NEW TECHNIQUES OF POST HARVEST APPLICATION OF SO2 ON TABLE GRAPES

1
Eduardo Maldonado Araneda , *
1
Katerina Maldonado Cortes ,
2
Christopher Dixon

Author Affiliations
1
Insumos Frutìcolas INFRUTA SA, Juan de la Fuente 534, Lampa, Santiago, Chile
2
Rìo Blanco Limitada,

Corresponding author (emaldonado@infruta.cl ; tel 569 8233 5048)

Background and Aims

Control of Botrytis cinérea Pers and other post-harvest illnesses of table grapes is seldom a trivial
issue for most growers and exporters. The use of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in the form of fumigation in
chambers or SO2 generating pads have been a standard practices for many years.

Since the invention of the SO2 pads by Dr. Nelson in the late 60's mostly incremental changes have
been made in the design and usage of these devices. The grape industry has seen innovations in
terms of materials and manufacturing techniques but very few other alternatives have been explored.
SO2 pads have evolved from the very traditional “paper pad” to more sophisticated pads built with
different materials and dosages of active ingredient with longer and more stable emissions.

The increase of Botrytis, on the other hand, is a recognized phenomenon in some countries. In Chile
for example, the increase of Botrytis has forced growers and exporters to expand and diversified
phytosanitary measures both pre and post-harvest.

Four years ago we heard from Don Luvisi at the Symposium in Davis, California referring to the post-
harvest treatment of table grapes for long storage/transit: “We don’t see alternatives to SO2 in the
foreseeable future”. We took note of that and got to work looking for better and more effective ways to
deliver SO2 and control Botrytis in table grapes. As we looked into incremental improvements we go
back and again to Dr. Nelson teachings. In one of his best works “The Grape” he describes the use of
dual release pads and explains that the two stages of the theses type of pads can be used “one
above and one underneath the fruit”. The first part of the pad is what we call a “TOP” pad, and the
second part is what we call a “BOTTOM” pad.

We then set out to evaluate performance and efficacy of different sizes and types of SO2 pads (cell
versus laminated) in top position combined with different sizes and types of pads in bottom position,
including laminated single release in different sizes and dual release pads with the fast release
impregnated. The main hypothesis to be tested in the study is that in order to improve efficacy, SO2
inside the box must be better distributed in order to control Botrytis while at the same time avoiding
bleaching damage and limiting sulfites residues. The specific aim of this study was to determine which
combinations of Top/Bottom SO2 pads could deliver better results.

Experimental Procedure and Results

Given two of the characteristics of the SO2 gas (heavier than air and hydrophilic) it is quite clear that
the greater distance between the SO2 pad and the fruit, less SO2 and more decay (gray mold) will
tend to develop. We measured the effect of distance in terms of SO2 using only TOP SO2 pads and
with both TOP and BOTTOM pads and this is what we found:
The results are absolutely clear, the combination of TOP and BOTTOM pads brings much better
distribution of SO2 across the box.

Extrapolating the results of TOP/BOTTOM pads, we also have found that SO2 pads of larger size that
provide better coverage (percentage of the top or bottom surface) also help to improve the SO2
distribution inside the box, particularly by reaching the corners.

Clearly, the ideal distribution is exactly the same amount of SO2 in every location inside the box. With
this idea in mind, we have worked in the last few years in designing and testing new TOP/BOTTOM
and pad size combinations of pads that should provide more effective distribution of SO2 across the
box and as a result better control of Botrytis while at the same time limiting the possibilities of
bleaching.

This study includes Unidirectional Cell and Laminated pads. Cell based SO2 pads are made of
sodium metabisulfite “sandwiched” in the middle of two or three sheets of paper or plastic using heat
sealing to create little cells (or sachets). Laminated pads are made by laminating (enclosing or sealing
together) two or three sheets of paper and plastic using adhesive and then sprinkling sodium
metabisulfite uniformly between the layers. In this study we also use “impregnation” as an alternative
to adhere the active ingredient to one of the sheets.

The following experiment consists of comparing efficacy and performance with the following
combinations of SO2 pads in boxes of red globe table grapes:

On TOP of Grapes At the BOTTOM of the Box

T0 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 26x46 NONE
T1 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 26x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 26x46 cm
T2 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 26x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 33x46 cm
T3 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 26x46 Impregnated Pad Dual Release 26x46 cm
T4 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 33x46 NONE
T5 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 33x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 26x46 cm
T6 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 33x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 33x46 cm
T7 PP Cell Pad Dual Release 33x46 Impregnated Pad Dual Release 26x46 cm
T8 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 26x46 NONE
T9 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 26x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 26x46 cm
T10 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 26x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 33x46 cm
T11 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 26x46 Impregnated Pad Dual Release 26x46 cm
T12 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 33x46 NONE
T13 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 33x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 26x46 cm
T14 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 33x46 Laminated Pad Single Release 33x46 cm
T15 PP UK Laminated Pad Dual Release 33x46 Impregnated Pad Single Release 26x46 cm

The size of the box is 50x40x12 cm is made of wood and contains 8.2 kilograms of Red Globe table
grapes. All treatments use 1% ventilation liner. Three boxes per case were prepared and tested.

