2.18 ± 0.3 2.05 ± 0.3 1.95 ± 0.2 2.04ab
6 °C 1.75 ± 0.1 1.98 ± 0.3 1.94 ± 0.3 1.89 ± 0.3 1.82 ± 0.2 1.88fg RT = 2.02a
1.93c
9 °C 1.75 ± 0.1 2.01 ± 0.2 1.92 ± 0.2 1.83 ± 0.2 1.84 ± 0.2 1.87g
12 °C 1.75 ± 0.1 2.03 ± 0.2 1.99 ± 0.2 1.94 ± 0.2 1.87 ± 0.2 1.92ef
Harvest II RT 2.08 ± 0.1 2.02 ± 0.1 1.97 ± 0.1 1.91 ± 0.1 1.87 ± 0.1 1.97cd 6 °C = 1.95bc

Volume 74 | Issue 6 |
6 °C 2.08 ± 0.1 1.94 ± 0.2 1.90 ± 0.2 1.86 ± 0.2 1.82 ± 0.2 1.92ef
1.95b
9 °C 2.08 ± 0.1 1.99 ± 0.2 1.94 ± 0.1 1.88 ± 0.1 1.78 ± 0.1 1.96de
12 °C 2.08 ± 0.1 2.00 ± 0.1 1.95 ± 0.1 1.89 ± 0.1 1.84 ± 0.1 1.97cd 9 °C = 1.95c
Harvest III RT 2.30 ± 0.1 2.01 ± 0.2 1.99 ± 0.2 1.97 ± 0.2 1.95 ± 0.2 2.05ab
6 °C 2.30 ± 0.1 2.03 ± 0.2 2.01 ± 0.2 1.99 ± 0.2 1.96 ± 0.2 2.06a
2.03a
9 °C 2.30 ± 0.1 1.97 ± 0.1 1.94 ± 0.1 1.92 ± 0.2 1.91 ± 0.2 2.01bc 12 °C = 1.98b
12 °C 2.30 ± 0.1 2.01 ± 0.1 1.99 ± 0.1 1.96 ± 0.1 1.94 ± 0.1 2.04ab
Means (interval) 2.06a 2.02b 1.97c 1.93d 1.88e
LSD (P ≤ 0.05) H = 0.02, T = 0.03, I = 0.03, H×T =0.05 , H ×I = 0.05, T×I = NS, H×T×I = NS.

Table 3c.  Effect of harvest stage and storage temperature on the SSC:TA ratio of the fruit of aonla cv. Neelum. H: Harvest stage; I: Interval of storage; NS: Not significant; RT: Room
temperature (see Figure 2); T: Temperature of storage.
Harvest stages Storage intervals (days) Means Means Means

November-December 2019
Storage temperatures 0 3 6 9 12 (H×T) (harvest) (temperature)
Harvest I RT 3.98 ± 0.1 4.13 ± 0.1 4.48 ± 0.1 4.47 ± 0.1 5.08 ± 0.1 4.89f
6 °C 3.98 ± 0.1 4.59 ± 0.2 4.86 ± 0.2 5.11 ± 0.2 5.37 ± 0.2 4.78abc RT = 4.56c
4.66a
Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

