effect of different nutrient management practices on ...

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON SENSORY AND BIOCHEMICAL ATTRIBUTES OF CARROT (DAUCUS CAROTA L.) Tanveer Ahmad1*, Muhammad Amjad1, Qumer Iqbal2, Aamir Nawaz3, Javed Iqbal4 and Muhammad Awais Ghani5 1

Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan 2

Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad, Pakistan

3

Department of Horticulture,, Bahauddin

Zakariya University,

Multan Pakistan

4

Mango Research Institute, Multan, Pakistan.

5

Dept. of Horticulture, College of Agriculture and Biotechnology, Zhejiang University, PR China Corresponding author: [email protected]

ABSTRACT Nutrient management practices are thought to be one of the most important factor affecting sensory and biochemical characteristics of fruits and vegetables. The objectives of the present studies were to investigate the effects of different nutrient management practices on sensory and biochemical attributes of two carrot cultivars (Oranza and T-29). In this study, 14 treatment combinations of farm yard manure (FYM), leaf manure (LM), poultry manure (PM) and urea based on the total nitrogen requirement was tested for two carrot cultivars (Oranza and T-29). The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with factorial arrangements and replicated thrice. From these results, it can be concluded that both carrot cultivars differ significantly in their organoleptic and biochemical response under different crop management practices. Sensory evaluation manifested that scale rating regarding taste, flavor and aroma of carrot ‘T-29’ was found acceptable when T4 (Poultry manure) was applied while carrot texture and color does not appeal to the panel. The quality aspect of carrot root in term of biochemical analysis illustrated that excellent sweetness character of the ‘T-29’ demonstrated better production and bio-accumulation of total as well as reducing and non-reducing sugars when the carrots harvested in T4. Similarly, ‘T-29’ showed maximum biosynthesis of vitamin C with T4 but the astringency and less sweet taste due to higher pH, more titratable acidity synthesized in case of Oranza when T7 was applied for production pursuits. Overall results revealed that the application of poultry manure gave the best results in terms of sensory as well as biochemical characteristics. It can be concluded that provision of nutrition to carrots through poultry manure would be beneficial not only to improve carrot quality but also reducing the rising input costs of inorganic fertilizers. Keywords: Carrot; Fertilization; Nutrients; Sensory; Biochemical INTRODUCTION Carrot (Daucus carota L.) is one of the important root vegetable rich in bioactive compounds like carotenoids, phenolic acids, polyacetylenes and dietary fibers having noticeable levels of several other functional components with health-promoting characteristics, an excellent source of carotene (18-90 mg/100g fresh weight) that is responsible for making carrots a major source of provitamin A in the human diet (Mahan and Escott-Stump, 1996). Different varieties of carrots contain differing amounts of antioxidant phytonutrients. For example; purple, red and orange carrots are best known for anthocyanin, lycopene and β-carotene, respectively. In yellow carrots, 50% of the total carotenoids come from lutein. Carotenoids are thought to have a variety of different actions that are related to the decreased risk of some degenerative diseases (Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, 2000); act as free-radical scavengers (Bast et al., 1998; Bramley, 2000). The presence of α- and

892

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey β-carotene in blood has a protective effect against atherosclerosis D’Odorico et al. (2000). Carrot consumption enhance the immune system, protect against stroke, cataracts arthritis, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, bronchial asthma, heart diseases and urinary tract infection (Beom et al., 1998; Sun et al., 2001; Seo and Yu, 2003). Carrot

leaves

(tops)

