Packaging to reduce water loss can delay ripening of mango (Mangifera indica L. cv. ‘Kensington Pride’) fruit

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Summary. Water loss and premature ripening during postharvest handling reduce the market quality of mango fruit. Towards investigating the use of moisture barrier liners for mango fruit trays, relationships between in-package relative humidity and weight loss and ripening of ‘Kensington Pride’ fruit were studied. Individual fruit were held at 20°C in sealed plastic containers (small 1.2 L buckets). The lid of each container had a single circular hole. Holes were of various sizes, ranging from 5 to 135 mm diameter. Ripening mature green fruit held at the lowest relative humidity of 57% (135 mm diameter hole) lost weight at a significantly (P£0.05) greater rate (10 mg/g initial FW. day) than fruit at higher relative humidities of 59 (open air), 60 (95 mm diameter hole), 61 (55 mm diameter hole), 71 (35 mm diameter hole), 74 (25 mm diameter hole) and 83% (25 mm diameter hole plus free water). These fruit at higher relative humidities lost weight at rates ranging between 9 and 4 mg/g initial FW. day. Fruit softening and skin colouring rates were similar across all relative humidities. In a second experiment, mango fruit were allowed to ripen in containers with smaller holes, ranging from 5 to 95 mm diameter, in their lids. Fruit at the lowest relative humidity (60%, 95 mm diameter hole) lost weight at a significantly (P≤0.05) greater rate (9 mg/g initial FW. day) than fruit from other treatments. Furthermore, these fruit ripened about 2 days sooner than fruit at higher relative humidities: 85 (25 mm diameter hole), 88 (15 mm diameter hole), 91 (10 mm diameter hole) and 93% (5 mm diameter hole). Fruit at the higher relative humidities lost weight at rates between 6 and 2 mg/g initial FW. day, and ripened in 6 to 12 days. Thus, hole size can be varied in order to control in-package relative humidity and regulate mango fruit weight loss and ripening. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 1997, 37, 463–7 463