9 °C 3.98 ± 0.1 4.44 ± 0.2 4.83 ± 0.2 5.07 ± 0.2 5.20 ± 0.2 4.71bcd
12 °C 3.98 ± 0.1 4.42 ± 0.1 4.85 ± 0.2 4.92 ± 0.2 5.15 ± 0.1 4.66cde
Harvest II RT 3.57 ± 0.3 4.41 ± 0.3 4.64 ± 0.3 4.88 ± 0.3 5.05 ± 0.3 4.51ef 6 °C = 4.77a
6 °C 3.57 ± 0.3 4.88 ± 0.1 5.07 ± 0.1 5.28 ± 0.1 5.51 ± 0.1 4.87a
4.70a
9 °C 3.40 ± 0.3 4.89 ± 0.2 5.09 ± 0.2 5.32 ± 0.2 5.64 ± 0.2 4.87a
12 °C 3.40 ± 0.3 4.55 ± 0.2 4.77 ± 0.2 4.98 ± 0.2 5.17 ± 0.2 4.58def 9 °C = 4.80a
Harvest III RT 3.58 ± 0.1 4.73 ± 0.1 4.91 ± 0.0 5.03 ± 0.0 5.16 ± 0.1 4.68bcd
6 °C 3.58 ± 0.1 4.72 ± 0.1 4.79 ± 0.2 5.03 ± 0.2 5.20 ± 0.2 4.67cde
4.72a
9 °C 3.58 ± 0.1 4.89 ± 0.1 5.04 ± 0.2 5.22 ± 0.2 5.37 ± 0.2 4.82ab 12 °C = 4.65b
12 °C 3.58 ± 0.1 4.80 ± 0.2 4.92 ± 0.2 5.06 ± 0.1 5.24 ± 0.2 4.72abcd
Means (interval) 3.68e 4.62d 4.86c 5.06b 5.26a
LSD (P ≤ 0.05) H = 0.08, T = 0.09, I = 0.10, H×T = 0.15, H×I = 0.17, T×I = NS, H×T×I = NS.

267
 Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit

Table 4.  Effect of harvest stage and storage temperature on total sugars (in %) of the fruit juice of aonla cv. Neelum. H: Harvest stage; I: Interval of storage; NS: Not significant; RT: Room storage. In the absence of CI at 12 °C and room temperature
(RT), the observed fruit spoilage was solely due to fruit

9 °C = 3.85ab
(temperature)

6 °C = 3.83b

12 °C = 3.88a
decay. A low average spoilage at RT (14.77%) may be due to

RT = 3.78c
Means the low RH during storage (Figure 2). The minimum CI and
decay (Figure 5a) resulted in the lowest average spoilage
(9.93%) at 9 °C over the 12 DOS.
The chilling injury appeared as brown discolouration
on the skin which later developed into water soaked lesions
and turns brown (Figure 3). Chilling injury also results in
poor fruit colour and susceptibility of the fruit to decay.
(harvest)
Means

4.00a

3.87b
3.63c

The susceptibility of tropical and subtropical fruits to

chilling injury often results in their short storage life as low
temperature storage cannot be applied to delay fruit quality
deterioration and pathogen growth. Optimum storage
temperatures of 12 °C (Pareek and Kitinoja, 2011) and
15 °C (Sidhu, 2011) have already been reported for Indian
Means
(H×T)
3.60a
3.61a
3.66a
3.65a
3.90a
4.00a
4.03a
4.05a
3.85a
3.87a
3.85a
3.93a
gooseberry, with slightly different pre-harvest climatic
conditions, however (hot arid and humid tropical climatic
zones, respectively). However, Indian gooseberry fruit
express very high spoilage during storage, most probably
due to high fruit firmness (Figure 3a) and rather thin outer
scale, making it sensitive to CI on one hand, and to fungal
3.70 ± 0.1
3.68 ± 0.1
3.74 ± 0.1
3.73 ± 0.1
4.31 ± 0.1
4.37 ± 0.1
4.17 ± 0.3
4.60 ± 0.2
4.12 ± 0.1
4.14 ± 0.1
3.91 ± 0.3
4.29 ± 0.2
4.06a

spoilage by Penicillium and Aspergillus (Sidhu, 2011) on the

12

other hand.
In respect to its relatively small fruit size (34 g), low
economic value and low use for processing, packaging Indian
gooseberry in reusable plastic crates is the most viable option
for postharvest handling and storage. The spoilage could be
decreased by another 4% by using Corrugated Fibre Board
3.58 ± 0.1
3.63 ± 0.1
3.69 ± 0.1
3.68 ± 0.1
4.20 ± 0.1
4.26 ± 0.1
4.36 ± 0.2
4.33 ± 0.2
4.03 ± 0.1
4.08 ± 0.1
4.10 ± 0.1
4.10 ± 0.1
4.00b

(CFB) boxes (Thakur et al., 2017), however, it will eventually

9

increase the expenses for little additional advantage for the

growers.

