Skip to main content

Pre-harvest field application of enhanced freshness formulation reduces yield loss in orange

Abstract

Background

Orange (Citrus sinensis L.) production in Tanzania is constrained by several pre-harvest factors that include pests. Hexanal, sprayed as Enhanced Freshness Formulation (EFF) is a relatively new technology that has been reported to reduce pre-harvest loss in fruits. However, the effects of hexanal on pre-harvest yield loss of orange are not known. We studied the effects of hexanal as EFF on yield losses of three sweet orange cultivars namely, Early Valencia, Jaffa, and Late Valencia. Factorial experiments tested the effects of EFF concentration, variety, and time of EFF application on number of dropped fruit, percentage of non-marketable fruit and incidence of pest damage.

Results

Results showed significant negative correlation (p < 0.001) between EFF and the percentage of dropped fruit, non-marketable yield, and incidence of pest damage. An increase in hexanal concentration by 1%, is expected to reduce number of dropped fruit by 50, percentage of non-marketable by 35.6, and incidences of pest damage by 36.5% keeping other factors constant. Results also show significant association (p < 0.001) between time of hexanal application and non-marketable yield. Percentage of dropped fruit is expected to increase by 1 for each day away from harvest, keeping other factors constant.

Conclusion

Pre-harvest application of hexanal as EFF can significantly reduce number of dropped fruits, percentage of non-marketable fruit and incidence of pest damage.

Background

Orange (Citrus sinensis L.) is one of the most important fruit crops due to distinct flavours, therapeutic, and economic values of its fruit [1]. Orange production in Tanzania is 249 641 mt [2] from an area of 42 335 ha with an annual productivity of 4.67 t ha−1 [3]. Orange production is constrained by several factors including pre-harvest fruit drops, incidence of serious diseases such as powdery mildew and anthracnose, and insect pests such as hopper and mealy bugs [4, 5].

Pre-harvest fruit drop is a major cause of low productivity of orange fruit worldwide [6,7,8]. Orange trees bear many fruits but most of them drop at early stages of development or before attaining the commercial ripening stage [9, 10]. Several techniques have been reported to reduce fruit drop and increase retention of fruit on orange trees [11,12,13,14,15,16]. For example, an aldehyde (n-hexanal and (E)-2-hexanal) improves fruit retention on trees and fruit quality such as aroma, skin colour, and firmness [17, 18]. Similarly, auxin alleviates fruit abscission at post-bloom and early development stages of the fruit, which results in the reduction of fruit drop [11]. Moreover, 3, 5, 6-trichloro-2-pyridyloxyacetic acid (3, 5, 6-TPA) was investigated to control fruit drop properties, fruit weight, diameter, length, and leaf/fruit ratio [19, 20], whereas the application of fungicides and a combination of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and gibberellic acid (GA3) improves fruit retention on trees by reducing high flower and fruit drop [21]. A combination of urea and GA3 enhances fruiting and fruit quality, fruit set, and fruit retention on trees [16].

Pre-harvest application of hexanal as Enhanced Freshness Formulation (EFF) containing hexanal, ethanol and tween 20, was recently reported to be effective against premature fruit drop, superficial scald and fungal infection (18). EFF has also been reported to increase fruit firmness, quality, freshness, and fruit retention on trees of various fruit species such as apple, cherry, longan, mango, strawberry, guava, and tomato [17, 18, 22]. The effects of such pre-harvest applications on yield loss in orange is not well known. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the effects of pre-harvest application of hexanal on three important orange cultivars in Tanzania for the fruit retention and marketability.

Materials and methods

Description of study area

The study carried out at Semngano (254.0 m a.s.l., 05o14′14.8″S and 038o46′33.1″E) and Mamboleo (263.0 m a.s.l., 05o13′59.9″S and 038o42′58.2″E) villages in Muheza District, Tanga Region. These sites have the same agro-climatic conditions. Muheza district experiences bimodal rainfall from 800 to 1400 mm with an average annual minimum and maximum temperatures of 24 °C and 32 °C, respectively [23]. The long rainy season is between March and May, while the short rain season is between October and December. The experiments were carried out in semi-commercial farmers’ orange orchards (10–15 years old trees), which were well established and maintained according to the recommended agricultural practices.

