BIBLIOGRAPHY SUMAKBAY, ADORACION C. ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
SUMAKBAY, ADORACION C. APRIL 2009. Postharvest Characteristics of
Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by Stage of Harvest and
Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Araceli G. Ladilad, PhD.
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to determine the postharvest characteristics of
lisianthus cutflowers harvested at different stages of flower development, and to
determine the best holding solution and best stage of harvest that will prolong the
postharvest life of cut lisianthus flowers.
Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at different stage of flower development were
held in various concentration of calamansi juice ml/l water and 250 ppm citric acid
solution used as the control.
Results showed that a holding solution with 10 ml calamansi juice/l water was the
best holding solution to prolong the vaselife of lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50%
anthesis.
For cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis, vaselife can be lengthened with the use
of 15 ml calamansi juice/liter water and can be further opened to 50% using 10 ml
calamansi juice per liter water.
To prolong the vaselife of lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis, place
them in a solution with 5 ml calamansi juice per liter water.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography……………………………………………………………
i
Abstract ………………………………………………………………..
i
Table of Contents ………………………………………………………
ii
INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE …………………………………………..
3
The Plant ………………………….………………………………
3
Harvesting and Postharvest Handling ……………………………..
3
Floral or Energy Source ……………………………………………
4
Biocides ……..……………………………………………………..
4
Vaselife ……………………………………………………………
5
Water pH………………………………………………………….
6
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials …………………………………………………………..
7
Methods …………………………………………………………..
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vaselife ……………………………………………………………
17
Final Volume of Solution Taken Up (ml.)………………………..
18
Maximum Flower Diameter Attained (cm) ………………………
20
Flower Quality Rating ……………………………………………
21
Leaf Quality Rating ………………………………………………
23
ii
Stem Quality Rating . ……………………………………………
24
Initial and Final pH of the Holding Solution …………………….
26
Daily Temperature of the Holding Room (oC)…………………...
28
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary …………………………………………………………
29
Conclusion ……………………………………………………….
29
Recommendation ………………………………………………...
30
LITERATURE CITED …………………………………………………..
31
APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………
32
iii
INTRODUCTION
Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) is a North American wild flower. It is a
native to the prairies of Nebraska, Colorado and Texas. They are also known as Prairie
Gentian or Texas Blue Bell, the latter name a reference to the blue flowers of the wild
species. Cultivars in production today offer a wide range of colors, including purple,
rose, pink, white and various colors (Fox, 1998).
Lisianthus has the qualities of an “ideal cutflower” (attractive flowers) and should
continue to increase in popularity throughout the next century (Gill, undated). According
to Hermano (2006), the vase life range from two to three weeks from harvesting of the
cutflowers.
Plant breeders have done a wonderful job of developing outstanding flower colors
and introducing single and double flowering forms, adding to the beauty of this flower.
The flower is elegant in form and easily mistaken for rose. Hybrids developed in Japan
provide a wide range of colors, color patterns, and both single and double forms.
Lisianthus become very popular as a cut flower, because of the range of colors available,
and the fact that each inflorescence comprises a long, straight stem bearing as many as
ten individual flowers.
Although there have been many studies of the environmental conditions required
for lisianthus production, there has been little examination of the post harvest
characteristics of the flowers. Lisianthus is usually harvested commercially when the
first one or two flowers on the stem have opened. A good quality inflorescence will
usually have ten or more buds and flowers. If the flowers are placed in water, few if any
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
2
of these buds open, and the longevity of the inflorescence is therefore determined by the
life of the open flowers.
Since the primary objective of every farmer and trader is to have higher income,
the quality of the cutflowers harvested must then be preserved from harvesting to
consumption in order to get higher prices and thus, increase the farmer’s income. It is
also necessary to prolong the quality of the harvested cutflower as long as possible.
The study was conducted to determine the postharvest characteristics of lisianthus
cutflowers harvested at different stages of flower development; and to determine the best
holding solution and best stage of harvest that will prolong the postharvest life of cut
lisianthus flowers.
This study was conducted at the Ornamental Horticulture Service Laboratory,
College of Agriculture, Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet from October
2008 to November 2008.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Plant
Eustoma grandiflorum is a perennial plant that is treated in most areas as annual.
The seed is relatively small (19,000 seeds/gm) or (545,000 seeds/oz) and is hard to
handle in field plantings. Because of its small size, seedlings are generally started in plug
trays and transplanted into the field. A plug size of 288 or 392 mm has been successful
for commercial procedures. Plants are moved to the field when they have developed 2 to
3 sets of the true leaves (approximately 3 months from seedling time). Although for
some varieties, terminal cuttings are used plants from seeds are more common (Gill).
Harvesting and Postharvest Handling
Lisianthus cutflowers are harvested when one flower is open. Harvesting is done
in the morning; when the flowers and plant tissues are cool (Pan American Seed,
undated). Hermano (2006) stated that on non-pinch plants, stems are cut above the third
node from the ground. Similarly, the stems are cut above the third node of the lateral
shoots on pinched plants. This site of cut allows the plants to produce laterals shoots for
the second flush of laterals for flower production. Upon cutting, the cut flowers are
soaked in clean water or in warm pulse solution (40oC). Flowers are sorted and graded
according to stem length.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
4
Floral Preservatives
Chemicals used to prolong the postharvest life of cutflowers and aesthetic value
for a longer period are called floral preservatives (Reid, 2000). According to Agricarta
(1999), there are three basic components of floral preservatives; agent for acidifying the
solution, food source (Sucrose) and biocides.
Food or Energy Source
Sucrose (sugar) is the best food source for the flowers to be held in the solution.
The sugar concentration however depends on what the purpose of the solution is. If
flowers are wilted and stems are in a dehydration solution, sugar should not be used.
Pulse solution and bud opening solutions must contain the correct concentration for the
flower being treated. Typically, all purpose preservative solutions contain 1.5-2% sugar.
This will vary with flower types (Agricarta, 1999). In addition, sucrose had been shown
to increase the fresh weight and longevity of cut flowers. Sucrose also reduces moisture
stress in cut flowers by decreasing the size of leaf stomata. Flowers held in sucrose were
comparable to field open flowers.
Biocides
Few “biocides” available actually kill all the microorganisms present in water.
