Abstract
The experiment was carried out to asses the influence of five preservative solutions (aluminium + ethanol, aluminium + sucrose, ethnol + sucrose, aluminium + ethanol + sucrose and water) and two rose cultivars (‘Red Sky’ and ‘Blizzard’). The scope of the study was to identify the best combination of preservative solutions on rose cultivars. The treatments were arranged in factorial combination in CRD with three replications. Ten (10) cut flowers of each treatment were pre-treated using prepared preservative solution for 24 h in cold room (3 ± 1°C) before storage. Interaction effects of Preservative solutions and cultivars were significant (P < 0.05) on solution uptake on day 16; petal fresh weight on day 4; total soluble solids (TSS) on day 4, 8 and 12 and on vase solution absorbance. Preservative solutions had significant effects on solution uptake on day 1, 4, 8 and 12; TSS on day 1 and 16; petal fresh weight on day 1, 8, 12, and 16. Flower longevity and maximum flower head diameter, relative fresh weight and petal fresh weight loss were significantly (P < 0.05) reduced. Cultivars had significant (P < 0.05) difference on solution uptake and TSS. Aluminium + ethanol + sucrose preservative solution treated cut flowers had shown longest vase life, flower opening, solution uptake, petal fresh weight and TSS on both cultivars; while the values were significantly higher in ‘Red Sky’ cultivar. The findings provide an alternative for extending the vase life of cut roses and thereby ensure the satisfaction of flower users and sustainability of cut rose flower production. Key words: Aluminum sulphate, ethanol, preservative solution, quality, rose, sucrose, vase life.
Highlights
About 20% of fresh flowers lose their quality while passing through the market and a large deal of remaining flowers are sold at low quality conditions dissatisfying the consumer (Panhwar, 2006; Asfanani et al, 2008) due to physiological and pathological problems during the postharvest handling
The treatments were consisted of five preservative solutions tested on two rose cultivars; arranged in CRD and replicated three times.The flowers were harvested at stage 1 when the buds were tight and the sepals enclosed in the floral bud early in the morning and kept in buckets partially filled with water in upright position (Capdeville et al, 2005)
The present results indicated that in all preservative solutions having sucrose did not result in clearer vase solution as compared to the pure water; but preservatives containing aluminum sulphate and ethanol together (Al+Et and Al+Et+Suc) had significantly lower vase solution absorbance clearly indicating that sucrose helps for microbial development in the vase and resulted in poor solution uptake by stem
Summary
About 20% of fresh flowers lose their quality while passing through the market (harvest, packaging, transportation, and sale) and a large deal of remaining flowers are sold at low quality conditions dissatisfying the consumer (Panhwar, 2006; Asfanani et al, 2008) due to physiological and pathological problems during the postharvest handling. Cut flowers last only for a few days maintaining their beauty and attractiveness. Using appropriate preservatives could help to extend the vase life of the harvested produce for consumer satisfaction and exploitation of the business. Short vase life of cut flowers is related to wilting, ethylene production and vascular blockage by air and microorganisms (Elgimabi, 2011). Preservative solutions are generally required to supply energy source, reduce microbial build up and vascular blockage, increase water
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