Description of orange varieties

Three orange varieties namely Early Valencia, Jaffa, and Late Valencia were selected for the study. Early Valencia is the most popular variety with an extended production from May to September, high yield, and firm fruits that tolerate long distant transportation [24, 25]. Late Valencia is a popular variety, which matures from January to March, produces high yield, retains mature fruit on trees for an extended period, and has fruits that withstand tough transportation and environmental conditions [25]. Jaffa variety matures from May to July and produces high yield; however, its fruit do not withstand harsh transport conditions [24, 25]. Early Valencia and Late Valencia are the most preferred orange varieties in Muheza District, and whose farmers’ preference stands at 45.8 and 31%, respectively, of all the orange varieties grown in the district [26].

Design of experiment

The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete-block design in a 3 × 4 × 4 factorial arrangement. The first factor was orange variety (Early Valencia, Jaffa, and Late Valencia), the second factor was EFF concentration (0.01, 0.02, 0.04% of hexanal and untreated fruit/control), and the third factor was time of EFF application prior to fruit harvest, i.e. days to harvest (7, 21, 42 and 60 days). The experiment was repeated twice, from April 2017 to July 2017, and from August 2017 to December 2017. A single tree of each variety was considered as an experimental unit, which was replicated ten times. EFF was manually sprayed on orange fruits until dripping using a low-pressure knapsack sprayer. Each variety was sprayed according to its phenology. The EFF concentrate was prepared by mixing 100 ml of Ethanol (95%) with 100 ml of Tween 20 in a suitable container while stirring. Hexanal volumes of 5, 10, and 20 ml, were then added to the mixture separately. We diluted the mixture with water to make 50 l solution corresponding to 0.01, 0.02, and 0.04% of hexanal. The volume for the pre-harvest spray ranged from 1 to 3 l depending on the size of the tree and the number of fruits per tree.

Data collection and analysis

Fruits were harvested at maturity, based on commercially acceptable indicators of colour (yellow peel colour), size (minimum 53 mm) and shape (slight or no defect in shape) [24, 27]. Data were collected immediately after the harvest of the fruits on the total number of fruits, the number of non-marketable fruits and incidences of pest damage as described below. The dropped fruits per tree were collected and counted at an interval of 1 week from the 7th day after the application of EFF concentration and stopped just before the first fruits were harvested. The harvested fruits were sorted into marketable and non-marketable fruits per tree. According to OEDC [24], orange fruit with sunburn, stem end rot, anthracnose, bruising, scar, and powdery mildew infections were considered as non-marketable. Data on incidences of pest damage were obtained by sorting and counting fruits with pest defects. The major pest defects were caused by fruit flies, fruit piercing moth, false codling moth, and anthracnose.

All data were averaged by replications and growing period. Data in percentage were transformed using arcsine scale. Data analysis procedures for post-harvest losses described by FAO [28] were followed. Multiple regression analyses were performed using Minitab version 19. 2020. 1.0 (Minitab LLC). We determined the association between the independent variables (predictors), i.e. EFF concentration, variety and time (days to harvest) and the dependent/response variables, i.e. fruit drop, non-marketable fruit and incidence of pest damage.

Results

Effects of EFF concentration on fruit drop

Our results show that independent variables EFF concentration, variety and time significantly predicted the fruit drop from trees of the three varieties (F(4, 91) = 9.24, p < .0001). EFF concentration has a significant inverse relationship with fruit drop (Table 1). An increase in EFF concentration by 1%, is expected to reduce number of dropped fruit by 326, keeping other factors constant. Furthermore, number of dropped fruit is expected to increase by 0.71 for each day away from harvest, keeping other factors constant. Varieties Jaffa and Late Valencia are expected to have lower numbers of dropped fruit by 1.80 and 2.95, respectively, compared with Early Valencia, although in both cases the correlations were not significant (Table 1).

Table 1 Effect of predictors on fruit drop

Effects of EFF concentration on percentage of non-marketable fruit

Our results further show that independent variables EFF concentration, variety and time significantly predicted the percentage of non-marketable fruit (F(4, 91) = 4.69, p = .002). EFF concentration has a significant negative correlation with non-marketable fruit. An increase in EFF concentration by 1%, is likely to reduce percentage of non-marketable fruit by 36, keeping other factors constant. Varieties Jaffa and Late Valencia are expected to have lower percentages of non-marketable fruit by 0.14 and 0.54, respectively, compared with Early Valencia, although in both cases, the correlations were not significant (Table 2).