The material 8-HQ6 (hydroxyl quirnoline citrate) which is used to adjust water pH is
fortunately the most commonly used biocide. It prevents rapid growth of bacteria, but
does not kill them.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
5
Vaselife
As reported by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 2000), the
vaselife of the different cutflowers can be prolonged as long as proper methods and care
are applied. Below are some ways that could prolong the vaselife of cut flower produce.
a. Cutting the stem everyday to eliminate decayed parts of the stem.
b. Placing the flower in cool and treated holding solution.
c. Avoiding the use of metal containers because it can cause unfavorable
reaction with the holding solution.
d. Keep the flowers away from ripening fruits and vegetables.
e. Cutting the stem in a 45o angle instead of crushing or splitting it.
f. Placing the flowers in a favorable atmosphere – away from direct sunlight and
warm temperatures.
g. Replace the water used everyday. Also, it is recommended that the container
must be cleaned everyday.
h. Placing the flower away from the circulation of conditioned air, especially for
wide-leafed flowers. Although lower temperatures favor the longevity of flowers, those
placed in air-conditioned rooms tend to dry and wilt faster than that placed in a room with
normal air circulation.
i. Draughty positions are also unfavorable spots to locate the flowers. The
petals tend to dry out and respire more quickly in these areas.
j. For flowers grown in tropical areas, subjecting them to temperatures lower
than 4oc can be very detrimental.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
6
k. For arranged flowers on vases, remove the flowers that have signs of
deterioration because these emit ethylene.
Water pH
Acidity alteration is the most important of the three considerations of components
of a floral preservative since alkaline or high pH water/solution is damaging to cut
flowers. Reduced water potential of the holding solution usually influences and decrease
pH of water and sugar uptake. A low pH inhibits indigenous enzymes essential for stem
plugging (Reid, 2000) and tends to minimize physiological stem blockage.
Various chemicals are used to increase the acidity of a solution. The most
available chemical is vinegar. However, vinegar whitened the stem included in the
holding solution.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
The materials used in the study are the following:
a. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at different stage of flower development at
25%, 50%, 75%
b. graduated cylinder (200 ml)
c. beaker
d. pH meter
e. thermometer
f. foot ruler
g. catsup bottles
h. labeling materials
i. holding solutions (sucrose and citric acid using calamansi juice).
j. camera (for documentation)
k. pruning shear/cutter
Methods
The Lisianthus cutflowers were harvested at three different stages of flower
development at: 25%, 50% and 75%. Before the treatments, the stems were recut in
slanting manner; all cutflowers have 45 cm stem length and pulsed-feed with 10%
sucrose for twenty four (24) hours. Calamansi juice of various concentrations was used
as treatments. Distilled water + 250 ppm citric acid was used in S0 as control. The study
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
8
was laid-out in completely Randomized Design (CRD) with the stage of harvest as factor
A and holding solution as Factor B. Each flower represents a treatment replication and it
was held in 200 ml holding solution in catsup bottles. Each treatment was replicated
three times.
The different treatments are as follows:
First treatment
Factor A – stage of flower development at harvest (%)
T1 – 25 – close/tight bud with color
T2 – 50 – half-opened
T3 – 75 – more than half opened
Factor B – Sugar concentration for pulse – feeding (%/liter)
S0 – 0 (control; distilled H20 only)
S1 – 5
S2 – 10
S3 – 15
S4 – 20
Data to be Gathered
1. Vase life. The vase life of the cutflowers was measured from the day of
immersion of stem ends in holding solutions to the termination of the aesthetic value of
the flower. Vase life was terminated when the outer most petals have lost their turgidity
and have started to discolor.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
9
2. Final volume of the solution. This was obtained by measuring the volume of
the solution per treatment at the termination of the postharvest life of the cutflowers or
samples.
3. Maximum flower diameter attained (cm). This was measured when the flower
attained its maximum flower diameter.
4. Visual quality rating
a. Flower quality rating – each flower was observed daily using the following
index.
Rating
Description
1
No damage, field fresh
2
10-20% petals with damage
3
30-40% petals with damage
4
50-70% petals with damage
5
80-100% petals with damage
b. Leaf quality – the same with flower quality was observed everyday using the
following index:
Rating
Description
1
All green
2
25% discoloration/yellowing
3
50% discoloration/yellowing
4
75% discoloration/yellowing
5
100% discoloration/yellowing
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
10
c. Stem quality rating. The stem of each flower was rated using the following
index
Description
Rating Index
Deep green, no injury
1
Deep green and rotting at the base (<2.54 cm)
2
Deep green and rotting at base the (>2.54 cm)
3
Green and rotting at the base (<5.08 cm)
4
Green and rotting at the base (>5.08 cm)
5
Yellow green and rotting at the base (<7.62 cm)
6
Yellow green and rotting at the base (>7.62 cm)
7
5. Initial and final pH of holding solution. The pH of holding solution was
measured at holding and at the termination of the post harvest life of the cutflower
samples using a pH meter.
6. Daily temperature of the holding room (oC). These was obtained twice a day
(10 AM and 2 PM) using a thermometer.
7. Documentation of the study in pictures.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
11
Figure 1. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis held in different holding
solutions
Figure 2. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis held in different holding
solutions
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
12
Figure 3. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis held in different holding
solutions
Figure 4a. Top view of lisianthus cutflowers at 3rd day of observation.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
13
Figure 4b. Top view of lisianthus cutflowers held in different holding solutions during
the 3rd day of observations
Figure 4c. Top view of lisianthus cutflowers held in different solutions during the
3rd day of observation
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
14
Figure 5. Overview of the cutflowers used in the experiment
Figure 6. Cutflowers harvested at (a) 25% (b) 50% and (c) 75% anthesis at day
1 of observation
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
15
Figure 7a. Maximum flower diameter attained by Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at
25% anthesis
Plate 7b. Maximum flower diameter attained by lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50%
anthesis
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
16
Figure 7c. Maximum flower diameter attained by lisianthus cutflowers harvested
at 75% anthesis
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vaselife
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 1 shows that lisianthus
cutflowers harvested at 50% flower opening stage had the longest aesthetic life of 13.47
days to the first sign of senescence from holding followed by 25% flower opening stage
with a mean of 13.20 days while 75% flower opening stage has the shortest vaselife with
a mean of 11.47 days. Statistically, there were no significant differences obtained on the
vaselife of lisianthus as affected by the different stages of flower maturity at harvest.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. Statistical analysis showed no
significant differences on the effects of the different holding solutions on the vaselife of
lisianthus cutflowers. Cutflowers held in solutions with 10 ml calamansi juice/l of water
had the longest vaselife of 13.33 days followed held in solution 5 ml calamansi/a of water
and in holding solution of 20 ml calamansi juice/l of water with a mean of 12.89 days and
12.56 days respectively. Shortest vaselife was recorded in cutflowers held in holding
solution 15 ml calamansi juice/1 of water with a mean of 12.33 days.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects between the stage
of flower development and effect of holding solution in the vaselife of lisianthus
cutflowers.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
18
Table 1. Vaselife
TREATMENT
MEAN (days)
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
13.20a
50
13.47ab
75
11.47b
Concentration of Calamansi juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control
12.44a
5
12.89a
10
13.33a
15
12.33a
20
12.56a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Volume of Solution Taken Up
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 2 shows that the stage of
flower development at harvest had no significant effects on the volume of solution taken
up measured after the termination of observations. However, cutflowers harvested at
50% anthesis had higher rate of solution uptake compared to flowers harvested at 25%
and 75% anthesis.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. Statistical analysis showed that there
were no significant differences in the volume of holding solution taken up by the
cutflowers as affected by the different holding solutions. Lisianthus cutflowers held in
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
19
solutions with 15 ml calamansi juice/l of water had higher rate of absorption taking up
64.44 ml at the termination of observations.