Ascorbic acid
Storage intervals (days)

Irrespective of the harvest stage and storage temperature,

a significant decrease of the ascorbic acid content (Vit. C)
H = 0.04, T = 0.04, I = 0.05, H×T = NS, H×I = 0.08, T×I = 0.10, H×T×I = NS.
3.54 ± 0.1
3.56 ± 0.1
3.64 ± 0.1
3.62 ± 0.1
4.00 ± 0.0
4.18 ± 0.1
4.29 ± 0.1
4.24 ± 0.1
4.00 ± 0.1
4.05 ± 0.1
4.10 ± 0.1
4.10 ± 0.1
3.94c

of aonla fruit was recorded along the 12 DOS (Figure 5b).

6

Temperatures of 9 or 12 °C resulted in slightly higher fruit

Vit. C over the storage period. The fruit Vit. C increased
from the first (430.3 mg 100 g-1 FW) to the second harvest
(470.1 mg 100 g-1 FW), and decreased thereafter for the third
harvest (451.8 mg 100 g-1 FW) (Table 5b). The strongest
decrease (> 23%) of fruit Vit. C over the 12 DOS was observed
3.52 ± 0.1
3.51 ± 0.1
3.58 ± 0.1
3.56 ± 0.1
3.93 ± 0.0
4.15 ± 0.1
4.26 ± 0.1
4.06 ± 0.1
3.97 ± 0.1
3.99 ± 0.2
4.06 ± 0.1
4.06 ± 0.2

at ambient temperature, but only 13% reduction on fruits

3.89d
3

from the second and third harvests. The fruit Vit. C has
been reported to decrease with increased storage periods
temperature (see Figure 2); T: Temperature of storage.

(Hayat et al., 2003). Higher fruit Vit. C at the second harvest

may be due to adequate supply of carbohydrates through
photosynthesis, whereas lower Vit. C afterwards may result
from enzymatic oxidation processes (Thakur et al., 2002).
3.66 ± 0.1
3.66 ± 0.1
3.66 ± 0.1
3.66 ± 0.1
3.06 ± 0.1
3.06 ± 0.1
3.06 ± 0.1
3.06 ± 0.1
3.10 ± 0.0
3.10 ± 0.0
3.10 ± 0.0
3.10 ± 0.0

Higher fruit dry matter (> 30%) may also be responsible for
3.28e
0

higher Vit. C in the fruit after 12 DOS from second harvest over
the first harvest. Despite the Vit. C decrease over the storage
period, the initial contents at harvest were determining.
Storage temperatures

Phenolics
The highest content of phenolics in the aonla fruit over
6 °C
9 °C

6 °C
9 °C
12 °C

6 °C
9 °C
12 °C
12 °C
RT

RT

RT

the 12 DOS was recorded for the second harvest (2.40 mg

100 g-1 FW), and lowest (2.05 mg 100 g-1 FW) for the first
harvest (Figure 5c). The total phenolic content in fruit is
Means (interval)
Harvest stages

LSD (P ≤ 0.05)

known to be influenced by factors like genotype, maturity

stage, growing location and method of extraction (Madi-
Harvest III
Harvest II
Harvest I

wale et al., 2011). The observed increase of phenolics with

the stage of harvest should be due to higher biosynthesis of
these compounds with maturity advancement. Goncalves

