Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Postharvest Biology and Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/postharvbio

Correlations between subjective quality and physicochemical

attributes of fresh fruits and vegetables
M. Cecilia do Nascimento Nunes *
University of South Florida, Department of Cell Biology, Microbiology and Molecular Biology, Tampa, FL 33602, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history:
Received 9 November 2014
Received in revised form 30 April 2015
Accepted 3 May 2015
Available online 19 May 2015

Color charts and rating scales have been developed for several fresh fruits and vegetables (FFVs) but
limited information is available regarding the correlation between subjective evaluations and
physicochemical attributes. The objective of this work was to correlate subjective quality data with
quantitative analytical data collected for several fruits exposed to different environmental conditions.
Avocados, blueberries, peppers, strawberries and tomatoes were exposed to a range of different
temperatures and humidity conditions for varied periods of time, and quality evaluated using both rating
scales and physicochemical analysis. The strength of the relationship between variables was measured
using the Pearson correlation coefcient (r) and the coefcient of determination (r2) and, the signicance
of the relationship was expressed by probability levels (p = 0.05). Overall, there was a signicant
correlation between most of the subjective quality attributes evaluated and the physicochemical analysis
performed. Subjective color was signicantly correlated with hue angle for all fruits evaluated except for
blueberries for which subjective color had a stronger correlation with L* values. Correlations between
subjective color and anthocyanins, ascorbic acid or chlorophyll contents were also signicant. Shriveling
or stem freshness was strongly correlated with weight loss whereas subjective rmness was signicantly
correlated with instrumental texture. Results from this work showed that subjective quality evaluations
using rating scales can be a reliable and simple method to estimate changes in color, softening, water loss,
and ultimately changes in specic chemical components when FFVs are exposed to different
environmental conditions. A color chart is proposed for the visual evaluation of strawberry quality.
2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Quality rating charts
Color
Texture
Weight loss
Anthocyanins
Chlorophyll

1. Introduction
Visual appearance of fresh fruits and vegetables (FFVs) has the
greatest impact on retailers buying decisions and on consumer
choices and purchases. Attributes such as appearance, freshness
and color are considered the foremost criteria used to evaluate the
immediate quality of FFVs (Clydesdale, 1991; Mitcham et al., 1996;
Barrett et al., 2010). As a result, they are used as quality indicators
throughout the supply chain, from the farm to the consumer, and
ultimately determine product acceptance or rejection. Texture,
taste and aroma are also important sensory attributes but are
mostly related with subsequent purchases (Clydesdale, 1991;
Barrett et al., 2010). Nutrient content is not visible or touchable,
and therefore is often disregarded as a quality attribute when it
comes to food choices and purchase decisions. However, FFVs are
important contributors to a well-balanced diet and to human

* Tel.: +1 813 974 9307; fax: +1 813 905 9919.

E-mail address: mariacecilia@usf.edu (M. C.d.N. Nunes).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.05.001
0925-5214/ 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

wellbeing as they supply important macronutrients, such as

carbohydrates and ber, and micronutrients such as vitamins and
minerals as well as polyphenols.
Subjective quality evaluations are often used to rate the
appearance, texture and avor of FFVs and, unlike formal sensory
panels, these are usually performed by trained individuals but not
on a sensory panel setting (e.g., quality control, and to estimate
ripeness stage and maturity at harvest). Although these evaluations are criticized by some as being inexact, in the absence of
formal analytical or affective sensory panels they are valuable to
quality control, and to determine the ripeness stage or the end of
shelf life of FFVs. In addition, they are faster, easier and less
expensive than sensory panels or instrumental measurements
which may require extensive training and complex logistics, or
expensive equipment (Mitcham et al., 1996; Barrett et al., 2010).
Consequently, many researchers frequently use somewhat quantitative scoring systems either alone or combined with drawings or
photographs to evaluate the sensory quality of FFVs. For example,
Kader and Cantwell (2006) developed several color charts along
with rating scales and descriptors for physical damage of produce.

44

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

2. Material and methods

distance between the eld and the laboratory) (Tables 1 and 2). All
FFVs were harvested at the commercial maturity stage, and cluster
tomatoes were harvested from a greenhouse at the light-red stage.
Upon arrival to the laboratory, FFVs were visually selected for
uniformity of color/ripeness stage, size and freedom of defects.
Sample sizes were chosen based on the size and variability
within each commodity (i.e., the smaller the size of the fruit the
larger the number of fruits per replicates). Thus, three avocados,
three peppers, two clusters of three tomatoes each, and three
replicated samples of 15 or 20 strawberries and blueberries each,
respectively, were used for initial subjective quality evaluation, and
for instrumental color and texture analysis, and immediately
frozen to be later used for chemical compositional analysis. A total
of 20 avocados or 20 peppers (three fruit per RH), and 15 clusters of
three tomatoes each (3 clusters per RH), and a total of 15 clamshells
(3 clamshells per RH) containing 15 or 20 strawberries or
blueberries, respectively, were distributed among the ve RHcontrolled rooms and reused daily or every two days for nondestructive quality evaluations (i.e., subjective quality evaluations
and weight loss). For destructive quality evaluations (i.e., texture
analysis and chemical analysis) and for non-destructive evaluations that required manipulation of the fruit to an extent that could
cause minor bruising (i.e., instrumental color) 165 avocados or
peppers (33 fruits per RH), and 110 clusters of three tomatoes each
(22 clusters per RH), and 120 or 135 clamshells (24 clamshells per
RH; 27 clamshells per RH, respectively) containing 20 or 15 blueberries and strawberries each, respectively were distributed
among the ve RH-controlled rooms. However, every day three
clamshells of these strawberries or every two days, three of these
avocados or peppers, and two clusters or tomatoes, and three
clamshells of these blueberries were removed from their respective RH and immediately frozen, to be later used for chemical
compositional analysis. Avocados were stored for 20 d, blueberries
were stored for 16 d, and peppers and tomatoes were stored for 22
days and quality evaluated every two days. Strawberries were
stored for nine days and quality evaluated every day (Table 2). For
temperature treatments the experimental setup was similar to that
used for RH treatments except that only avocados, strawberries
and tomatoes were used in this part of the experiments (Table 1).
Since all non-destructive quality analysis (i.e., subjective quality
evaluations and weight) were assessed using always the same FFVs
samples, those were conducted within approximately 30 min after
the products were removed from storage, to minimize temperature
uctuations that could affect the quality.

2.1. Sampling

2.2. Storage conditions

Fresh fruits and vegetables were harvested twice from

commercial operations in Florida and transported to the laboratory
within minimal delay after harvest (i.e., 1 to 6 h, depending on the

Storage conditions (i.e., temperature and relative humidity

treatments) and experimental setup used in this study were
similar to those previously described in detail by Nunes et al.