are

also

used

in

many countries

as

a source for extraction of leaf

proteins, fodder (Amjad et al., 2013) and also for the preparation of poultry feed. Quality of produce is a complex concept that is determined by external (color, aroma, size, shape) and internal (taste, texture, ingredients, nutritional value) characteristics (Abbott, 1999), environmental and growing conditions during carrot production are important considerations. Quality of produce is closely related to the marketing, as the consumers’ attitude towards food is influenced by quality characteristics as flavor is the important factor in assessing quality (Varming et al., 2004). Soil type and root maturity at harvest can impact sensory quality, as bitter flavors are more widespread in carrots grown in muck and sandy soils versus loam soils. On the other hand, juice processing industries are looking for eye-catching good quality cultivars, with lower quantity of processing waste and more juice. There is little work done on quality characteristics and biochemical attributes of carrot affected by the application of different sources of fertilization. Keeping in view the importance of these quality traits, the study was conducted to evaluate the impact of mineral and organic fertilizers on sensory and biochemical characteristics of two carrot cultivars (T-29 and Oranza). MATERIALS AND METHODS Seeds of commercially grown cultivars viz. Oranza (Nantes-type, F1 Hybrid) and T-29 (Open Pollinated) were obtained from Agricopak (Pvt.) Limited opposite Sheikhupura Morre, Gujranwala, and Ayub Agriculture Research Station, Pakistan. Direct seeding was done on ridges at The Experimental Vegetable Area, Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. There were 14 treatments and each treatment was replicated thrice. From each field, three samples from every replicate were collected from each replicate. Carrots were harvested, washed and packed in plastic bins and finally transported to Vegetable Seed Laboratory, Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, in an air-conditioned van (20±2°C; 50-60% RH). Averages of temperature (°C) and rainfall (mm) shown in Tables 1, respectively. Sensory and biochemical quality characteristics of carrots were determined as discussed below: Organoleptic Evaluation Sensory profiling analysis was performed according to the international standards (ASTM STP 913 1986) in Vegetable Seed laboratory, Institute of Horticultural sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. At horticultural maturity all the treatments were evaluated for organoleptic acceptability by using the 9 point hedonic scale (1 being ‘dislike extremely’ and 9 being ‘like extremely’) described by Peryam and Pilgrim (1957). Ten judges, who were already trained foe sensory analysis, were called in the panel for organoleptic evaluation of treatments because they had better ability to recognize aromas, basic flavors and differences in relation to acid, sweet and astringent tastes (ISO 8586-1 1993). Samples received scores from 1 to 9 according to the hedonic scale. Biochemical analysis Biochemical analyses were performed in laboratory to estimate pH, TSS, titratable acidity, ascorbic acid and sugars (total sugars, reducing and non-reducing sugars). Juice was extracted from each sample to estimate biochemical quality. Digital pH meter and refractometer (RX 5000, Atago, Japan) were used for the determination of pH and total soluble solids (TSS), respectively. Ascorbic acid, titratable acidity and sugar were determined by using methods described by Ruck (1969), Hortwitz (1960) and Lane-Eynon method (1923), respectively. 893

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Statistical analysis The data regarding various biochemical and organoleptic attributes was subjected to statistical analysis at 5% level of significance using Statistica® Software under Randomized Complete Design (RCD). The treatment means were compared by Least Significant Difference value (Steel et al., 1997). RESULTS Sensory attributes Significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences were observed for taste in both carrot cultivars and its values were higher in ‘T-29’ than ‘Oranza’ (Table 2). The effect of different fertilizer treatments on taste also was found significant and T4 exhibited higher (7.33) values followed by T 1, T13, T12, T11 and T3 while it was lowest in T0 (Table 3). The interaction between cultivar × treatments for taste was found non-significant. Data depicted significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences for flavour in both carrot cultivars and it was higher (6.56) in ‘T-29’ than ‘Oranza (Table 2). All fertilizer treatments differed significantly (P ≤ 0.05) for this trait and it was higher in T4 which was statistically alike with T2, T11, T13 and T12. However, the lowest value for flavour was observed in T0 (Table 3).

The interaction between cultivar × treatments was observed non-significant.

Both carrot cultivars behaved statistically alike for texture ‘(Table 2).