268 International Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture

Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit
et al. (2004) have reported an increase of phenolic content
with the ripeness stage of cherries of four cultivars. The ini-
tial decrease of phenolic content (up to 3 DOS) may be due to
high polyphenol oxidase (PPO) activity that oxidizes pheno-
lic substrates to quinones. Within the cherry cultivars under
study, Goncalves et al. (2004) recorded an initial decrease of
phenolic content at room temperature (15 ± 5 °C) in the cv.
Saco only, and in cvs. Saco and Burlat at cold storage (1–2 °C).
Phenolic compounds are generally synthesized through the
shikimate pathway in which phenylalanine ammonia lyase
(PAL) is the key enzyme. The increasing phenolic content
after 3 DOS might be due to an increase of PAL activity or
a reduction of PPO activity (Lattanzio et al., 2009). Besides,
the increase of phenolic content may also result from the
concentration of phenolics due to water/weight loss (Figure
4b). Phenolics and ascorbic acid are among the vital quality
attributes of Indian gooseberry due to its use for therapeutic
purposes. Phenolic compounds influence flavour, colour, an-
tioxidant potential and health beneficial properties of fruit.
The phenolics can either increase or decrease in fruit and
vegetables depending on the storage condition (Kalt, 2005).
a
a
b
b
Figure 6. Principle component analysis for fruit quality traits in Indian gooseberry. The symbol • = Harvest I, Δ = Harvest II
and + = Harvest III.
FIGURE 6. Principle component analysis for fruit quality traits in Indian gooseberry. The symbol  = Harvest I,  =
Volume 74 | Issue 6 | November-December 2019
Harvest II and  = Harvest III.
Juice pH
The juice of Indian gooseberry fruit was highly acidic
(pH < 3.7) (Table 2). Irrespective of the harvest stage, the pH
of aonla fruit juice increased over the 12 DOS. There was no
significant effect of the harvest stage or of the storage tem-
perature on the pH.
The pH of fruit juice is associated with the safety of fruit
juice during its storage. A pH range between 2.5 to 5.5 in-
hibits the growth of certain microorganisms and prolongs
the shelf life of fresh fruit and juice. The changes in pH may
be due to the breakdown of pectin into pectenic acid and/or
fermentation of sugars (Muhammad et al., 2011). The pH of
the fruit is also affected by the content of organic acids in the
fruit which are consumed in respiration resulting in lower
acidity (Table 3b) and higher pH.
SSC, acidity, SSC:TA and sugars in fruit juice
Soluble solid content (SSC) is an important fruit quality
parameter which was correlated with the texture and com-
position of fruit (Kamiloglu, 2011). A steady increase of the
SSC was recorded along the harvesting dates (Table 3a), as
269
 Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit
well as for juice acidity (Table 3b). Irrespective of the other
factors, SSC and SSC:TA increased significantly with storage
intervals, whereas titratable acidity decreased (Tables 3a–c).
The highest SSC:TA ratio was recorded for a storage tempera-
ture of 6 or 9 °C. The increase of SSC:TA during storage was
due to both an increase of the SSC and a decrease of acidity
over storage time. The SCC:TA ratio was positively correlated
with SSC (0.587) and sugars (0.563), and negatively correlat-
ed with TA (-0.387) (Table 5). The increase in SSC over the
storage period may result from metabolic transformations in
soluble compounds, mainly sugars (Singh et al., 2006), and
a concentration effect due to water/weight loss (Figure 4b).
The average total sugar content of aonla fruit juice did
not follow exactly the same pattern as SSC, although strong-
ly positively correlated (Table 5): it increased with storage
time, mainly due to water loss, and it increased from first
harvest (3.63%) to second harvest (4.00%), as for SSC, but
it decreased (3.87%) at the third harvest (Table 4). After
12 DOS the highest total sugar content (3.88%) was record-
ed for a storage temperature of 9 or 12 °C. At all cool storage
conditions (6, 9 and 12 °C) the highest sugar contents (> 4%)
were recorded in the fruit juice from the second harvest. In
non-climacteric fruit like Indian gooseberry, accumulation
of sugars in the fruit is due to translocation of photo-assim-
ilates from leaves to fruit during the fruit development. The
increase of sugar content over the 12 DOS may be due to a
conversion of organic acids to sugars and a concentration of