White et al. (2005) developed a color chart to describe skin color

and avocado ripening. Our group also have developed a system that
uses scores and descriptors to rate individual sensory quality
attributes of various fruits and vegetables (Laurin et al., 2003;
Nunes et al., 2003a,b,c; Nunes et al., 2004, 2006, 2007, 2011, 2012,
2013; Proulx et al., 2005; Nunes and Emond, 2007; Nunes, 2008;
Proulx et al., 2010; Chilson et al., 2011). In the produce industry,
color charts are also frequently used to assess the stage of ripeness
(e.g., banana, tomato and avocado color charts) or to grade (e.g.,
size, color, and defects) or even to decide if a load of produce should
be accepted or rejected based on visual inspection.
Many color charts and rating scales have been developed for
several types of produce, and various studies have shown that
correlations exist between sensory and physical and/or chemical
attributes of FFVs (Ressureccion and Shewfelt, 1985; Maul et al.,
2000,b; Harker et al., 2002a,b; Safner et al., 2008; Gunness et al.,
2009; Pace et al., 2011; Corollaro et al., 2014). For example,
rmness and color of tomatoes were highly correlated with
sensory attributes (Ressureccion and Shewfelt, 1985) whereas
perceived sweetness or sourness was correlated with specic
volatile compounds (Maul et al., 2000). Pace et al., (2011) reported
a signicant correlation between b*, chroma, pH, titratable acidity
and appearance of fresh-cut nectarines. In apples, titratable acidity
was suggested to be a good predictor of acid taste (Harker et al.,
2002a,b) and texture analysis correlated well with sensory
perception of apple texture (Harker et al., 2002a,b; Corollaro
et al., 2014). However, these studies used consumer or trained
sensory panels and to our knowledge there is a lack of published
studies showing that subjective quality data collected by trained
individuals (not in a sensory panel setting) can also be, in the
absence of formal trained sensory panel, a reliable way the
determined changes in the overall quality of FFVs. The objectives of
this work were to: (1) correlate subjective quality data, such as
color, rmness and shriveling, with quantitative analytical data
collected for different FFVs, and to show that in the absence of a
formal sensory panel the use of color charts and rating scales can
be used by trained individuals as an accurate way of determining
changes in overall quality of FFVs; and (2) give an example of a
unique color chart designed for the evaluation of visual quality of
strawberry based on correlations between individual subjective
quality characteristics and physicochemical attributes, and that
was validated in research and commercial settings.

Table 1
Optimum storage conditions, cultivar, harvest location and date, and storage conditions during the temperature experiments.
Commodity
Avocados

Optimum temperature (
C)
512

Optimum RH (%)
8595

Strawberries

9095

Tomatoes

713d

9095d

Cultivar

Origin

Harvest date

Storage duration (d)a

Choquette
Choquette
Albion
Albion
Success
Success

Homestead, Florida
Homestead, Florida
Floral City, Florida
Floral City, Florida
Wellborn, Florida
Welborn, Florida

October 1, 2008
November 19, 2009
December 12, 2008
March 9, 2009
January 15, 2009
February 24, 2008

22
22
10
10
22
22

Storage conditions: (A) 1.8  0.8
C; (B) 5.2  0.2
C; (C) 10.6  0.6
C; (D) 15.2  0.4
C; (E) 20.2  0.2
C; 90% RH in all ve temperature-RH controlled chambers.
a
In some cases the experiments were terminated before the end of the storage period, at the time when at least one of the visual quality attributes evaluated reached the
maximum acceptable (rating of 3).
b
Woolf et al. (2014); evaluated every two days.
c
Mitcham (2014); evaluated every day.
d
Sargent and Moretti (2014); light red greenhouse-grown tomatoes; evaluated every two days.

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

45

Table 2
Optimum storage conditions, cultivar, harvest location and date, and storage conditions during the humidity (RH) experiments.
Commodity

Optimum temperature (
C)

Optimum RH (%)

Cultivar

Origin

Harvest date

Storage duration (d)a

Avocados

512b

8595b

Blueberries

0.5 to 0c

>90c

Pepper

710d

9095d

Strawberries

0e

9095e

Tomato

713f

9095f

Simmonds
Simmonds
Jubilee
Jubilee
Revolution
Revolution
Strawberry Festival
Strawberry Festival
Success
Success

Homestead, Florida
Homestead, Florida
Winter Haven, Florida
Winter Haven, Florida
Immokalee, Florida
Immokalee, Florida
Floral City, Florida
Floral City, Florida
Wellborn, Florida
Wellborn, Florida

July 17, 2008

August 2, 2008
April 5, 2012
April 26, 2012
November 24, 2009
December 1, 2009
March 5, 2012
February 21, 2013
June 11, 2009
June 27, 2009

20
20
16
16
22
22
9
9
22
22

Storage conditions: (A) 40.1%  3.2% RH; (B) 62.0%  2.0% RH; (C) 81.0%  2.1% RH; (D) 87.9%  1.9% RH; (E) 91.6  1.4% RH; temperature of the chambers was set at 15
C for
avocado, pepper and tomato and 1.5
C for blueberry and strawberry.
a
In some cases the experiments were terminated before the end of the storage period, at the time when at least one of the visual quality attributes evaluated reached the
maximum acceptable (rating of 3).
b
Woolf et al. (2014); evaluated every two days.
c
Perkins-Veazie (2014); evaluated every two days.
d
Gonzlez-Aguilar (2014); evaluated every two days.
e
Mitcham (2014); evaluated every day.
f
Sargent and Moretti (2014); evaluated every two days.

(2013). After sorting, FFVs designated for temperature experiments

(avocados, strawberries, tomatoes) were distributed into ve
temperature-humidity-controlled chambers (Forma Environmental Chambers Model 3940 Series, Thermo Electron Corporation,
OH, USA) that were set at ve different temperatures with an
relative humidity (RH) of approximately 90% (Table 1). These
temperatures were chosen because they cover a wide range of
physiological temperatures, between optimum and ambient
temperature, with an optimum RH. For the humidity experiments,
temperature of the chambers containing blueberries and strawberries was maintained as close as possible to the optimum storage
temperature (1.5
C) whereas for avocados, peppers and tomatoes,
the temperature of the chambers was maintained at 15
C in order
to reduce the risk of chilling injury (Table 2). The levels of humidity
used were chosen based on RH that may be encountered
throughout the supply chain (Nunes et al., 2009; Lai et al., 2011
;Pelletier et al., 2011).
2.3. Temperature and relative humidity monitoring
The temperature inside the temperature and RH controlled
rooms was monitored throughout the study using Stow Away1
XTI02 temperature loggers from (5
C to +37
C) (Onset Computer
Corporation, Pocasset, MA). The RH was monitored with Stow
Away1 RH loggers (10 to 95% RH) (Onset Computer Corporation,
Pocasset, MA).