Statistically similar results were recorded

by different fertilizer treatments but they were significantly (P ≤ 0.05) higher than T0 (Table 3). The interaction between cultivar × treatments was non-significant. Similar trends like texture were observed for internal colour of both carrot cultivars (Table 2). Among different fertilizer treatments, T4 showed significantly higher internal colour value but was statistically at par with T 10, T12, T10, T9, T13, T7, T8, T1, T6 and T5. However, internal colour value was lowest in T 0 (Table 3). The interaction between cultivar × treatments was non-significant. Data pertaining to aroma exhibited significant (P ≤ 0.05) supremacy of T-29 (6.09) in ‘T-29’ over ‘Oranza’ (Table 2). Similarly, significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences were observed among different fertilizer treatments and aroma was higher (6.83) in T4 followed by T13, T11, T5, T2 and T1 while it was minimum in T0 (Table 3). The interaction between cultivar × treatments was observed non-significant. Biochemical attributes Results pertaining to TSS showed significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences for both carrot cultivars and it was higher (8.90 Brix) in ‘T-29’ than ‘Oranza’ (Table 4). Significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences were observed among various fertilizer treatments. Mean TSS was found maximum in T 4 which was statistically at par with T 8, T2, T5, T7, and T12, T2 followed by T13, T10, T11 and T1 while minimum TSS was observed in T0 (Table 5). The interaction between cultivars × treatments was found significant and both cultivars responded best in T 4 (Figure 1A). Significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences were observed for pH in both carrot cultivars and it was higher (7.06) in ‘Oranza’ than ‘T-29’ (Table 4). All the fertilizer treatments demonstrated significant differences and it was highest (7.20) mean pH was observed in T 7 which was statistically at par with T 3, T0 followed by T2 whereas minimum value observed in T13 which was statistically alike with T12, T11, T10, T9, T8, T6 and T5 (Table 5). The interaction between cultivar × treatments was observed significant (Figure 1B). Titratable acidity exhibited significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences between both carrot cultivars and it was higher in ‘Oranza’ than ‘T-29’ (Table 4). Fertilizer treatments differed significantly and T 7 had higher amount of titratable acidity which was statically at par with T 6, T12, T11, T10, T8, T5, T2 and T3 followed by T4 whereas minimum value was observed in T0 (0.19) (Table 5). The interaction between cultivar × treatments was observed 894

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey non-significant (Figure 1C). Vitamin C indicated significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences for both carrot cultivars and it was higher in ‘T-29’ as compared to ‘Oranza’ (Table 4). All the fertilizer treatments differed significantly for this trait and the highest mean value of vitamin C was observed in T 4 which was statistically at par with T12 followed by T7 and T8 while minimum value was observed in T0 (Table 5). The interaction between cultivar × treatments was found non-significant. Data pertaining to reducing sugars, non-reducing sugars and total sugars illustrated significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences for both carrot cultivars and it was found higher (1.85, 1.69 and 3.39%, respectively) in ‘T-29’ as compared ‘Oranza’ (Table 4). All the fertilizer treatments differed significantly (P ≤ 0.05) and T 4 gave the highest mean amount of reducing sugars (followed by T 13 which was statistically at par with T12, T8, T5, T11, T10, and T9), non-reducing sugars (trail by T 1, T12, and T2) and total sugars (followed by T 10, T6, and T7) as compared to all other fertilizer treatments. Minimum reducing sugars, non-reducing sugars and total sugars (1.15, 1.13 and 2.28%, respectively) were observed in T 0 (Table 5). Interaction between cultivar × treatments for reducing sugars was found non-significant while interactive effect of cultivar × treatments for non-reducing sugars and total sugars was observed significant (Figure 2). DISCUSSION Overall results revealed that ‘T-29’ was judged best as compared to ‘Oranza in nearly all sensory attributes. These results are in consistent with the conclusions of Haglund et al. (1999), Simon et al. (1982) and Seljasen et al. (2001) that carrot cultivar affected the sensory attributes and cultivar largely influenced the variation in carrot sensory attributes Carrot taste reacts to nitrogen and light as a differentiation parameter. Selecting carrot cultivars with desirable colour, taste and aroma characteristics is a valuable instrument for good quality product (Tesi, 2008). Non-volatile chemical constituents such as sugars and amino acids are primarily responsible for the taste of fresh carrots (Alabran and Mabrouk, 1973). The taste and flavour of carrots can be directly experienced on the tongue and through nose of the consumer. They are known to be dependent on the type of cultivar, and for a certain cultivar, they are influenced by soil conditions, weather and agricultural practices such as fertilization (Northolt et al., 2004). In the present case, both cultivars have different genetic backgrounds and different fertilizer treatments that had affected their taste. The scores for sensory characteristics for the cultivars were distinguished, which indicated that the cultivars varied in respect of sensory quality. Environmental and growing conditions during carrot production are important considerations when assessing processed product quality. Soil type and root maturity at harvest can impact sensory quality, as bitter flavors are more widespread in carrots grown in muck and sandy soils versus loam soils. Moreover, reducing sugars predominate in early root development as sucrose becomes the prevalent sugar near horticultural maturity (Simon, 1985). Texture is a quality attribute that is critical in determining the suitability of fruits and vegetables. Texture is a collective term that encompasses the structural and mechanical properties of a food and their sensory perception in the hand or mouth (Abbott and Harker, 2011). Textural traits of fruits and vegetables are related to the structural, physiological and biochemical characteristics of the living cells; their changes over time; and their alteration by processes such as cooking or freezing (Abbott and Harker, 2011). The relationship of instrumental measurements to specific sensory attributes and their relationship to consumer acceptability must be considered (Shewfelt, 1999).