sugars due to weight loss (Figure 4b). Besides, lower respira-
tion rates at cool temperature than at RT may have contrib-
uted to retain higher sugar levels.
Principal component analysis
The main part of the variability (98.05%) of the fruit
quality characters of aonla fruit harvested at the three dif-
ferent stages and stored at four storage conditions for 12
days was explained by three components accounting for
92.53%, 3.61% and 1.91% of the total variability (Figure 6).
The first two principal components, contributing 96.14% of
the total variability were plotted to categorize the variables
and to observe the relationship between clusters. Spoilage
was positively correlated to lightness L* and weight loss,
and negatively correlated to hue angle h° and firmness. The
fruit quality traits over 12 DOS could distinguish the fruits
from the first harvest with those from the second and third
harvest. The fruit stored at 6 °C had higher spoilage, L* and
lower weight loss, h° and firmness. Besides, the fruit stored
at 9 °C had lower spoilage, L*, h° and firmness (Figure 6a).
The fruit from the first harvest had lower ascorbic acid con-
tent, firmness and L*. The fruit from the second harvest had
higher ascorbic acid content at the time of harvest and sub-
sequently during the storage; in addition, they had higher L*,
firmness and lower spoilage and h° (Figure 6b).
Conclusion
Fruits of Indian gooseberry cv. Neelum had a short stor-
age life due to chilling injury (CI) at 6 and 9 °C and higher
weight loss and spoilage at 12 °C and RT. The fruit from sec-
ond harvest stored at 9 °C showed minimum spoilage, weight
loss and CI; their biochemical quality traits over 12 DOS were
better than those of first or third harvest. The following rec-
ommendations for the industry in subtropical regions are:
aonla fruit can be harvested after 207–209 days after full
bloom for a fortnight or until the daily mean temperatures
remain > 18 °C. Fruit can be harvested as soon as fruit reach-
270 International Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture
es 30% DM, light green colour (L* = 50 and ho = 106), the
juice reaches 7.4 °Brix and a ratio SSC:TA = 4.7. Best storage
conditions are at 9 °C for 9 days until processing.
Acknowledgments
The authors duly acknowledge the assistance provided
by the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India for
conducting the studies.
References
Adsare, S.R., Bellary, A.N., Sowbhagya, H.B., Baskaran, R., Prakash, M.,
and Rastogi, N.K. (2016). Osmotic treatment for the impregnation
of anthocyanin in candies from Indian gooseberry (Emblica
officinalis). J. Food Eng. 175, 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jfoodeng.2015.11.023.
Ali, L. (2012). Pre-harvest factors affecting quality and shelf life in
raspberries and blackberries (Rubus spp. L.). Doctoral thesis (Alnarp,
Sweden: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences).
Ali, Z.M., Chin, L.H., Marimuthu, M., and Lazan, H. (2004). Low
temperature storage and modified atmosphere packaging of
carambola fruit and their effects on ripening related texture
changes, wall modification and chilling injury symptoms.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 33, 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
postharvbio.2004.02.007.
Alquezar, B., Mesejo, C., Alferez, F., Agusti, M., and Zacarias, L.
(2010). Morphological and ultrastructural changes in peel of
‘Navelate’ oranges in relation to variations in relative humidity
during postharvest storage and development of peel pitting.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 56, 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
postharvbio.2009.12.005.
Anonymous (2019). Area and Production of Horticulture Crops
(New Delhi: National Horticulture Board, Government of India),
www.nhb.gov.in.
AOAC (2000). Official Methods of Analysis, 17th edn. (Guthersburg,
Maryland, USA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists).
Baliga, M.S., and Dsouza, J.J. (2011). Amla (Emblica officinalis
Gaertn.), a wonder berry in the treatment and prevention of
cancer. Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 20, 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1097/
CEJ.0b013e32834473f4.
Benkeblia, N., Tennant, D.P.F., Jawandha, S.K., and Gill, P.S. (2011).
Preharvest and harvest factors influencing the postharvest
quality of tropical and subtropical fruits. In Postharvest