Interaction effect. Likewise there were no significant effects obtained between
the different varieties of Lisianthus cutflowers and the different concentrations of
calamansi juice in the holding solution with regards to the volume of solution taken up.
Table 2. Final volume of the solution taken up (ml)
TREATMENT
MEAN
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
41.33a
50
57.33a
75
48.33a
Concentration of Calamansi juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control
38.39a
5
44.44a
10
52.22a
15
64.44a
20
44.44a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
20
Maximum Flower Diameter Attained (cm)
Effect of stage of flower development of harvest. Table 3 shows the observed
maximum cutflower diameter attained. Cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis displayed a
maximum flower diameter of 9.29 cm and were significantly bigger compared to the
cutflowers harvested at 25% and 50% anthesis. The smallest blooms were measured
from cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis with a mean of 6.99 cm.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. Differences obtained on the effect of
holding solution did not significantly affect the maximum flower diameter attained.
However, Lisianthus cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi/l of water had smaller blooms
attaining a diameter of 7.36 cm only. The results imply that the concentration of
calamansi juice in the holding solution did not affect further flower opening in lisianthus
cutflowers harvested at different stage of development.
Interaction effect. Statistical analysis showed that there were no significant
effects between the three stages of flower development and the different holding
solutions with regards to the maximum flower diameter attained. However, cutflowers
harvested at 75% anthesis which were held in 250 ppm citric acid solution attained the
biggest blooms with maximum flower diameter of 10.03 cm, while cutflowers harvested
at 25% anthesis and held in 250 ppm citric acid solution had the smallest blooms with
maximum flower diameter of only 5.83 cm.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
21
Table 3. Maximum flower diameter attained (cm)
TREATMENT
MEAN
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
6.99c
50
7.81b
75
4.29a
Concentration of Calamansi juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control
7.90ab
5
7.36b
10
8.04ab
15
8.59a
20
8.26ab
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Flower Quality
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 4 shows the observed
flower quality rating of lisianthus cutflower from day 1 to day 14. Statistical analysis
showed that there were significant differences obtained on the effect of stage of flower
development at harvest on the flower quality rating of lisianthus cutflowers from day 4
today 10. The lowest flower quality ratings observed at 1.80, 2.46 and 3.80 were from
day 4, 7 and day 10 respectively, which means that lisanthus cutflowers had 30-40%
petals with damage; while on day 13 to day 14 there were no significant differences
noted.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
22
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. There were no significant differences
observed from day 1 to day 14 with regards to the effect of the different holding solutions
on flower quality rating.
Interaction effect. Likewise, there were no significant interaction effects obtained
between the different stage of flower development of lisianthus cutflowers at harvest and
different holding solutions with regards to flower quality rating from day 1 to day 14 of
observations.
Table 4. Flower quality
NUMBER OF DAYS
TREATMENT
1
4
7
10
13
14
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
M E A N
25
1.00a
1.07b
1.27b
2.47b
4.20a
5.00a
50
1.13a 1.33ab 1.60b
2.47b
4.13a
4.80a
75
1.13a
1.80a
2.47a
3.80a
4.47a
5.00a
Concentration of Calamansi
Juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
1.11a
1.78a
1.89a
2.67a
4.33a
5.00a
5
1.00a
1.22a
1.56a
2.78a
4.22a
4.89a
10
1.11a
1.33a
1.89a
2.67a
4.11a
4.89a
15
1.11a
1.33a
1.78a
3.33a
4.33a
4.89a
20
1.11a
1.33a
1.78a
3.11a
4.33a
5.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
23
Leaf Quality
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 5 shows that on day 7 and
day 9 no significant differences obtained on the leaf quality rating as affected by the
different stages of flower development at harvest. However, starting on the 11th day
significant differences were noted. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis had
the highest leaf quality rating of 2.73 followed by 50% anthesis with a leaf quality rating
of 2.87 which is 25% discoloration and Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis
had the lowest leaf quality rating. Likewise, on day 13 and d ay 14, no significant
differences were obtained, on day 13, lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis had
the highest leaf quality rating of 3.93 which is 50% yellowing; while at day 14 it was
observed that lisianthus cutflowers had the poorest leaf quality rating of 4.87.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. It was observed that from day 7 to day
11 lisianthus cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi juice/1 water solution had the best leaf
quality rating of 2.77, while in day 13 to day 14; cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi/1
water had the highest leaf quality rating of 3.89 that was observed in day 13 followed by
lisianthus cutflowers held in 10 ml calamansi juice/1 water with a leaf quality rating of
4.67. On the other hand, cutflowers held in 250 ppm citric acid solution, and three with
20 ml calamansi juice/l of water; had the highest defects of leaves with a mean of 5.00
after the termination of observation.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects noted between the
different stage of flower development at harvest and effects of the different
concentrations of calamansi juice on the holding solution on leaf quality of lisianthus
cutflowers from day 1 to day 14.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
24
Table 5. Leaf quality
NUMBER OF DAYS
TREATMENT
7
9
11
13
14
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
1.13a
1.67a
2.73b
4.00a
4.80a
50
1.00a
1.67a 2.87ab 3.93a
4.80a
75
1.00a
1.60a
3.93a
4.33a
4.87a
Concentration of Calamansi Juice
(ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
1.00a
1.89a
3.22a
4.11a
5.00a
5
1.11a
1.44a
2.78a
3.89a
4.67a
10
1.00a
1.78a
3.22a
4.00a
4.67a
15
1.00a
1.67a
3.56a
4.33a
4.78a
20
1.11a
1.44a
3.11a
4.11a
5.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Stem Quality
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 6 shows that there were
no significant differences obtained on the stem quality rating as affected by the different
stages of flower developmental at harvest. At day 1 lisianthus cutflowers harvested at
75% anthesis had the lowest stem quality rating of 2.67 (deep green and rotting at the
base (>2.54 cm) while higher stem quality ratings were recorded in cutflowers harvested
at 25% anthesis with a mean of 2.26 (deep green and rotting at the base (<2.54 cm). At
day 14 cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis had the highest stem quality rating of 6.46
(yellow green and rotting an the base (<7.62 cm) while those harvested at 25% anthesis
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
25
and 75% anthesis had the lowest stem quality rating of 6.53 and 6.66 respectively which
is (yellow and rotting at the base 1 >7.62 cm).