895

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey The non-significant differences were obtained in root texture and colour of both carrot cultivars that could partly be attributed to balanced application of nitrogen fertilizer as application of nitrogen was homogeneous in the present study. Aroma affects overall acceptance of the product by an indirect effect through sweetness (Tesi, 2008). In the present investigations, aroma values were higher in ‘T-29’ compared with ‘Oranza’ while the sensory evaluation of ‘T-29’ and ‘Oranza’ also indicated that ‘T-29’ was liked the most by the consumers. TSS (Total soluble solids) was higher in ‘T-29’ in the present investigations. TSS measured by a refractometer includes sugars, organic acids, soluble pectins, anthocyanins in addition to other phenolic compounds and ascorbic acid. Therefore, the correlation between soluble solids and sweetness is low in some cases (Kader, 2002). Soluble sugars accounted to 34-70% of the of the carrot root DM (Nilsson, 1987). In the present study, the applied fertilizer types and levels affected TSS in both cultivars which is contradiction with McCollum et al. (2004) who reported less variation in TSS between conventionally grown and organically grown tomato fruits. Total soluble solids measured by a refractometer include sugars, organic acids, soluble pectins, anthocyanins besides other phenolic compounds and ascorbic acid. Thus, the correlation between soluble solids and sweetness is low in some cases (Kader, 1988). Soluble sugars accounted to 34-70% of the of the carrot root DM (Nilsson, 1987). In the present study, the applied fertilizer types and levels affected TSS in both cultivars which is in contradiction with the findings of McCollum et al. (2004) who mentioned less variation in TSS between conventionally grown and organically grown tomato fruits. pH value significantly affects the quality of carrot juice and the shelf life of carrot juice is dependent on pH value. The pH value was higher in ‘Oranza’ as compared to ‘T-29’. These results are in line with the findings of Gajewski et al. (2007) who reported that pH value was significantly related to the cultivar. pH value of both cultivars did not change much higher under the application of different types of fertilizers. The current result revealed that higher concentration of vitamin C was observed in ‘T-29’ compared with ‘Oranza’. In the most investigations, variation in vitamin C was explained by cultivar differences (Alasalvar et al., 2001; Nicolle et al., 2004). One of the possibilities for a high vitamin C content is that ‘T-29’ had

higher

leaf area and consequently higher light intensity could be gained than in ‘Oranza’ which had low leaf area as has been discussed in the previous text. In the present investigations, organic fertilizers tended to enhance vitamin C content in both carrot cultivars. Similar results were reported by Warman and Havard (1997) for carrot and Toor et al. (2006) for tomato. Carrot sweetness in relation to high sensorial quality has been reported to correlate with reducing sugar content (Simon et al., 1980; Howard et al., 1996; Seljäsen, 2001). Nevertheless, chemical composition of carrot root could vary greatly depending on cultivar differences and cultural practices (Warman and Havard, 1997; Alasalvar et al., 2001; Gajewski and Dąbrowska, 2007). Sweetness is determined by the concentrations of the predominant sugars which are ranked relative to sucrose in the following order: fructose > sucrose > glucose (Kader, 2002). Sourness