Biology and Technology of Tropical and Subtropical Fruits, E.M.
Yahia, ed. (Woodhead Publishing), p. 112–141. https://doi.
org/10.1533/9780857093622.112.
Bhattacherjee, A.K., Dikshit, A., Kumar, S., and Tandon, D.K. (2013).
Quality evaluation in storage of aonla (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.)
juice extracted from fruits preserved by steeping in water. Food Res.
Inter. J. 20, 1861–1865.
Chaphalkar, R., Apte, K.G., Talekar, Y., Ojha, S.K., and Nandave, M.
(2017). Antioxidants of Phyllanthus emblica L. bark extract provide
hepatoprotection against ethanol-induced hepatic damage: a
comparison with silymarin. Oxidative Med. and Cellular Longevity
10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3876040.
Cheng, G., Duan, X., Jiang, Y., Sun, J., Yang, S., and Yang, B. (2009).
Modification of hemicellulose polysaccharides during ripening
of postharvest banana fruit. Food Chem. 115, 43–47. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.11.065.
Doreyappa Gowda, I.N., Sudhakar Rao, D.V., Tiwari, R.B., Bhuvaneswari,
S., and Narayana, C.K. (2011). Postharvest management and value
addition in aonla. IIHR, Technical Bulletin No. 39 (Bangalore, India),
15 pp.
Veerpartap Singh et al. | Harvest maturity and storage temperature affect Indian gooseberry fruit
Goncalves, B., Landbo, A., Knudsen, D., Silva, A.P., Moutinho-Pereira,
J.A., Rosa, E., and Meyer, A.S. (2004). Effect of ripeness and postharvest
storage on the phenolic profiles of cherries (Prunus avium L.). J. Agril.
Food Chem. 52, 523–530. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf030595s.
Goyal, R.K., Patil, R.T., Kingsly, A.R.P., Himanshu, W., and Pradeep,
K. (2008). Status of post-harvest technology of aonla in India.
A review. Am. J. Food. Technol. 3, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.3923/
ajft.2008.13.23.
Hammer, O., Harper, A.T., and Rayn, P.D. (2001). PAST: paleontological
statistics software package for education and data analysis.
Palaeontologia Electronica 4, 1–9.
Hayat, I., Masud, T., and Rathore, H.A. (2003). Effect of coating and
wrapping materials on the shelf life of apple (Malus domestica cv.
Borkh.). Int. J. Food Safety 5, 24–34.
Joubert, J. (2016). Influence of rind water content on mandarin citrus
fruit quality. Master thesis in Agriculture (Horticultural Science)
(Stellenbosch University: Faculty of Agri Sciences).
Kablan, T., Koffi, N.R., Marina, K., and Oule, M.K. (2008). The effects
of different storage temperatures on the quality of bell pepper
(Capsicum annuum L.) Agric. J. 3, 157–162.
Kader, A.A., and Rolle, R.S. (2004). The role of post-harvest
management in assuring the quality and safety of horticultural
produce. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin 152 (Rome, Italy: Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 51 pp.
Kalt, W. (2005). Effects of production and processing factors on major
fruit and vegetable antioxidants. J. Food Sci. 70, 11–19. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2005.tb09053.x.
Kamiloglu, O. (2011). Influence of some cultural practices on yield,
fruit quality and individual anthocyanins of table grape cv. Horoz
Karasi. J. Anim. Plant Sci. 21, 240–245.
Khairi, A.N., Falah, M.A.F., Suyantohadi, A., Takahashi, N., and Nishina,
H. (2015). Effect of storage temperatures on color of tomato fruit
(Solanum lycopersicum Mill.) cultivated under moderate water
stress treatment. Agric. Agric. Sci. Proc. 3, 178–183. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2015.01.035.
Kore, V.T., Devi, H.L., and Kabir, J. (2013). Packaging, storage and
value addition of aonla, an underutilized fruit, in India. Fruits 68,
255–266. https://doi.org/10.1051/fruits/2013064.
Lattanzio, V., Kroon, P.A., Quideau, S., and Treutter, D. (2009). Plant
phenolics: secondary metabolites with diverse functions. In Recent
Advances in Polyphenol Research, Vol. 1, H. Halbwirth, K. Stich,
V. Cheynier, and S. Quideau, eds. (Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley &
Sons), p. 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444302400.ch1.
Li, Y., Sun, H.Y., Yu, X.Y., Liu, D., and Wan, H.X. (2015). Evaluation
of cellular antioxidant and antiproliferative activities of five main
Phyllanthus emblica L. cultivars in China. Indian J. Pharm. Sci. 77,
274–282. https://doi.org/10.4103/0250-474X.159608.
Madiwale, G.P., Reddivari, L., Holm, D.G., and Vanamala, J. (2011).
Storage elevates phenolic content and antioxidant activity but
suppresses antiproliferative and pro-apoptotic properties of