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. No significant differences were
likewise obtained on the stem quality rating of lisianthus cutflowers as affected by the
different holding solutions used at day 1. Results show that ratings range from 2.22 to
2.88 which is (deep green and rotting at the base <2.54 cm. However from day 4 to day
14, highly significant differences were obtained on the stem quality rating of lisianthus
cutflowers as affected by the holding solution. On the 4th day, cutflowers held in 5 ml
calamansi/l of water had the highest stem quality rating of 3.11 (deep green and rooting at
the base (>2.54 cm); while cutflowers held in 250 ppm citric acid solution had the lowest
stem quality rating of 7.0, which was yellow green and rotting at the base (>7.62 cm). At
day 13 to 14 still cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi juice/1 water had the highest stem
quality rating compared to those held in 250 ppm citric acid, and in 20 ml calamansi/1
water had the lowest stem quality rating of 7.0 which is yellow green and rotting at the
base (>7.62 cm).
Interaction effect. There were no significant differences between the different
stages of flower development at harvest and the different concentrations of calamansi
juice in the holding solution on the stem quality rating of lisianthus from the duration of
observations.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
26
Table 6. Stem quality rating
NUMBER OF DAYS
TREATMENT
1
4
7
10
13
14
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
M E A N
25
2.27a 4.93a
5.73a
5.87a
6.53a
6.53a
50
2.40a 4.67a 5.27b
5.67a
6.27a
6.47a
75
2.67a 5.07a 5.40ab 5.67a
6.67a
6.67a
Concentration of Calamansi
Juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
2.89a 6.44a
7.00a
7.00a
7.00a
7.00a
5
2.22a 3.11d 4.00d
4.22d
5.22b
5.44b
10
2.22a 4.00c
4.56c
5.00c
6.44a
6.56a
15
2.44a 5.33b 5.89b
6.11b
6.78a
6.78a
20
2.44a 5.56b 5.89b 6.33ab 7.00a
7.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT.
Final pH of Holding Solutions
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Statistical analysis showed that
there were no significant differences on the final pH of holding solution as affected by
the stage of harvest of lisianthus cutflower. However, the holding solution where
cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis were held had the highest final pH of 6.03 while the
holding solution of cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis and the holding solutions where
cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis had the lower pH of 5.81 (Table 7).
Effect of calamansi juice. Highly significant differences were obtained on the
final pH of the different holding solutions. Solution of 5 ml calamansi juice/l of water
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
27
had the highest pH reading of 6.57, followed by 10ml calamansi juice/1 water with a pH
of 6.14 while solution of 2.50 ppm citric acid solution and 20 ml calamansi juice/1 water
had the lowest pH reading of 5.19 and 5.44 respectively.
Interaction effect. Statistical analysis shows no significant interaction effects
between the stage of flower development at harvest and the different holding solution
with regards to final pH of the holding solution at the termination of observations.
Daily Temperature (oC)
The daily temperature of the holding room was recorded every 10:00 a.m. to 2:00
p.m. Observations show that there were no drastic fluctuations in the temperature of the
holding room which ranged from 21oC to 22oC.
Table 7. Initial and final pH of holding solution
TREATMENT
INITIAL
FINAL
Stage of Flower Development at Harvest (%)
25
5.81a
50
6.03a
75
5.81a
Concentration of Calamansi Juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
6.2
5.19c
5
6.1
6.57a
10
5.9
6.14ab
15
5.2
6.05b
20
5.2
5.44c
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
28
Table 8. Daily temperature (oC)
TEMPERATURE (oC)
DATE
10:00 a.m.
2:00 p.m.
October 21, 2008
21
22
October 22, 2008
22
22
October 23, 2008
22
22
October 24, 2008
22
22
October 25, 2008
22
22
October 26, 2008
22
22
October 27, 2008
21
21
October 28, 2008
21
22
October 29, 2008
21
22
October 30, 2008
22
22
October 31, 2008
22
22
November 1, 2008
22
22
November 2, 2008
22
22
November 3, 2008
22
22
November 4, 2008
21
22
November 5, 2008
22
22
November 6, 2008
22
22
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
Lisianthus cutflowers were harvested at their different stages of flower
development at 25%, 5% and 75% and were pulsed – fed with 10% sucrose in 24 hours.
It was held in various concentration of calamansi juice and .25 grams of citric acid that
was used in S0 as control.
Result show that Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis held in 10 ml/1
of water had longer vaselife compared to cutflowers harvested at 25% and 75% anthesis
and held in different holding solutions.
In terms of maximum flower diameter, Lisianthus harvested at 25% antehsis held
in 5 ml/1 of water had the smallest diameter of 6.26 cm while the biggest blooms were
attained by those cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis with a mean of 10.03 cm.
Good stem qualities were recorded in cutflowers harvested at 25%, 50% and 75%
anthesis held in 5 ml/1 of water. For the flower quality cutflowers harvested at 25%,
50% and 75% anthesis held in 5 ml/1 of water, 10 ml/l of water and 15 ml/l of water
solution had the highest quality rating showing a lesser damaged in flowers. Likewise
showing a lesser damaged in leaf quality.
Conclusion
Results show that calamansi juice at 10 ml/1 of water of the holding solution only
can be used to prolong the vaselife of Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis for
15.0 days; while concentrations of 10 ml calamansi juice/1 water and 15 ml calamansi
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
30
juice/1 of water can be used in cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis for 14 days of
vaselife.
Recommendation
It is therefore recommended, that holding solutions with calamansi juice at the
rate of 10 ml/1 of water only, can be used to prolong the vaselife of lisianthus cutflowers
harvested at 50% anthesis. In terms of maintenance of flower quality; calamansi juice at
the concentration of 5, 10 and 15 ml/1 of water can be used. Further studies on the use
of other sources of acidifiers are recommended to prolong the vaselife of lisianthus
cutflowers.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
LITERATURE CITED
ANONYMOUS. Pan American Seed. Undated Cut flower Lisianthus. Retrieved Oct.