2.4. Subjective quality evaluation

Subjective quality evaluation of strawberries was performed
every day during nine to 10 d, depending on the storage temperature
and RH (Tables 1 and 2). Subjective quality evaluations for avocados,
blueberries, peppers and tomatoes were performed every two days
with the length of storage depending on the commodity and storage
regime (Tables 1 and 2). A trained individual(s) conducted the
subjective quality evaluations using rating scales and descriptors
(Tables 37). Color, shriveling and stem freshness were determined
subjectively using a 1 to 5 visual rating scale and rmness was
determined based on the whole fruit resistance to slightly applied
nger pressure and recorded using a 15 tactile rating A score of
3 was considered the limit of acceptability for sale. Thus, when fruit
were visibly deteriorated or when at least one of the subjective
quality attributes had attained a rating of 3 or lower, the treatments
were terminated. Some of the visual quality scores and descriptors
used (e.g., shriveling and cluster tomato quality scores and
descriptors; Table 7) were developed by our team based on multiple
visual observations during postharvest storage of FFVs at different
temperatures (Nunes, 2008) whereas other scores were used based
on previously published works (Tables 36; see footnotes). The
individual(s) that performed the visual evaluations were trained
(using FFVs and photographs) to detect minimal changes in the
appearance and rmness of the FFVs and had extensive experience
using the rating scales.

Table 3
Visual quality scores and descriptors for avocado.
Scores and description

Colorb

3a

Very poor

Poor

Acceptable

Good

Excellent

Very dark skin with no traces of

green; fruit appears completely
brown or black

Some green on brown or Some yellow/black or brown Darker lime green and not so
Full dark lime green
black; approximately
on green; approximately
glossy; beginning of color changes; color; very glossy;
75% colored
25% colored
some yellowing
freshly harvested

Firmnessb Extremely soft on touch; easily

yields to slight hand pressure

Soft; whole fruit deforms Elastic; slightly yield to

with slight hand pressure hand pressure

Hard but less resistant to extreme Extremely hard; does

nger pressure
not yield to extreme
nger pressure

Shriveling Skin appears extremely dry

Serious shriveling

Minor signs of shriveling

a
b

Shriveling evident, but not

serious

Score of 3 was considered to be the minimum acceptable quality before avocados become unmarketable.
Modied from White et al. (2005).

Field-fresh, no signs of
shriveling

46

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

Table 4
Visual quality scores and descriptors for blueberry.
Scores and description
1
Very poor

2
Poor

3a
Acceptable

4
Good

5
Excellent

Colorb

Extremely dark;
overripe or
senescent

Very dark blue/purplish

Fully dark blue

More blue, less

bright

Bright blue color

Firmnessc

Berry rupture on
touch

Berry surface very depressed on touch Berry surface depressed on touch,

but no rupture
softer than rmer

Slight depression
on touch

Firm berry, not yielding to touch

Severe shriveling

Slight signs of
shriveling

Field-fresh, fruit appear very

fresh and turgid

Shriveling Extremely wilted

and dry
a
b
c

Shriveling evident but not serious

Score of 3 was considered to be the minimum acceptable quality before blueberries become unmarketable.
Modied from Sanford et al. (1991).
Modied from Beaudry et al. (1998).

Table 5
Visual quality scores and descriptors for pepper.
Scores and description
1
Very poor

2
Poor

3a
Acceptable

Extremely dull
green or 25%
colored

Dull green or slight coloration

Green but showing loss of glossiness Less bright dark green

Firmnessb Extremely soft on

touch

Soft on touch, yields easily to nger

pressure; not crisp; 75% of the fruit is
soft

Fruit starts to soften and yield to

nger pressure; 50% of the fruit is
soft

Firm but less resistant to nger Very rm, turgid and

pressure; 25% of the fruit is soft crisp

Shriveling Extremely
shriveled and dry

Serious shriveling

Shriveling evident, but not serious

Slight signs of shriveling

Colorb

a
b

4
Good

5
Excellent
Completely bright
dark green; very
glossy

Field-fresh, no signs
of shriveling

Score of 3 was considered to be the minimum acceptable quality before peppers become unmarketable.
Modied from Lownds et al. (1994).

Table 6
Visual quality scores and descriptors for strawberry.a
Scores and description
1
Very poor

2
Poor

3b
Acceptable

4
Good

5
Excellent

Color

Very dark purplish-red;

extremely overripe or
senescent

Overripe; very dark

red

Fully red

Fully light red

Three-quarter to fully light red

Firmness

Extremely soft and

deteriorated

Soft and leaky

Minor signs of softness

Firm but less turgid

Very rm and turgid

Shriveling Extremely wilted and dry

a
b

Severe shriveling, fruit Shriveling evident, fruit and calyx show Minor signs of shriveling,
is shriveled and
evident signs of moisture loss
calyx slightly wilted
calyx is wilted and dry

Field-fresh, fruit and calyx

appear very fresh and turgid

Nunes et al. (2003c).

Score of 3 was considered to be the minimum acceptable quality before strawberries become unmarketable.

2.5. Instrumental surface color

A total of two color measurements per FFVs were taken on
opposite sides at the equatorial region. A hand-held tristimulus
reectance colorimeter (Model CR-300, Minolta Co., Ltd., Osaka,
Japan) equipped with a glass light-protection tube (CR-A33,
Minolta Co., Ltd., Osaka, Japan) was used. Color was recorded
using the CIE-L*a*b* uniform color space (CIE-Lab), L* (lightness),
a* (redness) and b* (yellowness) values. Numerical values of a* and
b* were converted into hue angle and chroma using the Minolta

Color Management Software (19961999CyberSoft SpectraMatch/

QC software version 3.3, CyberChrome, Inc., Stone Ridge, N.Y.).
2.6. Texture analysis
Before texture was analyzed, FFVs from each treatment were
conditioned at room temperature for approximately 1 h. Thereafter, rmness of each individual FFVs was measured using a TA.XT
plus Texture Analyzer (Texture Technologies Corp., NY, USA)
equipped with a 50 kg load cell.