colored-flesh potatoes against human colon cancer cell lines. J. Agric.
Food Chem. 59, 8155–8166. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf201073g.
Magwaza, L.S., Mditshwa, A., Tesfay, S.Z., and Opara, U.L. (2017).
An overview of preharvest factors affecting vitamin C content of
citrus fruit. Sci. Hortic. 216, 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scienta.2016.12.021.
Muhammad, A., Ayub Muhammad, Z.A., Durrani, Y., Ullah, J., and
Afridi, S. (2011). Physico-chemical analysis of apple pulp from
Mashaday variety during storage. Agric. Biol. J. North Amer. 2, 192–
196. https://doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2011.2.2.192.196.
Volume 74 | Issue 6 | November-December 2019
Musacchi, S., and Serra, S. (2018). Apple fruit quality: Overview
on preharvest factors. Sci. Hortic. 234, 409–430. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scienta.2017.12.057.
Pareek, S., and Kitinoja, L. (2011). Aonla (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.).
In Postharvest Biology and Technology of Tropical and Subtropical
Fruits, E.M Yahia, ed. (Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing), p. 65–97.
https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857092762.65.
Pathak, P.K., Preeti, D., and Kumar, S. (2009). Effect of post-harvest
treatments on shelf-life of aonla (Emblica officinalis) fruits damaged
during harvesting. J. Food Sci. Technol. 46, 283–285.
Pathak, R.K., Pandey, D., Misra, A.K., Haseeb, M., and Tandon, D.K.
(2003). The aonla (Lucknow, India: Central Institute of Subtropical
Horticulture), 32 pp.
Peel, M.C., Finlayson, B.L., and McMahon, T.A. (2007). Updated world
map of the Koppen-Geiger climate classification. Hydrol. Earth Syst.
Sci. 4, 439–473. https://doi.org/10.5194/hessd-4-439-2007.
Ranganna, S. (2007). Handbook of Analysis and Quality Control
of Fruit and Vegetable Products (New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill
Publishing Co Ltd.), p. 13.
Rivera, S.A., Ferreyra, R., Robledo, P., Selles, G., Arpaia, M.L., Saavedra,
J., and Defilippi, B.G. (2017). Identification of preharvest factors
determining postharvest ripening behaviors in ‘Hass’ avocado under
long term storage. Sci. Hortic. 216, 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scienta.2016.12.024.
Sidhu, A.S. (2011). Postharvest management and value addition of
aonla. IIHR Technical Bulletin No. 39 (Bangalore: IIHR), 15 pp.
Singh, A., Patel, R.K., Babu, K.D., and Bhuyan, M. (2006). Flowering,
fruiting and ripening physiology of passion fruit. Env. Ecol. 245,
693–697.
Singh, V., Thakur, A., and Jawandha, S.K. (2015). Changes in physical
and bio-chemical attributes of fruit during fruit growth, development
and maturation of aonla. HortFlora Res. Spectrum 4, 308–312.
Singleton, V.L., Orthofer, R., and Lamuela-Raventós, R.M. (1999).
Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and
antioxidants by means of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. Meth. in Enzymol.
299, 152–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(99)99017-1.
Thakur, A, Dhaliwal, H.S., and Singh, V. (2017). Aonla (Emblica
officinalis Gaertn.) In Utilization Fruit Crops: Importance and
Cultivation, S.N. Ghosh, A. Singh, and A. Thakur, eds. (New Delhi: Jaya
Publishing House), p. 1–44.
Thakur, K.S., Lal, B.B., and Sharma, R.M. (2002). Effect of different
post harvest treatments and storage conditions on the fruit quality
of Kinnow. J. Food Sci. Technol. 39, 609–618.
Toivonen, P.M., and Brummell, D.A. (2008). Biochemical bases of
appearance and texture changes in fresh-cut fruit and vegetables.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 48, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
postharvbio.2007.09.004.
Wang, S.Y., and Zheng, W. (2001). Effect of plant growth temperature
on antioxidant capacity in strawberry. J. Agric. Good Chem. 49, 4977–
4982. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf010624.4.
Wang, S.Y., Chen, C.T., Wang, C.Y., and Chen, P. (2007). Resveratrol
content in strawberry fruit is affected by preharvest conditions.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 8269–8274. https://doi.org/10.1021/
jf071749x.
Woolf, A.B., and Ferguson, I.B. (2000). Postharvest responses to high
fruit temperatures in the field. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 21, 7–20.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5214(00)00161-7.
Received: Jul. 22, 2018
Accepted: Sep. 30, 2019
271