or acidity is determined

by concentrations

of predominant

organic

acids, which are ranked

relative to citric acid as the most sour acid in the following order: citric > malic > tartaric (Kader, 2002). Titratable acidity was high in ‘Oranza’ as compared to ‘T-29’. In Pakistan, ‘T-29’ (The red ones)

is preferred as

compared to all other cultivars because they assume that it is sweatier as compared to all other cultivars while according to Szymczak et al. (2007) orange-coloured carrots are preferred compared to purple, yellow and white ones. In the present study, consumer’s preference test was done and high sugars contents and low titratable acidity observed in ‘T-29’ carrots (The red ones) supports the consumer’s choice of preferring ‘T-29’ over rest of the cultivars. In the present investigations, titratable acidity differed significantly in both genotypes and the type of fertilizer. 896

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Generally, sugar contents in carrots vary with the variation in genotype. In this study, ‘T-29’ had higher sugar contents compared with ‘Oranza’. The physiological maturity of carrots can be explained by the content of sugars and sucrose to hexose ratio (Suojala, 2000). Therefore, the highest total sugars in ‘T-29’ could be due to its genetic background rather than its physiological maturity. Within not show much higher variation different

fertilizer

in

sugars content although

each

some

fertilizer

differences

type,

were

the levels

observed

did

among

types. Hochmuth et al. (1999) found that sugar concentration and carrot yield were

increased with increased N rate and it was cultivar dependent. On the other hand, Hailu et al. (2008) demonstrated that application of N more than 126 kg ha-1 reduced sugar concentration than lower N levels did. In the present study, the applied mineral fertilizers as well as organic fertilizers at any levels were advantageous to enhance carrot quality regarding reducing sugar content. In addition, the results evidently demonstrated that supplying carrot plants with combination of half FYM and half PM may enhance the accumulation of total sugars in the roots. CONCLUSIONS Sensory evaluation illustrated that scale rating with respect to taste, flavor and aroma of carrot variety ‘T-29’ was observed acceptable in T4 treatment whereas carrot texture and color does not appeal to the panel. The quality aspect of carrot root in term of biochemical analysis manifested that excellent sweetness character of ‘T-29’ recorded better production and bio-accumulation of total as well as reducing and non-reducing sugars in T4. Similarly, ‘T-29’ showed maximum biosynthesis of vitamin C in T 4 however the acidity and less sweet taste due to higher pH, more titratable acidity synthesized was observed in ‘Oranza’ when T 7 was applied for production pursuits. REFERENCES Abbott, J.A. 1999. Quality measurement of fruits and vegetables. Postharvest Biology and Technology. 15:207-225. Abbott, J.A. and F.R. Harker. 2011. Texture. Mt. Albert Research Centre, Auckland, New Zealand. [online] Available at: www.ba.ars.usda.gov/hbbb (Accessed on 07-06-2011). Alabran, D.M. and A.F. Mabrouk. 1973. Carrot flavour, sugars and free nitrogenous compounds in fresh carrots. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry. 21:205-208. Alasalvar, C., Grigor, J.M., Zhang, D., Quantick, P.C. and F. Shahidi. 2001. Comparison of volatiles, phenolics, sugars, antioxidant vitamins, and sensory quality of different colored carrot varieties. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry. 49:1410-1416. Bast, A., Haenen, G.R., Van den Berg, R. and B. Van den Berg. 1998. Antioxidants effect on carotenoids. International Journal for Vitamin and Nutrition Research. 68:399-403. Beom, J., Yong, S. and H. Myung. 1998. Antioxidant activity of vegetables and blends in iron catalyzed model system. Journal of Food Science and Nutrition. 3:309-314. Bramley, P.