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

47

Table 7
Visual quality scores and descriptors for greenhouse-grown cluster tomato.
Scores and description
1
Very poor

2
Poor

3a
Acceptable

Color

Very dark red, overripe

Dark red; dull color

Vivid red; loss of glossiness Light red but less glossy

Firmness

Extra-soft, overripe, fruit yields

very readily to slight pressure

Soft, fruit yields readily Firm, fruit yields slightly to Hard, fruit yields only slightly Extra hard, fruit does not yield
to slight pressure
moderate pressure
to considerable pressure
to considerable pressure

Shriveling Extremely shriveled and dry; fruit

appears old and deteriorated
Stem

freshness

Severe shriveling

4
Good

Shriveling evident, but not

serious

Stem is completely dry Stem is dry, wilted and

and dark brownishbrownish-green
green

5
Excellent
Light red with no trace of
green; very glossy

Slight signs of shriveling

Field-fresh, no signs of
shriveling

Signs of dryness are evident

but not objectionable

Stem appears slightly less

green and less turgid

Stem is
very
bright
green and
turgid
a

Score of 3 was considered to be the minimum acceptable quality before cluster tomatoes become unmarketable.

For avocado, the instrument was tted with a 76.2 mm diameter

stainless compression plate and rmness was measured on two
cheeks of each non-pealed fruit. The probe was then driven with a
crosshead speed of 2 mm s1, and the compression force was
recorded at 3.0 mm deformation (Jeong et al., 2002). For blueberry,
three replicated samples of 30 g each were placed into three100 mL plastic beakers and the fruit was compressed to a depth of
30 mm using a 38 mm diameter and 20 mm high acrylic cylinder
probe. The probe was then driven with a crosshead speed of
1 mm s1, and the compression force was recorded after the probe
had compressed the fruit by 30 mm (Sanford et al., 1991). Peppers
were rst cut transversely, approximately three-quarter way from
the shoulder end and then placed, with the cut end down, on the
at platform of the texture analyzer. A 7.95 mm stainless convex
probe was centered on a shoulder lobe with two measurements
being taken on opposite lobes. The probe was then driven with a
crosshead speed of 1 mm s1, and the compression force was
recorded at 5.0 mm deformation (Nunes et al., 2012). Strawberry
rmness was measured at the equatorial part of the fruit using a
7.95 mm stainless convex probe. The probe was then driven with a
crosshead speed of 1 mm s1, and the compression force was
recorded at 3.0 mm deformation (Whitaker et al., 2012). Tomato
was placed on the at surface of the texture analyzer with stemend down, so the pressure was applied on the blossom-end part of
the fruit. The instrument was tted with a 76.2 mm diameter
stainless compression plate and the probe was then driven with a
crosshead speed of 1 mm s1, and the compression force was
recorded at 10.0 mm deformation (Chilson et al., 2011).
2.7. Weight loss
Weight loss of each individual avocado, pepper or tomato and of
each individual triplicated clamshell containing 20 blueberries or
15 strawberries each was calculated from the initial weight and
after every day or every two days during ve to 22 d, depending on
the fruit and on the temperature or RH regimes. Concentrations of
chemical constituents were expressed in terms of dry weight in
order to show the differences between temperatures or RHs that
might be obscured by differences in water content. The following
formula was used for water loss corrections: [chemical components (fresh weight)  100 g/average dry weight (avocado = 12.9 g;
blueberry = 13.2 g; pepper = 6.1 g; strawberry = 9.4 g; tomato = 5.5

g) + weight loss during storage (g)]. The dry weight was determined by drying three weighed aliquots of homogenized fruit
tissue at 80
C, until weight stabilized.
2.8. Total anthocyanins content
Three replicated samples of blueberry or strawberry fruit were
homogenized in a laboratory blender (Waring Products Div.
Dynamics Corp. of America, New Hartford, CO) at high speed for
2 min. The homogenate (2 g) was mixed with 28 mL of 0.5% (v/v)
HCl in methanol and held for 1 h at 4
C for pigment extraction. The
occulate was removed by ltering the extract through a single
layer of facial tissue, and absorbance of the resulting liquid
containing the pigments was measured at 520 nm (maximum
absorbance for anthocyanins) using a BioTek microplate reader
(BioTek Instruments, Inc., Highland Park, Vermont, USA). Pigment
content was calculated using the following formula: A520 
dilution factor  [molecular weight (MW) of PGN/molar extinction
coefcient] where MW of PGN = 433.2 and the molar extinction
coefcient = 2.908  10,000. The amount of total anthocyanins was
expressed in terms of dry weight (g kg1) to compensate for water
loss during storage.
2.9. Total chlorophylls content
Chlorophyll content of avocado puree was extracted in the dark
with N,N-dimethylformamide and absorbance of the ltrate
measured at 625, 647 and 664 nm using a BioTek microplate
reader (BioTek Instruments, Inc., Highland Park, Vermont, USA).
Total chlorophylls content was calculated according to Moran
(1982) and the results expressed in terms of dry weight (g kg1) to
compensate for water loss during storage.
2.10. Total ascorbic acid
Total ascorbic acid was quantied by mixing 2 g of strawberry,
pepper or tomato homogenates with 20 mL metaphosphoric acid
mixture (6% HPO3 containing 2 N acetic acid). Samples were then
ltered (0.22 mm) prior to HPLC analysis. Ascorbic acid analysis
was conducted using a Hitachi LaChromUltra UHPLC system with a
diode array detector and a LaChromUltra C18 2 mm column
(2  50 mm) (Hitachi, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). The analysis was

48

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

performed under isocratic mode at a ow rate of 0.5 mL/min with a

detection of 254 nm. Sample injection volume was 5 mL, each with
duplicate HPLC injections. Mobile phase was buffered potassium
phosphate monobasic (KH2PO4, 0.5%, w/v) at pH 2.5 with
metaphosphoric acid (HPO3, 0.1%, w/v). The retention time of
the ascorbic acid peak was 2.5 min. After comparison of retention
time with the ascorbic acid standard, the peak was identied. The
amount of total ascorbic acid content in strawberry was quantied
using calibration curves obtained from different concentrations
(0.01 g L1, 0.02 g L1, 0.03 g L1, 0.05 g L1, 0.10 g L1, 0.15 g L1,
0.20 g L1 and 0.30 g L1) of ascorbic acid standards. Total ascorbic
acid content was expressed in terms of dry weight (g kg1) to
compensate for water loss during storage.
2.11. Statistical analysis
The SigmaPlot Version 12.0 (Systat Sotware, San Jose CA) was
used for the analysis of the data. Since there were no signicant
differences between harvests in respect to the strength and
signicance of the relationships, data from the two harvests was
combined. The strength of the relationship between variables (i.e.,
subjective versus quantitative) was measured using the Pearson
correlation coefcient (r). The coefcient of determination (r2) and
the signicance of the relationship between variables was

expressed by probability levels (p = 0.05). A linear regression

model was applied to the data collected and was used to describe
the relationship between variables.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Correlation between subjective color and L*, hue angle,
anthocyanins, chlorophyll and ascorbic acid contents
Subjective color was signicantly correlated to L* values for all
the FFVs evaluated, regardless of the storage conditions, except for
strawberry stored under different RH regimes (Table 8; Fig. 1). In
general, as color ratings decreased, L* values also decreased,
meaning that the surface color of the FFVs became darker.
Similarly, with the exception of blueberry, there was a signicant
correlation between color ratings and hue angle for all the fruit
evaluated (Table 8; Fig. 1). As color ratings decreased, hue angle
values also decreased; for avocado and pepper, decreased in hue
angle corresponded to changes in color from bright dark lime green
to a brownish-green color (Tables 3 and 5; Fig. 1). In pepper,
decreased in hue angle corresponded to changes in color from
bright dark-green to dull green (Table 3). In strawberry and tomato,
decreased in hue angles corresponded to changes in the surface
color from bright light-red to a deep dull red (Tables 6 and 7; Fig. 1).