Treatments T0, T4, T8 and T12 correspond to boxes using only Top SO2 pads for Cell and Laminated
pads in different sizes (26x46 versus 33x46).

Treatments T1, T2, T5, T6, T9, T10, T13 and T14 correspond to boxes using different combinations of
Top and Bottom pads for Cell and Laminated pads with different sizes (26x46 versus 33x46).

Treatments T3, T7, T11 and T15 correspond to boxes using on Top Cell and Laminated pads in
different sizes and Bottom pad that is impregnated.
Concentration of SO2 in the Box

In terms of SO2 concentration, the results shown on this graphic form indicate that the absence of
bottom pad is very detrimental to the amount of SO2 that reaches the lower part of the box: almost no
SO2 is found at the lower side of the box when no bottom pad is available. The situation is even
worse when using laminated pads, since this type of pads tend to generate less SO2 than cell pads.
Another clear observation is that cell pads generate substantially more SO2 than laminated pads.

Although with some variations, the main conclusion is that the amount of SO2 in the upper and lower
and is much closer than with the absence of bottom pads. In other words, the combination of top and
bottom pads improves distribution of SO2 along the entire box.

Concentration of SO2 was measured after 100 days of packing. SO2 concentration are shown in
yellow for the upper side of the box and green for the lower side in parts per million (ppm)

10
Without bottom pad there is Concentration of SO2 SO2 Upper Side
almost no SO2 in the lower part 8
SO2 Lower Side
of the box.
Combination of top and bottom 6
pad show better distribution of
4
SO2 between the upper and
lower side of the box. 2
Concentration of SO2 is clearly
higher with cell pads than 0
laminated pads. T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10T11 T12T13T14T15

Control of Botrytis cinerea

In terms of controlling Botrytis the results indicate clearly that bottom pads help. Boxes without bottom
pads show always de worst results in terms of Botrytis. Cell and laminated show similar results in
controlling Botrytis but a larger size of the pad improves the performance. Larger pads with better
coverage of the box, top and bottom, provide better results in terms of controlling Botrytis. We also
see performance improvement when using the impregnation of bottom pads. Three of the four
treatments of the series show better results with impregnated bottom pads.

Botrytis (red) is measured in terms of number of berries in the box after 100 days.

The absence of bottom pad Botrytis

results always in more Botrytis.
In other words, levels of Botrytis
are lower in all treatments that 2
include a bottom pad.
Larger bottom pads with more 1
surface coverage show better
efficacy in controlling Botrytis 0
Impregnated pads show good T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15
results in controlling Botrytis.

Bleaching

The results also indicate clearly that bottom pads do not have incidence in bleaching. Directly related
with the results of SO2 concentration, Laminated pads produce less bleaching than Cell pads in all
categories.
Bleaching (blue) is measured in terms of number of berries in the box after 100 days.

Bleaching is low in all Bleaching

treatments. 2.5

Laminated pads have clearly 2

better performance than cell
1.5
pads as far as bleaching.
1

0.5

0
T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10T11 T12T13T14T15

Discussion and Significance of the Study

th
All the pad treatments in the study were still releasing SO2 on day 100 . The implication is that these
combinations of top and bottom pads can be used for long term storage, with no fruit damage and
effective control of Botrytis. The best combination of top/bottom pads to control Botrytis without
bleaching is a larger pad (at least 80% surface coverage) on the internal surface (top or bottom of the
box) using a liner with 1% ventilation. The use of bottom pads is highly effective in combination with
top pads and do not have major impact on bleaching, which make them attractive for long term
storage, particularly in those regions with high occurrence of Botrytis cinerea.

We hope that this study and its results will help the table grape industry to improve control of Botrytis
and deliver better fruit.

Acknowledgements

This study was fully supported and financed by INFRUTA S.A., a manufacturer of SO2 pads, and Río
Blanco Ltda. the largest exporter of table grapes from Chile. We would like to acknowledge specially
the contributions from Mr. Christopher Dixon, Quality Control Manager from Río Blanco Ltda.

References

Nelson, Klayton E.. Extracts from The Grape, No date availble.

Luvisi, Donald A.. California’s Table Grape Industry: A Historical Perspective, Oral presentation at the
th
6 International Table Grape Symposium, University of California, UC Davis, California 2010.