2000. Is lycopene is beneficial to human health. Phytochemistry. 51:233-236.

D’Odorico, A., Martines, D., Kiechl, D., Egger, G., Oberhollenzer, B., Bonvicini, P., Sturniolo, G.C., Naccarato, R. and J. Willeit. 2000. High plasma levels of alpha- and beta-carotene are associated with a lower risk of artherosclerosis results from the bruneek study. Artherosclerosis. 153:231-239.

897

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Gajewski, M. and A. Dbrowska. 2007. Quality characteristics of carrot cultivars depending to long-term storage, P. 95-103. In: P. Nowaczyk (Eds.). Spontaneous and Induced Variation for the Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Products. Press Univ. of Technol. and Life Sci., Bydgoszcz. Haglund, A., Johansson, L., Berglund, L. and L. Dahlstedt. 1999. Sensory evaluation of carrots from ecological and conventional growing systems. Food Quality and Preference. 10:23-29. Hailu, S., Seyoum, T. and N. Dechassa. 2008. Effect of combined application of organic P and inorganic N fertilizers on post harvest quality of carrot. African Journal of Biotechnology. 7(13):2187-2196. Hochmuth, G.J., Brecht, J.K. and M.J. Bassett. 1999. Nitrogen fertilization to maximize carrot yield and quality on a sandy soil. Hort Science. 34(4):641-645. Horwitz, C.O. 1960. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chenusts, 9. ed. Board, Whashington, P. 1015. Howard, L.A., Wong, A.D., Perry, A.K. and B.P. Klein. 1999. β-Carotene and ascorbic acid retention in fresh and processed vegetables. Journal of Food Science. 64:929-936. Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Selenium, and Carotenoids. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. P. 325-382. ISO, 8586-1. 1993. Assessors for Sensory Anlaysis. Part 1: Guide to the selection, training and monitoring of Assessors. Kader, A.A. 2002. Pre- and postharvest factors affecting fresh produce quality, nutritional value, and implications for human health. Proceedings of the International Congress Food Production and the Quality of Life, Sassari, Italy, September 4-8, 2000. 1: 109-119. Lane, J.H. and L. Eynon. 1923. Volumetric determination of reducing sugars by means of Fehling's solution, with methylene blue as internal indicator. IS1 XXV : 143-149. Mahan, K.L. and S. Escott-Stump. 1996. Krause’s Food, Nutrition, and Diet Therapy, 9th Ed., WB Saunders, Philadelphia, PA. McCollum, T.G., Chellemi, D.O., Rosskopf, E.N., Church, G.T. and A. Plotto. 2004. Postharvest quality of tomatoes produced in organic and conventional production systems. Hort Science. 40(4):959-967. Nicolle, C., Simon, G., Rock, E., Amouroux, P. and C. Remesy. 2004. Genetic variability influences carotenoid, vitamin, phenolic, and mineral content in white, yellow, purple, orange, and dark-orange carrot cultivars. Journal of American Society of Horticultural Sciences. 129:523-529. Nilsson, T. 1987. Growth and chemical composition of carrots as influenced by the time of harvest. Journal of Agricultural Science. 108:459-468. Northolt, M., Burgt, G.J., Buisman, T. and A.V. Bogaerde. 2004. Parameters for carrot quality and the development of the inner quality concept. Organic food, quality and health publication number FAH 04. Louis Bolk institute. The Netherlands. Peryam, D. and F.J. Pilgrim. 1957. Hedonic scale method of measuring food preference. Food Technology. 11(9):9-14. Ruck, J.A. 1969. Chemical methods for analysis of fruits and vegetable products, Canada Department of Agriculture, Summerland.