Table 8
Pearson correlation coefcient (r), coefcient of determination (r2), linear regression equation, and signicance of the relationship (p) between subjective color and:
instrumental color coordinates (L* value and hue angle), anthocyanins, chlorophyll and ascorbic acid content contents for avocado, blueberry, pepper, strawberry and tomato
stored at different temperature or humidity regimes.
Commodity (treatment)

Color vs L* value

Color vs hue angle

Color
vs anthocyanins
(g kg1)

Color
vs chlorophyll
(g kg1)

Color vs ascorbic acid

(g kg1)

Avocado (RH)

r = 0.602
r2 = 0.363
y = 4.409x + 68.321
p < 0.0001

r = 0.906
r2 = 0.821
y =13.870x + 56.882
p < 0.0001

NM

p > 0.05 (NS)

NM

Avocado (T)

r = 0.364
r2 = 0.133
y = 1.484x + 46.924
p < 0.05

r = 0.719
r2 = 0.517
y = 5.471x + 97.354
p < 0.0001

NM

r = 0.458
r2 = 0.210
y = 0.004x  0.001
p < 0.05

NM

Blueberry (RH)

r = 0.324
r2 = 0.105
y = 0.451x + 25.551
p < 0.05

NM

NM

p > 0.05 (NS)

r = 0.674
r2 = 0.455
y = 0.901x + 1.199
p < 0.0001

Pepper (RH)

r = 0.411
r2 = 0.169
y = 0.497x + 40.490
p < 0.05

r = 0.644
r2 = 0.414
y = 3.927x + 111.630
p < 0.0001

NM

NM

r = 0.908
r2 = 0.824
y = 2.465x  0.117
p < 0.0001

Strawberry (RH)

p > 0.05 (NS)

r = 0.834
r2 = 0.695
y =  24.576x + 125.460
p < 0.0001

r = 0.885
r2 = 0.783
y = 0.681x  0.738
p < 0.0001

NM

r = 0.864
r2 = 0.746
y = 2.174x  2.730
p < 0.0001

Strawberry (T)

r = 0.469
r2 = 0.220
y = 1.207x + 32.737
p < 0.05

r = 0.715
r2 = 0.512
y = 2.960x + 9.221
p < 0.0001

r = 0.890
r2 = 0.792
y = 0.221x + 0.856
p < 0.0001

NM

r = 0.824
r2 = 0.679
y = 0.573x + .530
p < 0.0001

Tomato (RH)

r = 0.897
r2 = 0.805
y = 2.423x + 32.247
p < 0.0001

r = 0.783
r2 = 0.613
y = 3.596x + 30.124
p < 0.0001

NM

NM

r = 0.531
r2 = 0.282
y = 0.237x + 2.242
p < 0.0001

Tomato (T)

r = 0.594
r2 = 0.353
y = 1.975x + 35.321
p < 0.0001

r = 0.444
r2 = 0.184
y = 2.351x + 35.508
p < 0.001

NM

NM

r = 0.393
r2 = 0.155
y = 0.126x + 1.00
p < 0.05

RH: relative humidity; T: temperature; NS: not signicant; NM: not measured.

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

70
Avocado (RH)
Tomato (RH)

65

L* value

60
55
50
45
40
35
30
1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

160
Avocado (RH)
Avocado (T)
Pepper (RH)

140

49

Nunes et al. (2013) also showed that there was a highly positive
correlation between banana visual color and hue angle values and
suggested that color can be a reliable way to estimate visual color
changes. Visual evaluation of browning in fresh-cut nectarines was
also found to be highly correlated to color parameters, particularly
with b* and chroma (Pace et al., 2011). In addition, color changes
have also been shown to be strongly correlated with sugar content
in banana (Nunes et al., 2013). Therefore, the use of color charts
(e.g., banana industry) when used by trained individual(s) can be
an easy and fast way to estimate FFVs quality attributes that are
associated with changes in surface color.
Color ratings were also signicantly correlated with anthocyanin contents, particularly in strawberry (Table 8; Fig. 2). As color
ratings decreased, anthocyanin content also decreased, meaning
that fruit with a deep purplish-blue or purplish-red color had
lower anthocyanin contents than fruit showing a bright light blue
or red color. Although in avocado the relationship between color
and chlorophyll content was not very strong, there was a
signicant correlation between color ratings and chlorophyll
content in avocado stored at different temperatures (Table 8).
Therefore, as color ratings decreased (color changed from green to
brown) chlorophyll content also decreased. Proulx et al. (2010) also

100

80

60
1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

120
Strawberry (RH)
Strawberry (T)

100

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

14

80
-1

Total ascorbic acid (g kg )

Hue angle

Strawberry (RH)
Strawberry (T)
Blueberry (RH)

-1

Total anthocyanins (g kg )

Hue angle

120

60
40
20
0
1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Color rating (1-5)

Fig. 1. Scatter plots and linear regression lines showing the relationship between
subjective color (1 = very poor; 5 = excellent) and L* value for avocado and cluster
tomato and the relationship between subjective color and hue angle for avocado,
pepper and strawberry stored at different temperature and RH regimes. RH =
relative humidity; T = temperature.

Strawberry (RH)
Strawberry (T)
Pepper (RH)

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Color rating (1-5)

Fig. 2. Scatter plots and linear regression lines showing the relationship between
subjective color (1 = very poor; 5 = excellent) and total anthocyanins content for
strawberry and blueberry and the relatioship between subjective color and total
ascorbic acid content for strawberry and pepper stored at different temperature and
RH regimes. RH = relative humidity; T = temperature.