Table 2 Effect of predictors on percentage of non-marketable fruit

Effects of EFF concentration on incidence of pest damage

We also found that EFF concentration, variety and time significantly predicted incidence of pest damage on three orange varieties (F(4, 91) = 4.09, p = .004). Incidences of pest damage are likely to be lower by 36.5% for 1% increase in EFF concentration. Compared with Early Valencia, variety Jaffa is likely to have a lower incidence of pest damage by 0.26% while Late Valencia is expected to have a higher incidence by 0.22% (Table 3).

Table 3 Effect of predictors on incidence of pest damage

Discussion

In the present study, the application of hexanal significantly reduced the number of dropped fruits in all the three varieties of the orange tested, namely, Early Valencia, Jaffa, and Late Valencia. This clearly shows that EFF can help in fruit retention. Retaining fruits would be valuable to farmers as it can help them to extend the season, thereby stabilizing the price. Earlier studies have demonstrated that hexanal reduced fruit drop in mango, strawberry, raspberry, and nectarines [29,30,31,32]. It is hypothesized that the increased retention of fruits on the orange trees due to hexanal is associated with the delay in abscission [29]. It is not clear how hexanal prevents abscission in mature fruits. El Kayal et al. [31] reported that hexanal reduced the activities of phospholipase D (PLD) and abscisic acid (ABA) regulating genes in strawberry. Although we have not analysed these genes in oranges, it is quite possible that fruit retention in orange is also facilitated by the reduced levels of PLD and ABA, as reported previously [29, 32]. It has been shown further that hexanal also alters the expression of calcium regulating genes in raspberry [30]. Phospholipase D acts on phospholipids generating phosphatidic acid that undergo sequential catabolic breakdown downstream. Therefore, once Phospholipase D is inhibited, the whole cycle is slowed down and this results in increased fruit retention on trees [17, 18]. Together these data suggest that a similar mechanism of delaying PLD, as well as other ripening related genes could have also resulted in the enhanced retention of fruits in orange.

Application of hexanal can also indirectly benefit orange growers, in addition to fruit retention. Reduction in fruit drop will be more beneficial in early maturing orange varieties, which are naturally prone to high fruit drops compared to the later maturing varieties. In addition to dropped and damaged fruits during harvest, orange encounters a number of other issues such as sooty mold and other disorders like cracking and blossom end rot, which makes them unmarketable [33]. Our study indicates that the application of hexanal reduced to incidences of green mold, sooty mold, and physiological disorders such as blossom end rot, which are all secondary benefits of applying hexanal. Earlier studies have also observed that hexanal reduced insect pest and disease damage on mango, apple, and pear [29, 34]. According to Sholberg and Randall [34], hexanal can exhibit antifungal properties by altering the lipoxygenase pathway. Lipoxygenases are key enzymes that play an important role in the response of plants to wounding and pathogen attack [35].

Conclusions

Results of this study show that hexanal can significantly reduce yield loss in three orange varieties. Hexanal consistently reduced number of dropped fruit, percentage of non-marketable fruit and incidence of pest damage. Although a detailed cost–benefit analysis is yet to be done for East African conditions, based on other studies in Asia and the Caribbean, it is expected to be very affordable to fruit farmers, considering the overall benefits. Nevertheless, application of hexanal can reduce unwanted loss in orange and thereby increase the returns to growers. We, therefore, recommend that a detailed economic and marketing analysis of hexanal on its cost–benefit ratio should be done in the near future.

Availability of data and materials

There are no linked research data sets for this submission. The following reason is given: the data used forms part of the thesis work of Jaspa Samwel–submitted to the Sokoine University of Agriculture, Tanzania.

Abbreviations

EFF:

Enhanced freshness formulation

P :

Probability

PO RALG:

President’s Office Regional Administration and Local Government

3, 5, 6-TPA:

3, 5, 6-trichloro-2-pyridyloxyacetic acid

2, 4-D:

2, 4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid

GA3:

Gibberellin

m a.s.l:

Meters above sea level

mm:

Millimetre

oC:

Degree centigrade

%:

Percent

Ml:

Millilitres

L:

Litres

PLD:

Phospholipase D

ABA:

Abscisic acid

CIFSRF:

Canadian International Food Security Research Fund

IDRC:

International Development Research Centre

GAC:

Global Affairs Canada

MMA:

Match Maker Associates

NBS:

National Bureau of Statistics

TRCO:

Tanga Regional Commissioners Office

OECD:

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

DTH:

Days to harvest

References

  1. 1.