898

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Seljasen, R., Bengtsson, G.B., Hoftun, H. and G. Vogt. 2001. Sensory and chemical changes in five varieties of carrot (Daucus carota L.) in response to mechanical stress at harvest and post-harvest. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 81:436-447. Seo, A. and M. Yu. 2003. Toxigenic fungi and mycotoxins. In: Andrea Z, editor. Handbook of industrial mycology. London: Academic;

P. 233–246.

Shewfelt, R.L. 1999. What is quality? Postharvest Biology and Technology. 15:197-200. Simon, P.W. 1985. Carrot flavor: effects of genotype, growing conditions, storage and processing. In: Evaluation of quality of fruits and vegetables. Eds. Eskin, E. Westport, CT: AVI Publishing Co. P. 315-328. Simon, P.W., Peterson, C.E. and Lindsay, R.C. 1980. Correlations between sensory and objective parameters of carrot flavor. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 28(3): 559-562. Simon, P.W., Petersonand, C.E. and R.C. Lindsay. 1982. Genotype, soil, and climate effects on sensory and objective components of carrot flavor. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Sciences. 107(4):644-648. Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H. and D.A. Dickey. 1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. 3rd ed. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York, USA. Sun, M.S., Mihyang, K. and J.B. Song. 2001. Cytotoxicity and quinine reductase induced effects of Daucus carrot leaf extracts on human cells. Korean Food Science. 30:86-91. Suojala, T. 2000. Variation in sugar content and composition of carrot storage roots at harvest and during storage. Scientia Horticulturae. 85(1-2):1-19. Szymczaka, P., Gajewski, M., Radzanowska, J. and A. Dabrowska. 2007. Sensory quality and consumer liking of carrot cultivars of different genotype. Vegetable Crops Research Bullettin. 67:163-176. Tesi, T. 2008. Characterisation and evaluation of carrot germplasm. Dottorato Di Ricerca. Settori scientifico disciplinari di afferenza: AGR02 / AGR04. Toor, P.K., Savagea, G.P. and A. Heeb. 2006. Influence of different types of fertilisers on the major antioxidant components of tomatoes. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis. 19:20-27. Varming, C., Jensen, K., Moller, S., Brockhoff, P.B., Christiansen, T., Edenlenbos, M., Bjorn, G. K. and L. Poll. 2004. Eating quality of raw carrots correlation between flavor compounds, sensory profiling analysis and consumer liking test. Food Quality Preferences. 15(6): 531-540. Warman, P.R. and K.A. Havard. 1997. Yield, vitamin and mineral contents of organically and conventionally grown carrots and cabbage. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment. 61: 155-162.

899

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey

Figure 4.2.4.1: Interactive effect between cultivars × treatment for (A) TSS (B) pH and (C) nonreducing sugars. Vertical bars indicate standard error.

900

n= 3 replicates.

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey

Figure 4: Interactive effect between cultivars × treatment for total sugars. Vertical bars indicate standard error. n= 3 replicates.

901

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Table 1. Long-term averages of temperatures ( oC) and precipitation (mm) in the areas of study Dist.

Avg. Temp.(oC)

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Annual

FSD

Max.

19.4

22.4

27.4

34.2

39.7

41.0

37.7

36.5

36.6

33.9

28.2

22.1

31.6

Min.

4.8

7.6

12.6

18.3

24.1

27.6

27.9

27.2

24.5

17.7

10.4

6.1

17.4

Precipitation(mm)

6

30

33

33

9

24

84

81

27

3

6

15

315

FSD

Table 2. Mean value for sensory attributes of carrot cultivars ‘T-29’ and ‘Oranza’ Cultivars

Taste

Flavour

Texture

Colour

Aroma

T-29

6. 95

a

6.56

a

6.04

a

6.14

a

6.09

a

Oranza

5.79

b

5.76

b

5.52

a

6.00

a

5.21

b

LSD

0.6869

0.5944

Means having different letters differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05.

0.6594 n = 3 replicates.