50

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

showed that in snap beans there was a signicant correlation

between visual color scores and chlorophyll content, that is,
chlorophyll content decreased as the color turned from bright
green to yellowish-green. In avocado, the reason for the weak
relationship between visual color and chlorophyll content might
be related to the fact that color ratings were based on the color of
the avocado skin whereas chlorophyll content was measured in the
pulp of the fruit.
Ascorbic acid content was signicantly correlated with color
ratings particularly for pepper and strawberry (Table 8; Fig. 2).
Therefore, as color ratings decreased, ascorbic acid content also
decreased. After harvest, decline in ascorbic acid content of FFVs
usually occurs rapidly and it normally parallels the increase in
water loss, particularly when FFVs are exposed to adverse
environmental conditions. Excessive loss of water causes tissue
damage and results in deterioration of the overall quality; with cell
wall disruption promoting the release of ascorbate oxidase and
subsequent oxidation of ascorbic acid (Proulx et al., 2010).
3.2. Correlation between subjective shriveling and weight loss
For avocado, blueberry, pepper and strawberry, shriveling was
negatively correlated with weight loss whereas in tomato weight
loss was negatively correlated with shriveling and particularly

with stem freshness, regardless of the storage conditions (Table 9;

Figs. 3 and 4). Therefore, as ratings for shriveling or stem freshness
decreased weight loss signicantly increased. Nunes and Emond
(2007) evaluated several fruits and vegetables and also found a
highly signicant correlation between weight loss and subjective
color, rmness and shriveling/wilting. Thus, as weight loss
increased during storage, rmness decreased, and wilting,
shriveling or browning increased. Lownds et al. (1994) also
reported that accidity in peppers appeared to be directly
associated with water loss whereas color ratings paralleled
differences in water loss rates suggesting a direct relationship
between these variables.
3.3. Correlation between subjective rmness and instrumental texture
Subjective rmness was signicantly correlated with instrumental texture, regardless of the fruit and the storage regimes used
(Table 9; Fig. 5). As subjective rmness ratings decreased, values
for quantitative texture also decreased. In a previous study, a
signicant correlation was found between banana subjective
rmness (15 rating scale) and analytical texture, suggesting that
rmness on touch can be used to estimate softening (Nunes et al.,
2013). White et al. (2005) produced softening curves for avocado
based on hand rmness scores versus quantitative texture

Table 9
Pearson correlation coefcient (r), coefcient of determination (r2), linear regression equation, and signicance of the relationship (p) between
subjective shriveling or steam freshness and weight loss and between subjective rmness and instrumental texture for avocado, blueberry, pepper,
strawberry and tomato stored at different temperature or humidity regimes.
Commodity (treatment)

Shriveling/stem freshnessavs weight loss (%)

Firmness vs texture (N)

Avocado (RH)

r = 0.938
r2 = 0.880
y = 3.807x + 21.751
p < 0.0001

r = 0.725
r2 = 0.523
y = 28.002x  48.454
p < 0.0001

Avocado (T)

r = 0.721
r2 = 0.520
y = 1.598x + 9.445
p < 0.0001

r = 0.592
r2 = 0.350
y = 47.392 x  97.954
p < 0.0001

Blueberry (RH)

r = 0.908
r2 = 0.825
y = 4.125x + 21.908
p < 0.0001

r = 0.342
r2 = 0.117
y = 37.922x  34.067
p < 0.05

Pepper (RH)

r = 0.977
r2 = 0.954
y = 3.720x + 19.834
p < 0.0001

r = 0.596
r2 = 0.355
y = 0.428x + 2.518
p < 0.0001

Strawberry (RH)

r = 0.960
r2 = 0.922
y = 5.647x + 28.176
p < 0.0001

r = 0.832
r2 = 0.692
y = 1.692x  0.810
p < 0.0001

Strawberry (T)

r = 0.877
r2 = 0.744
y = 4.861x + 25.412
p < 0.0001

r = 0.678
r2 = 0.488
y = 0.584x + 1.810
p < 0.0001

Tomato (RH)

r = 0.925
r2 = 0.856
y = 1.703x + 8.293
p < 0.0001

r = 0.827
r2 = 0.685
y = 3.701x + 19.757
p < 0.0001

Tomato (T)

r = 0.896
r2 = 0.803
y = 1.740x + 8.517
p < 0.0001

r = 0.886
r2 = 0.785
y = 5.527x + 16.510
p < 0.0001

RH: relative humidity; T: temperature.

a
Correlation between shriveling and weight loss was used for avocados, blueberries, peppers and strawberries; correlation between stem freshness
and weight loss was used for cluster tomatoes.

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

measured with a penetrometer. The curves showed that as hand

rmness decreases from very hard (rating of 0) to very soft (rating
of 7) the force required to puncture the fruit also decreased.

30
Avocado (RH)
Avocado (T)
Pepper (RH)

27

3.4. Data tting

21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

30
Strawberry (RH)
Strawberry (T)
Blueberry (RH)

27

Weight loss (%)

24

A linear regression model was applied to all datasets, and thus

the following equation was used to summarize the relationship
between variables: [y = ax + b]; where y = quantitative attribute and
x = subjective quality attribute score (15) (Tables 8 and 9). Graphic
representations were shown only for those relationships in which r
or r2  0.6 and p < 0.0001 (Figs. 15). Except for the correlation
between avocado L* value and color rating, where L* value showed
an increase up until a 3.5 color rating and decreased thereafter
(Fig. 1), all other quantitative measurements either continuously
decreased or continuously increased with a decrease in quality
ratings (Figs. 15). Changes in the color of the skin of Florida
avocado cultivars, used in this study, showed a different pattern
from that observed for Hass avocados (White et al., 2005). That is,
skin color of some Florida avocado cultivars rst changes from a
dark lime green to a yellowish lime green and then to a very dark
green or blackish-green color. These changes in color may explain
the initial increase in L* values (yellowing; ratings 34) followed by

21
18

8
Strawberry (RH)
Strawberry (T)

15

12
9
6
3
0
1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Texture (N)

Weight loss (%)

24

51

6
5
4

Shriveling rating (1-5)

3
Fig. 3. Scatter plots and linear regression lines showing the relationship between
subjective shriveling (1 = very poor; 5 = excellent) and weight loss for avocado,
blueberry, pepper and strawberry stored different temperature and RH regimes.
RH = relative humidity; T = temperature.

2
1.0

12

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

50
Tomato (RH)

Tomato (RH)
Tomato (T)

10

45

Tomato (T)

Texture (N)

Weight loss (%)

40

8
6
4

35
30
25
20

15

10

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Stem freshness rating (1-5)

Fig. 4. Scatter plots and linear egression lines showing the relationship between
subjective stem freshness (1 = very poor; 5 = excellent) and weight loss for cluster
tomato stored different temperature and RH regimes. RH = relative humidity;
T = temperature.

