Preservatives and packaging material have an impact on the post-harvest longevity of cut Rosa hybrida L. ‘Kardinal’ flowers

Abstract

SummaryWe studied the effects of various preservatives (sucrose, ascorbic acid, salicylic acid, and acetylsalicylic acid) alone, or in various combinations, on the post-harvest performance of cut Rosa hybrida L. ‘Kardinal’ flowers. The effects of packaging material, including boxes (used boxes without vents), newspaper, butter paper (a waxy paper used to avoid moisture loss), craft paper (a thin, less-waxy paper used for wrapping floral bunches), cellophane paper, single cardboard boxes with or without a cellophane lining, and standard double cardboard boxes with or without a cellophane lining, were also studied. Among the preservatives, 4% (w/v) sucrose alone, or combined with 100 mg l–1 acetylsalicylic acid, 200 mg l–1 salicylic acid, or 600 mg l–1 ascorbic acid resulted in longer vase-lives (7.1, 5.6, 5.5, or 5.3 d, respectively). Individual or combined applications of ascorbic acid and/or salicylic acid had no effect on vase-life. Stems in deionised (DI) water or 4% (w/v) sucrose alone had larger petal areas and flower diameters compared to all other preservatives. Pulsing with 0.5 mM silver thiosulphate (STS) for 2 h at room temperature further extended the vase-life, maintained flower diameter, increased petal area, and increased the uptake of vase solution during the first 2 d of the vase period. Stems packed in double-cardboard floral boxes lined with cellophane, or cellophane alone, gave a longer vase-life than newspaper, butter paper, or the spent boxes used by growers in the study area. Packaging in single or double cardboard floral boxes, with or without a cellophane lining, maintained flower quality, increased flower diameter, and increased ion leakage from petals (possibly due to the longer vase-life) more than spent boxes, craft paper, butter paper, or newspaper. By increasing the duration of storage from 2 d to 8 d, vase-life and ion leakage decreased from 4.2 d to 2.6 d, and from 102% to 85%, respectively, while subsequent flower diameter increased to 0.61 cm from a decrease of 0.16 cm.