902

0.6706

0.5397

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Table 3. Effect of different fertilizer treatments on sensory attributes of carrot cultivars ‘T-29’ and ‘Oranza’ Cultivars To

Taste

Flavour

3.17

d

Texture

Colour

Aroma

4.33

b

3.83

b

3.33

c

4.33

c

T1

7.00

ab

5.83

ab

6.17

a

6.00

ab

5.83

ab

T2

6.50

abc

6.50

a

6.00

a

5.50

b

6.00

ab

T3

5.67

abc

5.67

ab

6.00

a

5.50

b

5.17

bc

a

6.67

a

6.50

a

7.33

a

6.83

a

T4

7.33

T5

5.17

c

5.50

ab

5.50

ab

5.67

ab

6.33

ab

T6

5.83

abc

6.17

a

6.50

a

5.83

ab

5.33

bc

T7

6.33

abc

5.17

ab

5.83

a

6.50

ab

5.50

abc

T8

6.50

abc

6.33

a

5.83

a

6.00

ab

5.33

bc

T9

5.50

bc

5.83

ab

5.17

ab

5.50

b

5.17

bc

T10

5.17

c

5.67

ab

6.50

a

7.00

ab

5.83

ab

T11

6.17

abc

6.33

a

6.00

a

7.00

ab

6.00

ab

T12

6.33

abc

6.00

a

6.00

a

7.17

ab

5.50

abc

T13

7.17

ab

6.33

a

5.17

ab

6.67

ab

6.00

ab

LSD value

1.8174

1.5727

Means having different letters differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05.

1.7446 n = 3 replicates.

903

1.7741

1.4278

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Table 4. Mean value for biochemical attributes of carrot cultivars ‘T-29’ and ‘Oranza’ Cultivars

TSS (Brix)

pH

Titratable Acidity

Vitamin C (mg100-1)

(%)

Reducing Sugar

Non-Reducing

(%)

Sugar (%)

Total Sugar (%)

T-29

8.90 a

6.96 b

0.25 b

19.44 a

1.85 a

1.69 a

3.39 a

Oranza

8.10 b

7.06 a

0.35 a

9.76 b

1.54 b

1.59 b

3.23 b

LSD

0.1335

0.0524

0.036

2.2239

0.2866

0.0684

0.0499

Means having different letters differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05.

n = 3 replicates.

904

2nd International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment (2nd ICSAE) September 30 – October 3, 2015, Konya, Turkey Table 5. Effect of different fertilizer treatments on biochemical attributes of carrot cultivars ‘T-29’ and ‘Oranza’ Cultivars To T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 LSD value

TSS (Brix)

pH

Titratable Acidity (%)

Vitamin C (mg100-1)

Reducing

Sugar

Non-Reducing

(%)

Sugar (%)

Total Sugar (%)

7.87 e

7.15 ab

0.19 d

6.88 g

1.15 c

1.13 f

2.28 j

8.20 abcd

7.00 c

0.25 cd

9.65 fg

1.47 bc

1.85 ab

3.42 cdef

8.53 abc

7.05 bc

0.28 abcd

10.14 fg

1.41 bc

1.74 abcd

3.21 hi

8.60 abcd

7.17 ab

0.27 abcd

11.68 defg

1.67 bc

1.62 de

3.20 hi

8.87 a

7.03 bc

0.31 bc

24.09 a

2.50 a

1.89 a

3.71 a

8.62abc

6.93 c

0.30 abc

13.45 def

1.53 bc

1.67 cde

3.28 ghi

8.35 cd

7.00 c

0.36 ab

14.13 def

1.76 abc

1.68 bcde

3.54 bc

8.70 abc

7.20 a

0.37 a

20.29 abc

1.72 bc

1.70 bcd

3.49 bc

8.72 ab

6.95 c

0.32 abc

16.78 abc

1.56 bc

1.50 e

3.33 efgh

8.60 abc

6.95 c

0.28 abcd

14.98 cdef

1.49 bc

1.88 a

3.43 cde

8.45 bcd

6.93 c

0.32 abc

17.28 bcd

1.49 bc

1.68 bcde

3.58 b

8.43 bcd

6.93 c

0.32 abc

10.99 efg

1.56 bc

1.59 de

3.29 fghi

8.62 abc

6.95 c

0.33 abc

22.71 ab

1.65 bc

1.84 abc

3.39 defg

8.50 bcd

6.92 c

0.28 abcd

11.35 efg

2.09 ab

1.22 f

3.19 i

0.3532

0.1388

0.0963

5.8838

0.7582

0.1809

0.1319

Means having different letters differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05.

n = 3 replicates.

905