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Firmness rating (1-5)

Fig. 5. Scatter plots and linear regression lines showing the relationship between
subjective rmenss (1 = very poor; 5 = excellent) and instrumental texture for
strawberry and cluster tomato stored different temperature and RH regimes.
RH = relative humidity; T = temperature.

52

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

Fig. 6. Color chart for strawberry showing photographs of visual quality deterioration with subjective quality ratings (1 = very poor; 3 = acceptable; 5 = excellent) and
correspondent descriptors.

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

a decrease in L* values (very dark skin with no traces of green;

ratings 45).
Since there was a strong correlation between most of the
subjective quality attributes and the quantitative attributes evaluated, the linear regression equations shown in Tables 8 and 9 can be
useful to estimate quantitative measurements from subjective
quality attributes (i.e., rating scores). For example, if visual color of
tomato stored at different RH regimes received a rating of 5, L* value
would be calculated as follows: L* value = 2.423  5 + 32.247 = 44.36
(Table 8; Fig. 1). Likewise, if color of strawberry stored at different
RH regimes received a rating of 5, hue angle, anthocyanin and
ascorbic acid contents would be calculated as follows: hue
angle = 24.576  5 + 125.460 = 248.34 (Table 8; Fig. 1); total anthocyanins (g kg1) = 0.681  5  0.738 = 2.67 (Table 8; Fig. 2); and total
ascorbic acid (g kg1) = 2.174  5  2.730 = 8.14 (Table 8; Fig. 2).
Finally, weight loss in blueberry stored at different RH could be
calculated from a shriveling rate of 2 as follows: weight loss
(%) =  4.125  2 + 21.908 = 13.66 (Table 9; Fig. 3); and texture of
strawberry stored at different RH regimes could be calculated from a
rmness rate of 3 as follows: texture (N) = 1.692  3  0.810 4.27
(Table 9; Fig. 5).
3.5. Strawberry color chart
Based on the specic subjective quality attributes (color,
rmness and shriveling) and their strong relationship with
quantitative measurements (L*, hue angle, texture, anthocyanins
and ascorbic acid contents and weigh loss; Tables 8 and 9), a
strawberry color chart showing photographs of the fruit at
different stages of visual quality deterioration together with
corresponding descriptors and scores was created (Fig. 6). The
descriptors and scores used in this chart were previously used by
our group during laboratory and eld work and, have shown to be
an easy and reliable way to evaluate the quality of strawberry
stored under different environmental conditions (Nunes et al.,
2003a,b,c; Nunes and Emond, 2007; Nunes, 2008; Nunes et al.,
2009). We have created color charts for other FFVs but the
strawberry color chart was the only one thus so far that has been
validated in research and commercial settings. Therefore, this chart
can either be used by the industry or by researchers, providing an
easy and reliable way to evaluate visual quality and estimate color,
textural and compositional deterioration of the fruit during storage
or, can be used as a quality control tool to help decide acceptance or
rejection of a load. A similar strawberry chart to the one shown on
Fig. 6 was recently tested during commercial shipments of
strawberries from the eld to the distribution center and has
shown to be easy to use while giving consistent results
(unpublished data). Based on the descriptors shown in Table
37 similar color charts to the one shown for strawberry can also
be created to be used as research or quality control tools.
4. Conclusions
Overall, there was a signicant correlation between most of the
FFVs subjective quality attributes evaluated and the physicochemical analysis performed. Results from this study showed that
subjective quality evaluations using rating scales can be a reliable
and simple method to estimate changes in color, texture, water
content, and ultimately changes in specic chemical components
when FFVs are exposed to different environmental conditions. In
the absence of a formal trained sensory panel this method can be
easily used in research of industry settings (e.g., quality control at
receiving). The strawberry color chart proposed can be used by the
industry and by researchers as an easy and reliable way to evaluate
visual quality and estimate textural and compositional