    Nawaz MA, Ahmad W, Ahmad S, Khan MM. Role of growth regulators on pre-harvest fruit drop, yield and quality in kinnow mandarin. Pak J Bot. 2008;40(5):1971–81.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    [MMA] Match Maker Associates. Horticulture Study in Mapping of Production of Fruit and Vegetables in Tanzania. Match Maker Associates Final Report, Tanzania. 2017.

  3. 3.

    National Bereuau of Statistics. National Sample Census of Agriculture. Crop Sector-National report. The National Bereuau of Statistics and the office of the chief Government Statistician, Zanzibar, Tanzania 2008.

  4. 4.

    Chattha GA, Anjum MA, Hussain A. Effects of various growth regulators on reducing fruit drop in mango (Mangifera indica L.). Int J Agric Biol. 1999;1(4):288–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Maqbool, M., Mazhar, M. S. and Jabbar, A. Causes and potential remedies of mango fruit drop in Pakistani. In: International symposium on prospects of horticultural industry in Pakistani, 28 –30 March, 2007, Faisalabad, Pakistani 2007; p. 226–231.

  6. 6.

    Ezura H, Hiwasa-Tarase H. Chapter 15: Fruit development. J Plant Develop Biotech Perspective. 2010; 1: 301 - 18.

  7. 7.

    Khandaker MM, Hossain AS, Osman N, Boyce AM. Application of girdling for improved fruit retention, yield and fruit quality in Syzygiums amarangense under field conditions. Int J Agric Biol. 2011;13:18–24.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Oosthuyse SA, Berrios M. Increasing fruit retention and size and reduced new shoot vigour in mendez avocado resulting from spry application of paclobutrazol plus potassium nitrate during flowering. J VIII Congreso Mundial de la Palta. 2015;201:362–5.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Malik AU, Singh Z, Saleem BA. Khan MN. Post-harvest handling of fresh citrus fruit: An overview Geocitie spp; 2004. p. 223–30.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Ibrahim M, Abbasi NA, Hafeez-Ur-Rahman, Hussain A, Hafiz IA. Phonological behaviour and effects of different chemicals on prehavest fruit drop of sweet orange cv. Salustiana. Pak J Bot. 2011; 43(1): 453–457.

  11. 11.

    Roemer MG. Premature Fruit Drop in Mango (Mangifera indica L.) in Northern Vietnam. University of Hohenheim, Vietinam 2011.

  12. 12.

    Hussein A, Awan SM, Ali S, Azhar H. Prehavest fruit losses and physical- chemical analysis of different varieties of pomegranate in Gilgit-Baltistan Pakistan. J Agr Sci Tech. 2012;B2:992–1004.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Ahemad M, Kibret M. Mechanisms and applications of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria: current perspective. J King Saud Univ Sci. 2014;26:1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Shen J, Wu L, Liu H, Zhang B, Yin X, Ge Y, Chen K. Bagging treatment influences production of C6 Aldehydes and biosynthesis–related gene expression in peach fruit skin. Molecules. 2014;19:13461–72.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Wang X, Wang L, Wang J, Jin P, Liu H, Zheng Y. Bacillus cereus AR156-induced resistance to Colletotrichum acutatum is associated with priming of defence responses in loquat fruit. J PloS ONE. 2014;9:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Amro SMS, Abdel-Hameed AA, El Gammal HM. Effects and Gibberellin and Urea Falior spray on blooming, fruiting and fruit quality of mango tree cv. Fagrikalan Agric Vet Sci. 2016;9(3):9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Cheema A, Padmanabhan P, Blom T, Subramanian J, Paliyath G. Improving quality of tomato (Solanum lycopersium L) by pre and post-harvest application of hexanal containing formulations. Postharvest Biol Technol. 2014;95:13–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Karthika S, Kumar NBN, Gunasekaran K, Subramanian KS. Enhancement Preservation of Fruit using Nanotechnology. Biosafety of Hexanal: Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India and University of Guelph, Canada; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Anthony MF, Coggins CW. NAA and 3,5,6-TPA control mature fruit drop in California citrus. Hort Sci. 2001;36(7):1296–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Augusti M, Zaragoza S, Iglesias DJ, Almela V, Primo-Millo E, Tolan M. The synthetic auxin 3, 5, 6- TPA stimulates carbohydrate accumulation and growth in citrus fruit. J Plant Growth Regul. 2002;36:141–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Bekti KH. Physiological responses and fruit retention on carambola fruit (Averrhoa carambola L.) induced by 2, 4-D and GA3. Hayati J Biosciences. 2009; 9 - 14.