20, 2007 from http://www.ballseed.com/media/culture/pas/lisianthus
cutflower.pdf.
AGRICARTA. 1999. Agricarta: Postharvest care of cutflowers. Retrieved
October 20, 2007 from
http://www.aginfonet.com/agricarta/content/skdriedflower/postharvest+cave.ht
ml
FOX, R. 1998. Lisianthus. A specialty cutflower. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2007 from
http://www.hydroponics.com.au/php/viewtopic.php.2t=43
GILL, S.A. undated. Production of Lisianthus as a cutflower, retrieved Oct. 20, 2007
from http://www.agri.umd.edu/MCE/publications/publication.cfm)ID=169.
HERMANO, F.G. 2006. Growing Exotic Temperature Cutflowers. Published by
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 64-69.
KEBASEN, CHESTER B. 2002. Postharvest Characteristics of Carnation (Dianthus
caryophyllus) cutflowers as affected by stage of harvest and holding solutions.
Pp. 1-10.
MIGUEL, STEPHANIE M. 2008. Performance of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum)
under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. Pp. 1-4.
REID, M.S. 2000. Postharvest technology research and information center. Retrieved
Oct. 20, 2007 from http://postharvest.ucdavis.edu/index.html.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA) 2000. Tropical
Products Transport Handbook: Cutflowers and Florest greens. Retrieved Oct.
20, 2007 from http://www.amf.usda.gov/tmd/tropical/index.htm.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Vaselife (days)
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
10
14
14
38
12.67
S1
10
14
10
34
11.33
S2
14
14
14
42
14.00
S3
14
14
14
42
14.00
S4
14
14
14
42
14.00
50% S0
14
9
14
37
12.33
S1
14
14
17
45
15.00
S2
17
14
14
45
15.00
S3
10
17
10
37
12.33
S4
14
10
14
38
12.67
75% S0
14
9
14
37
12.33
S1
9
14
14
37
12.33
S2
9
10
14
33
11.00
S3
14
9
9
32
10.67
S4
14
10
9
33
11.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
35.378
17.689
3.10 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
5.911
1.478
0.26 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
42.622
5.328
0.93 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
171.333
5.711
TOTAL
44
255.244
Ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.80%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
33
Appendix Table 2. Final volume of solution taken-up (ml)
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
40
30
40
110
36.67
S1
30
50
30
110
36.67
S2
30
40
40
110
36.67
S3
50
100
30
180
60.00
S4
40
30
40
110
36.67
50% S0
30
40
40
110
36.67
S1
40
40
50
130
43.33
S2
150
50
40
240
80.00
S3
30
140
50
220
73.33
S4
30
90
40
160
53.33
75% S0
50
40
40
130
43.33
S1
50
80
30
160
53.33
S2
50
40
30
120
40.00
S3
50
110
40
180
60.00
S4
50
50
30
130
43.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1937.778
17.689
3.10 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
3533.333
1.478
0.26 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
2840.000
5.328
0.93 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
25133.333
5.711
TOTAL
44
33444.444
Ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 59.20%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
34
Appendix Table 3. Maximum flower diameter attained (cm)
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
4.5
8.0
5.0
17.5
5.83
S1
5.6
7.7
5.5
18.8
6.27
S2
8.0
5.5
6.0
19.5
6.50
S3
7.5
8.9
8.0
24.4
8.13
S4
8.2
8.0
8.5
24.7
8.23
50% S0
7.5
9.0
7.0
23.5
7.83
S1
6.0
7.5
8.2
21.7
7.23
S2
9.2
8.0
8.0
25.2
8.40
S3
7.5
7.5
9.4
24.4
8.13
S4
8.0
9.8
5.5
23.3
7.77
75% S0
10.0
10.2
9.9
30.1
10.03
S1
9.5
8.0
8.2
25.7
8.57
S2
9.5
9.8
9.4
28.7
9.57
S3
9.5
10.0
9.0
28.5
9.50
S4
8.5
8.9
8.9
26.3
8.77
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
40.556
20.278
18.31**
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
7.517
1.879
1.69ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
13.272
1.659
1.49ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
33.407
1.113
TOTAL
44
94.752
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.14%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
35
Appendix Table 4. Flower quality rating day 1
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
1
1
1
3
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
50% S0
1
2
1
4
1.33
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
2
1
4
1.33
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
75% S0
1
1
1
3
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
2
1
4
1.33
S4
1
2
4
1.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.178
0.089
1.00ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.089
0.022
0.25ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.711
0.089
1.00ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
2.667
0.089
TOTAL
44
3.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 27.38%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
36
Appendix Table 5. Flower quality rating of day 41
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
1
1
4
1.33
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
50% S0
1
4
1
6
2.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
2
1
4
1.33
S3
2
1
1
4
1.33
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
75% S0
1
4
1
6
2.00
S1
2
1
2
5
1.67
S2
2
1
2
5
1.67
S3
1
2
2
5
1.67
S4
1
2
3
6
2.0
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
4.133
2.067
3.44*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
1.689
0.422
0.70ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.978
0.122
0.20ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
18.000
0.600
TOTAL
44
24.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 55.32%
* - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
37
Appendix Table 6. Flower quality rating at day 7
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
1
1
4
1.33
S1
2
2
1
5
1.67
S2
2
1
1
4
1.33
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
50% S0
1
4
1
6
2.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
4
1
6
2.00
S3
2
1
1
4
1.33
S4
1
3
1
5
1.67
75% S0
1
4
2
7
2.33
S1
4
1
1
6
2.00
S2
4
1
2
7
2.33
S3
2
4
3
9
3.00
S4
2
2
4
8
2.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
11.511
5.755
4.64*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.667
0.167
0.13ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.533
0.43ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
37.333
1.244
TOTAL
44
53.778
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 62.75%
* - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
38
Appendix Table 7. Flower quality rating at day 10
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
1
1
7
2.33
S1
5
2
5
12
4.00
S2
3
1
1
5
1.67
S3
3
2
1
6
2.00
S4
2
3
2
7
2.33
50% S0
1
5
1
7
1.33
S1
1
3
1
5
1.67
S2
1
4
1
6
2.00
S3
5
1
5
11
3.67
S4
1
5
2
8
2.67
75% S0
2
5
3
10
3.33
S1
5
1
2
8
6.67
S2
5
5
3
13
4.33
S3
3
5
5
13
4.33
S4
3
5
5
13
4.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
17.778
8.889
3.25*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
3.200
0.800
0.20ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
20.667
2.583
0.95ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
82.000
TOTAL
44
123.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 56.79%
* - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
39
Appendix Table 8. Flower quality rating at day 13
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
1
1
13
4.33
S1
5
4
5
14
4.67
S2
4
4
4
12
4.00
S3
4
4
4
12
4.00
S4
4
4
4
12
4.00
50% S0
4
5
4
13
4.33
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
3
4
4
11
3.67
S3
5
3
5
13
4.33
S4
4
5
4
13
4.33
75% S0
4
5
4
13
4.33
S1
5
4
3
12
4.00
S2
5
5
4
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.933
0.467
1.31 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.356