53

deterioration of the fruit during storage or, can be used as a

quality control tool to help decide acceptance or rejection of a load.
References
Barrett, D.M., Beaulieu, J.C., Shewfelt, R., 2010. Color, avor, texture, and nutritional
quality of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables: desirable levels, instrumental and
sensory measurements, and the effects of processing. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr.
50, 369389.
Beaudry, R.M., Moggia, C.E., Retamala, J.B., Hancock, J.F., 1998. Quality of Ivanhoe
and Bluecrop blueberry fruit transported by air and sea from Chile to North
America. HortScience 33, 313317.
Chilson, D., Delgado, A., Nunes, M.C.N., 2011. Shelf life of cluster tomatoes
(Lycopersicum esculentum) stored non-schilling temperature and different
relative humidity levels. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 124, 246255.
Clydesdale, F.M., 1991. Color perception and food quality. J. Food Qual. 14, 6174.
Corollaro, M.L., Aprea, E., Endrizzi, I., Betta, E., Dematt, M., Bergamaschi, M., Costa,
F., Biasioli, F., Grappadelli, L.C., Gasperi, F., 2014. A combined sensoryinstrumental tool for apple quality evaluation. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 96,
135144.
Gonzlez-Aguilar, G.A., 2014. Pepper. In: Gross, K.C., Wang, C.Y., Saltveit, M. (Eds.),
The Commercial Storage of Fruits, Vegetables, and Florist and Nursery Stocks.
Agriculture Handbook 66. USDA-ARS http://www.ba.ars.usda.gov/hb66/
pepper.pdf (accessed 01.29.15.).
Gunness, P., Kravchuk, O., Nottigham, S.M., DArcy, B.R., Gidley, M.J., 2009. Sensory
analysis of individual strawberry fruit and comparison with instrumental
analysis. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 52, 164172.
Harker, F.R., Maindonald, J., Murray, S.H., Gunson, F.A., Hallet, I.C., Wlaker, S.B.,
2002a. Sensory interpretation of instrumental measurements 1: texture of
apple fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 24, 225239.
Harker, F.R., Marsh, K.B., Young, H., Murray, S.H., Gunson, F.A., Wlaker, S.B. 2002.
Sensory interpretation of instrumental measurements 1: texture of apple fruit.
Postharv. Biol. Technol. 24, 225-239.
Jeong, J., Huber, D., Sargent, S.A., 2002. Inuence of 1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP)
on ripening and cell-wall matrix polysaccharides of avocado (Persea americana)
fruit. Posthrvest Biol. Technol. 25, 241256.
Kader, A.A., Cantwell, M., 2006. Produce quality rating scales and color charts.
Postharvest Horticultural Series No. 23. Postharvest Technology Research and
Information Center. University of California Davis.
Lai, Y.P., Emond, J.P., Nunes, M.C.N., 2011. Environmental conditions encountered
during distribution from the eld to the store affect the quality of strawberry
(cv. Albion). Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society 124, 213220.
Laurin, E., Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., 2003. Forced-air cooling after air-shipment
delays asparagus deterioration. J. Food Qual. 26, 4354.
Lownds, N.K., Banaras, M., Bosland, P.W., 1994. Postharvest water loss and storage
quality of nine pepper (Capsicum) cultivars. HortScience 29, 191193.
Maul, F., Sargent, S.A., Sims, C.A., Baldwin, E.A., Balaban, M.O., Huber, D.J., 2000.
Tomato avor and aroma quality as affected by storage temperature. J. Food Sci.
65, 12281237.
Mitcham, B., Cantwell, M., Kader, A., 1996. Methods for determining quality of fresh
commodities. Perishables Handling Newsletter 85, 15. http://ucce.ucdavis.
edu/les/datastore/234-49.pdf.
Mitcham, E., 2014. Strawberry. In: Gross, K.C., Wang, C.Y., Saltveit, M. (Eds.), The
Commercial Storage of Fruits, Vegetables, and Florist and Nursery Stocks.
Agriculture Handbook 66. USDA-ARS http://www.ba.ars.usda.gov/hb66/
strawberry.pdf (accessed 01.29.15.).
Moran, R., 1982. Formulas for determination of chlorophyllous pigments extracted
with N,N-dimethylformamide. Plant Physiol. 69, 13761381.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., 2007. Relationship between weight loss and visual
quality of fruits and vegetables. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 120, 235245.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.K., Brecht, J.K., 2003a. Quality of strawberries as affected by
temperature abuse during ground, in-ight and retail handling operations. Acta
Hort. 604, 239246.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., Brecht, J.K., 2003b. Predicting shelf life and quality of
raspberries under different storage temperature. Acta Hort. 628, 599606.
Nunes, M.C.N., Proulx, E., Emond, J.P., Brecht, J.K., 2003c. Quality characteristics of
Horn of Plenty and medallion yellow summer squash as a function of the
storage temperature. Acta Hort. 626, 607614.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., Brecht, J.K., 2004. Quality curves for highbush
blueberries as a function of the storage temperature. Small Fruit Rev. 3,
423438.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., Brecht, J.K., 2006. Brief deviations from set point
temperatures during normal airport handling operations negatively affect the
quality of papaya (Carica papaya) fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 41, 328340.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., Brech, J.K., Dea, S., Proulx, E., 2007. Quality curves for
mango fruit (cv: Tommy Atkins ad Palmer) stored at chilling and non-chilling
temperatures. J. Food Qual. 30, 104120.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., Rauth, M., Dea, S., Chau, K.V., 2009. Environmental
conditions encountered during typical retail display affect fruit and vegetable
quality and amount of waste. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 51, 232241.
Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., Dea, S., Yagiz, Y., 2011. Distribution center and retail
conditions affect the sensory and compositional quality of bulk and packaged
slicing cucumbers. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 59, 280288.

54

M.C.N. Nunes / Postharvest Biology and Technology 107 (2015) 4354

Nunes, M.C.N., Delgado, A., Emond, J.P., 2012. Quality curves for green bell pepper
(Capsicum annum L.) stored at low and recommended relative humidity levels.
Acta Hort. 945, 7178.
Nunes, M.C.N., Yagiz, Y., Emond, J.P., 2013. Inuence of environmental conditions on
the quality attributes and shelf life of Goldnger bananas. Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 86, 309320.
Nunes, M.C.N., 2008. Color Atlas of Postharvest Quality of Fruits and Vegetables.
Blackwell Publishing, Iowa, USA.
Pace, B., Cefola, M., Renna, F., Attolico, G., 2011. Relationship between visual
appearance and browning as evaluated by image analysis and chemical traits in
fresh-cut nectarines. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 61, 178183.
Pelletier, W., Brecht, J.K., Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., 2011. Quality of strawberries
shipped by truck from California to Florida as inuenced by postharvest
temperature management practices. HortTechnology 21 (4), 482493.
Perkins-Veazie, P., 2014. Blueberry. In: Gross, K.C., Wang, C.Y., Saltveit, M. (Eds.), The
Commercial Storage of Fruits, Vegetables, and Florist and Nursery Stocks.
Agriculture Handbook 66. USDA-ARS http://www.ba.ars.usda.gov/hb66/
blueberry.pdf (accessed 01.29.15.).
Proulx, E., Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., Brecht, J.K., 2005. Quality attributes limiting
papaya postharvest life at chilling and non-chilling temperatures. Proc. Fla.
State Hort. Soc. 118, 389395.
Proulx, E., Yagiz, Y., Nunes, M.C.N., Emond, J.P., 2010. Quality attributes limiting snap
bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) postharvest life at chilling and non-chilling
temperatures. HortScience 45, 12381249.

Ressureccion, A.V.A., Shewfelt, R.L., 1985. Relationships between sensory attributes

and objective measurements of postharvest quality of tomatoes. J. Food Sci. 50,
12421245.
Safner, R., Polashock, J., Ehlenfeldt, M., Vinyard, B., 2008. Instrumental and sensory
quality characteristics of blueberry fruit from twelve cultivars. Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 49, 1926.
Sanford, K.A., Lidster, P.D., McRae, K.B., Jackson, E.D., Lawrence, R.A., Stark, R.,
Prange, R.K., 1991. Lowbush blueberry quality changes in response to
mechanical damage and storage temperature. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 116, 4751.
Sargent, S.A., Moretti, C.L., 2014. Tomato. In: Gross, K.C., Wang, C.Y., Saltveit, M.
(Eds.), The Commercial Storage of Fruits, Vegetables, and Florist and Nursery
Stocks. Agriculture Handbook 66. USDA-ARS http://www.ba.ars.usda.gov/hb66/
tomato.pdf (accessed 01.29.15.).
Whitaker, V.M., Chandler, C.K., Santos, B.M., Peres, N., Nunes, M.C.N., Plotto, A., Sims,
C.A., 2012. Florida MedallionTM (FL 05-1070 ) Strawberry. HortScience 47,
296298.
White, A., Woolf, A., Ofman, P., Arpaia, M.L., 2005. The International Avocado Quality
Manual, HortResearch, The Horticultural and Food Research Institute of New
Zealand Limited. Auckland, New Zealand.
Woolf, A.B., White, A., Arpaia, M.L., Gross, K.C., 2014. Avocado. In: Gross, K.C., Wang,
C.Y., Saltveit, M. (Eds.), The Commercial Storage of Fruits, Vegetables, and Florist
and Nursery Stocks. Agriculture Handbook 66. USDA-ARS http://www.ba.ars.
usda.gov/hb66/avocado.pdf (accessed 01.29.15.).