  22. 22.

    Tiwari K, Paliyath G. Microarray analysis of ripening-regulated gene expression and its modulation by 1-MCP and hexanal. Plant Physiol Bioch. 2011;49:329–40.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Tanga Regional Commissioners Office. Socio-Economic Profile 2008, Annual report, Tanya, Tanzania. 2008.

  24. 24.

    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Citrus Fruit International Standards for Fruit and Vegetables. Trade and Agriculture, Paris, France. 2010.

  25. 25.

    Said M. Adoption of Kilimo Kwanza Policy by Small Citrus Farmers in Muheza District. Tanga region: Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture, Kenya; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Makorere R. An exploration of factors affecting development of citrus industry in Tanzania: empirical evidence from Muheza district, Tanga region. Int J Food Agric Econ. 2012;2(2):135–54.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Joanna L, Maria JR, Lorenza Z. Maturity indicators and citrus fruit quality. Stewart Postharvest Review. 2014;2(2):1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Food and Agriculture Organization. Guidelines on the measurement of harvest and post-harvest losses: Recommendations on the design of a harvest and post-harvest loss statistics system for food grains (cereals and pulses). United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organisation, Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics (GSARS). United Nations, 2018.

  29. 29.

    Anusuya P, Nagaraj R, Janavi GJ, Subramanian KS, Paliyath G, Subrmanian J. Pre-harvest spray of hexanal formulation for extending retention and shelf life of mango (Mangifera indica L) fruit. Sci Hortic. 2016;211:231–40.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    El Kayal W, Paliyath G, Sullivan JA, Subramanian J. Phospholipase D inhibition by hexanal is associated with calcium signal transduction events in raspberry. J Hort Res. 2017;4:17042–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    El Kayal W, El-Sharkawy I, Dowling-Osborne C, Paliyath G, Sullivan JA, Subramanian J. Effect of pre-harvest application of hexanal and growth regulators in enhancing shelf life and regulation of membrane associated genes in strawberry. Can J Plant Sci. 2017;97:1109–20.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Krishnakumar S, El Kayal W, Sullivan JA, Paliyath G, Jayasankar S. Pre- harvest application of hexanal formulation enhances shelf life and quality of ‘Fantasia’ nectarines by regulating membrane and cell wall catabolism-associated genes. Sci Hortic. 2018;2017(229):117–24.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Naqvi SAMH. Diagnosis and management of pre and post-harvest diseases of citrus fruit. Disease of Fruit and Vegetables 2004: 339–359.

  34. 34.

    Sholberg PL, Randall P. Fumigation of stored pome fruit with hexanal reduces blue and gray mold decay. HortScience. 2007;42(3):611–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Gobel C, Feussner I, Schmidt A, Scheel D, Sanchez-Serrano J, Hamberg M, Rosahl S. Oxylipin profiling reveals the preferential stimulation of the 9-Lipoxygenase pathway in elicitor-treated potato cell. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(9):6267–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (CIFSRF), a program of Canada’s International Development Research Centre (IDRC), and the Global Affairs Canada (GAC), the Government of Canada who financially supported this Collaborative research between Sokoine University of Agriculture, Tanzania and the University of Guelph, Canada.

Funding

This project was undertaken with the financial support of Canada’s International Development Research Centre (www.idrc.ca), the Government of Canada, provided through Global Affairs Canada (www.international.gc.ca). The research was part of Jaspa Samwel PhD thesis work and funding was provided through scholarship as per the postgraduate guidelines of Sokoine University of Agriculture.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

JS did the research, collected data and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. TD interpreted the data of fruit drop and non-marketable fruits. AB had contribution in writing the background. HDM interpreted the data of incidences of pest defects. AN Contributed in writing the results. JAS contributed in writing the abstract and editing the manuscript. JS was the PI of the project and major contributor in writing the discussion. MWM was the major contributor in setting the layout and data analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaspa Samwel.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Samwel, J., Msogoya, T., Kudra, A. et al. Pre-harvest field application of enhanced freshness formulation reduces yield loss in orange. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 7, 25 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40538-020-00191-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Early valencia
  • Jaffa
  • Late valencia
  • Non-marketable fruit
  • Pre-harvest fruit drop
  • Citrus sinensis