0.089
0.25 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
2.844
0.356
1.00 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
10.667
0.356
TOTAL
44
14.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.97%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
40
Appendix Table 9. Flower quality rating at day 14
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
5
5
15
5.00
S1
5
5
5
15
5.00
S2
5
5
5
15
5.00
S3
5
5
5
15
5.00
S4
5
5
5
15
5.00
50% S0
5
5
5
15
5.00
S1
5
5
4
14
4.67
S2
4
5
5
14
4.67
S3
5
4
5
14
4.67
S4
5
5
5
15
5.00
75% S0
5
5
5
15
5.00
S1
5
5
5
15
5.00
S2
5
5
5
15
5.00
S3
5
5
5
15
5.00
S4
5
5
5
15
5.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.400
0.200
3.00 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.133
0.033
0.50 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.033
0.50 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
2.000
0.067
TOTAL
44
2.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 5.23%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
41
Appendix Table 10. Leaf quality rating at day 7
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
1
1
1
3
1.00
S1
2
1
1
4
1.33
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
4
1.33
50% S0
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
75% S0
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.178
0.089
2.00 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.133
0.033
0.75 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.033
0.75 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
1.333
0.044
TOTAL
44
1.9112.80
0
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 20.18%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
42
Appendix Table 11. Leaf quality rating day 9
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
1
2
5
1.67
S1
3
1
2
6
2.00
S2
2
1
2
5
1.67
S3
1
2
2
5
1.67
S4
1
2
1
4
1.33
50% S0
3
2
2
7
2.33
S1
1
1
2
4
1.33
S2
1
2
1
4
1.33
S3
3
1
2
6
2.00
S4
2
1
1
4
1.33
75% S0
S1
S2
S3
S4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.400
0.200
3.00 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.133
0.033
0.50 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.033
0.50 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
2.000
0.067
TOTAL
44
2.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 5.23%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
43
Appendix Table 12. Leaf quality rating at day 11
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
1
2
8
2.67
S1
5
2
5
12
4.00
S2
3
1
4
8
2.67
S3
2
2
3
7
2.33
S4
1
3
2
6
2.00
50% S0
3
5
3
11
3.67
S1
1
2
2
5
1.67
S2
2
3
2
7
2.33
S3
5
1
5
11
3.67
S4
3
5
1
9
3.00
75% S0
2
5
3
10
3.33
S1
5
1
2
8
2.67
S2
5
5
4
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
3
5
5
13
4.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
12.978
6.489
3.14*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
2.800
0.700
0.34 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
22.800
2.850
1.38 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
62.000
2.067
TOTAL
44
100.578
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 45.23%
* - significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
44
Appendix Table 13. Leaf quality rating at day 13
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
3
4
12
3.00
S1
5
4
5
14
4.67
S2
4
3
4
11
3.67
S3
4
4
4
12
4.00
S4
3
4
4
11
3.67
50% S0
4
5
4
13
4.33
S1
3
3
4
10
3.33
S2
3
4
4
11
3.67
S3
5
3
5
13
4.33
S4
4
5
3
12
4.00
75% S0
3
5
4
12
4.00
S1
5
2
4
11
3.67
S2
5
5
4
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.378
0.689
1.07 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.078
0.244
0.38 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
5.956
0.744
1.16 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
19.333
0.644
TOTAL
44
27.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 19.60%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
45
Appendix Table 14. Leaf quality rating at day 14
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
4
5
14
4.67
S1
5
5
5
15
5.00
S2
5
4
5
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
50% S0
4
5
5
14
4.67
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
5
4
13
4.33
S3
5
4
5
14
4.67
S4
5
5
4
14
4.67
75% S0
4
5
5
14
4.67
S1
5
2
4
11
3.67
S2
5
5
5
15
5.00
S3
5
5
5
15
5.00
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.533
0.267
0.71 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
1.689
0.422
1.12 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.244
0.405
1.07 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
11.333
0.378
TOTAL
44
16.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.36%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
46
Appendix Table 15. Final pH of the holding solution
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
4.9
5.2
4.4
14.5
4.83
S1
6.6
6.8
6.5
19.9
6.63
S2
6.2
6.3
6.0
18.5
6.17
S3
6.1
6.3
6.3
18.7
6.23
S4
6.0
5.0
4.5
15.5
5.17
50% S0
4.8
6.2
4.7
15.7
5.23
S1
6.9
6.5
6.8
20.2
6.73
S2
6.8
6.6
5.5
18.9
6.30
S3
6.0
5.8
6.3
18.1
6.03
S4
6.2
6.1
5.2
17.5
5.83
75% S0
4.5
6.0
6.0
16.5
5.50
S1
6.1
6.4
6.5
19.0
6.33
S2
6.0
6.1
5.8
17.9
5.97
S3
5.5
6.4
5.8
17.7
5.90
S4
5.3
4.8
5.9
16.0
5.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.484
0.242
0.97 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
11.156
2.789
11.19**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
1.511
0.189
0.76
2.25
3.17
Error
30
7.480
0.249
TOTAL
44
20.632
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 8.49%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
47
Appendix Table 16. Stem quality rating day 1
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
4
2
8
2.67
S1
2
2
2
6
2.00
S2
2
2
2
6
2.00
S3
2
2
2
6
2.00
S4
2
4
2
8
2.67
50% S0
2
4
2
8
2.67
S1
2
2
2
6
2.00
S2
2
2
2
6
2.00
S3
2
2
4
8
2.67
S4
2
2
4
8
2.67
75% S0
4
2
4
10
2.33
S1
4
2
2
8
2.67
S2
4
2
2
8
2.67
S3
2
4
2
8
2.67
S4
2
2
2
6
2.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.244
0.622
0.78ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
2.667
0.667
0.83
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.200
0.400
0.50ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
24.000
0.800
TOTAL
44
255.244
Ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 36.59%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
48
Appendix Table 17. Stem quality rating at day 4
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
6
6
6
18
6.00
S1
2
2
4
8
2.67
S2
6
4
4
14
4.67
S3
6
4
6
16
5.33
S4
6
6
6
18
6.00
50% S0
7
6
7
20
6.67
S1
2
4
2
8
2.67
S2
4
2
4
10
3.33
S3
4
6
6
16
5.33
S4
4
6
6
16
5.33
75% S0
7
6
7
20
6.67
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
4
4
12
4.00
S3
6
4
6
16
5.33
S4
6
6
6
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.244
0.622
0.74ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
63.111
15.778
18.68**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
6.755
6.844
1.00ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
25.333
0.844
TOTAL
44
96.444
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.79%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
49
Appendix Table 18. Stem quality rating at day 7
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
6
4
6
16
5.33
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
6
7
6
19
6.33
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
4
4
12
4.00
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
4
6
6
16
5.33
75% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
4
6
14
4.67
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
6
6
6
18
6.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.644
0.822
2.85ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
50.355
12.589
43.58**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
2.578
0.322
1.12ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
8.667
0.289
TOTAL
44
63.244
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 9.75%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
50
Appendix Table 19. Stem quality rating at day 10
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
7
6
6
19
6.33
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
6
6
16
5.33
S3
6
6
7
19
6.33
S4
6
7
7
21
6.33
75% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
6
17
5.67
S2
7
4
6
17
5.67
S3
6
7
7
20
6.67
S4
6
6
7
19
6.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.844
0.422
0.86ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
34.311
8.578
17.55**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
7.822
0.978
2.00ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
14.667
0.489
TOTAL
44
57.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.48%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
51
Appendix Table 20 Stem quality rating at day 13
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
7
18
6.00
S2
7
6
6
19
6.33
S3
7
6
6
19
6.33
S4
7
7
21
7.00
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
6
4
14
4.67
S2
6
7
7
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
75% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
6
17
5.67
S2
7
7
6
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.311
0.156
0.29 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
15.111
3.778
7.08 **
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.689
0.461
0.86ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
16.00
0.533
TOTAL
44
35.111
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.14 %
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
52
Appendix Table 21 Stem quality rating day 14
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
7
18
6.00
S2
7
6
6
19
6.33
S3
7
6
7
20
6.67
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
6
4
14
4.67
S2
6
7
7
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
75% S0
7
7
7
20
7.00
S1
7
4
6
17
5.67
S2
7
7
6
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.311
0.156
0.29 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
15.644
3.911
7.33 **
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.022
0.378
0.71 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
16.000
0.533
TOTAL
44
34.978
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.10 %
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
SUMAKBAY, ADORACION C. APRIL 2009. Postharvest Characteristics of
Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by Stage of Harvest and
Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Araceli G. Ladilad, PhD.
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to determine the postharvest characteristics of
lisianthus cutflowers harvested at different stages of flower development, and to
determine the best holding solution and best stage of harvest that will prolong the
postharvest life of cut lisianthus flowers.
Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at different stage of flower development were
held in various concentration of calamansi juice ml/l water and 250 ppm citric acid
solution used as the control.
Results showed that a holding solution with 10 ml calamansi juice/l water was the
best holding solution to prolong the vaselife of lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50%
anthesis.
For cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis, vaselife can be lengthened with the use
of 15 ml calamansi juice/liter water and can be further opened to 50% using 10 ml
calamansi juice per liter water.
To prolong the vaselife of lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis, place
them in a solution with 5 ml calamansi juice per liter water.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography……………………………………………………………
i
Abstract ………………………………………………………………..
i
Table of Contents ………………………………………………………
ii
INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE …………………………………………..
3
The Plant ………………………….………………………………
3
Harvesting and Postharvest Handling ……………………………..
3
Floral or Energy Source ……………………………………………
4
Biocides ……..……………………………………………………..
4
Vaselife ……………………………………………………………
5
Water pH………………………………………………………….
6
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials …………………………………………………………..
7
Methods …………………………………………………………..
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vaselife ……………………………………………………………
17
Final Volume of Solution Taken Up (ml.)………………………..
18
Maximum Flower Diameter Attained (cm) ………………………
20
Flower Quality Rating ……………………………………………
21
Leaf Quality Rating ………………………………………………
23
ii
Stem Quality Rating . ……………………………………………
24
Initial and Final pH of the Holding Solution …………………….
26
Daily Temperature of the Holding Room (oC)…………………...
28
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary …………………………………………………………
29
Conclusion ……………………………………………………….
29
Recommendation ………………………………………………...
30
LITERATURE CITED …………………………………………………..
31
APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………
32
iii
INTRODUCTION
Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) is a North American wild flower. It is a
native to the prairies of Nebraska, Colorado and Texas. They are also known as Prairie
Gentian or Texas Blue Bell, the latter name a reference to the blue flowers of the wild
species. Cultivars in production today offer a wide range of colors, including purple,
rose, pink, white and various colors (Fox, 1998).
Lisianthus has the qualities of an “ideal cutflower” (attractive flowers) and should
continue to increase in popularity throughout the next century (Gill, undated). According
to Hermano (2006), the vase life range from two to three weeks from harvesting of the
cutflowers.
Plant breeders have done a wonderful job of developing outstanding flower colors
and introducing single and double flowering forms, adding to the beauty of this flower.
The flower is elegant in form and easily mistaken for rose. Hybrids developed in Japan
provide a wide range of colors, color patterns, and both single and double forms.
Lisianthus become very popular as a cut flower, because of the range of colors available,
and the fact that each inflorescence comprises a long, straight stem bearing as many as
ten individual flowers.
Although there have been many studies of the environmental conditions required
for lisianthus production, there has been little examination of the post harvest
characteristics of the flowers. Lisianthus is usually harvested commercially when the
first one or two flowers on the stem have opened. A good quality inflorescence will
usually have ten or more buds and flowers. If the flowers are placed in water, few if any
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
2
of these buds open, and the longevity of the inflorescence is therefore determined by the
life of the open flowers.
Since the primary objective of every farmer and trader is to have higher income,
the quality of the cutflowers harvested must then be preserved from harvesting to
consumption in order to get higher prices and thus, increase the farmer’s income. It is
also necessary to prolong the quality of the harvested cutflower as long as possible.
The study was conducted to determine the postharvest characteristics of lisianthus
cutflowers harvested at different stages of flower development; and to determine the best
holding solution and best stage of harvest that will prolong the postharvest life of cut
lisianthus flowers.
This study was conducted at the Ornamental Horticulture Service Laboratory,
College of Agriculture, Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet from October
2008 to November 2008.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Plant
Eustoma grandiflorum is a perennial plant that is treated in most areas as annual.
The seed is relatively small (19,000 seeds/gm) or (545,000 seeds/oz) and is hard to
handle in field plantings. Because of its small size, seedlings are generally started in plug
trays and transplanted into the field. A plug size of 288 or 392 mm has been successful
for commercial procedures. Plants are moved to the field when they have developed 2 to
3 sets of the true leaves (approximately 3 months from seedling time). Although for
some varieties, terminal cuttings are used plants from seeds are more common (Gill).
Harvesting and Postharvest Handling
Lisianthus cutflowers are harvested when one flower is open. Harvesting is done
in the morning; when the flowers and plant tissues are cool (Pan American Seed,
undated). Hermano (2006) stated that on non-pinch plants, stems are cut above the third
node from the ground. Similarly, the stems are cut above the third node of the lateral
shoots on pinched plants. This site of cut allows the plants to produce laterals shoots for
the second flush of laterals for flower production. Upon cutting, the cut flowers are
soaked in clean water or in warm pulse solution (40oC). Flowers are sorted and graded
according to stem length.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
4
Floral Preservatives
Chemicals used to prolong the postharvest life of cutflowers and aesthetic value
for a longer period are called floral preservatives (Reid, 2000). According to Agricarta
(1999), there are three basic components of floral preservatives; agent for acidifying the
solution, food source (Sucrose) and biocides.
Food or Energy Source
Sucrose (sugar) is the best food source for the flowers to be held in the solution.
The sugar concentration however depends on what the purpose of the solution is. If
flowers are wilted and stems are in a dehydration solution, sugar should not be used.
Pulse solution and bud opening solutions must contain the correct concentration for the
flower being treated. Typically, all purpose preservative solutions contain 1.5-2% sugar.
This will vary with flower types (Agricarta, 1999). In addition, sucrose had been shown
to increase the fresh weight and longevity of cut flowers. Sucrose also reduces moisture
stress in cut flowers by decreasing the size of leaf stomata. Flowers held in sucrose were
comparable to field open flowers.
Biocides
Few “biocides” available actually kill all the microorganisms present in water.
The material 8-HQ6 (hydroxyl quirnoline citrate) which is used to adjust water pH is
fortunately the most commonly used biocide. It prevents rapid growth of bacteria, but
does not kill them.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
5
Vaselife
As reported by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 2000), the
vaselife of the different cutflowers can be prolonged as long as proper methods and care
are applied. Below are some ways that could prolong the vaselife of cut flower produce.
a. Cutting the stem everyday to eliminate decayed parts of the stem.
b. Placing the flower in cool and treated holding solution.
c. Avoiding the use of metal containers because it can cause unfavorable
reaction with the holding solution.
d. Keep the flowers away from ripening fruits and vegetables.
e. Cutting the stem in a 45o angle instead of crushing or splitting it.
f. Placing the flowers in a favorable atmosphere – away from direct sunlight and
warm temperatures.
g. Replace the water used everyday. Also, it is recommended that the container
must be cleaned everyday.
h. Placing the flower away from the circulation of conditioned air, especially for
wide-leafed flowers. Although lower temperatures favor the longevity of flowers, those
placed in air-conditioned rooms tend to dry and wilt faster than that placed in a room with
normal air circulation.
i. Draughty positions are also unfavorable spots to locate the flowers. The
petals tend to dry out and respire more quickly in these areas.
j. For flowers grown in tropical areas, subjecting them to temperatures lower
than 4oc can be very detrimental.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
6
k. For arranged flowers on vases, remove the flowers that have signs of
deterioration because these emit ethylene.
Water pH
Acidity alteration is the most important of the three considerations of components
of a floral preservative since alkaline or high pH water/solution is damaging to cut
flowers. Reduced water potential of the holding solution usually influences and decrease
pH of water and sugar uptake. A low pH inhibits indigenous enzymes essential for stem
plugging (Reid, 2000) and tends to minimize physiological stem blockage.
Various chemicals are used to increase the acidity of a solution. The most
available chemical is vinegar. However, vinegar whitened the stem included in the
holding solution.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
The materials used in the study are the following:
a. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at different stage of flower development at
25%, 50%, 75%
b. graduated cylinder (200 ml)
c. beaker
d. pH meter
e. thermometer
f. foot ruler
g. catsup bottles
h. labeling materials
i. holding solutions (sucrose and citric acid using calamansi juice).
j. camera (for documentation)
k. pruning shear/cutter
Methods
The Lisianthus cutflowers were harvested at three different stages of flower
development at: 25%, 50% and 75%. Before the treatments, the stems were recut in
slanting manner; all cutflowers have 45 cm stem length and pulsed-feed with 10%
sucrose for twenty four (24) hours. Calamansi juice of various concentrations was used
as treatments. Distilled water + 250 ppm citric acid was used in S0 as control. The study
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
8
was laid-out in completely Randomized Design (CRD) with the stage of harvest as factor
A and holding solution as Factor B. Each flower represents a treatment replication and it
was held in 200 ml holding solution in catsup bottles. Each treatment was replicated
three times.
The different treatments are as follows:
First treatment
Factor A – stage of flower development at harvest (%)
T1 – 25 – close/tight bud with color
T2 – 50 – half-opened
T3 – 75 – more than half opened
Factor B – Sugar concentration for pulse – feeding (%/liter)
S0 – 0 (control; distilled H20 only)
S1 – 5
S2 – 10
S3 – 15
S4 – 20
Data to be Gathered
1. Vase life. The vase life of the cutflowers was measured from the day of
immersion of stem ends in holding solutions to the termination of the aesthetic value of
the flower. Vase life was terminated when the outer most petals have lost their turgidity
and have started to discolor.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
9
2. Final volume of the solution. This was obtained by measuring the volume of
the solution per treatment at the termination of the postharvest life of the cutflowers or
samples.
3. Maximum flower diameter attained (cm). This was measured when the flower
attained its maximum flower diameter.
4. Visual quality rating
a. Flower quality rating – each flower was observed daily using the following
index.
Rating
Description
1
No damage, field fresh
2
10-20% petals with damage
3
30-40% petals with damage
4
50-70% petals with damage
5
80-100% petals with damage
b. Leaf quality – the same with flower quality was observed everyday using the
following index:
Rating
Description
1
All green
2
25% discoloration/yellowing
3
50% discoloration/yellowing
4
75% discoloration/yellowing
5
100% discoloration/yellowing
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
10
c. Stem quality rating. The stem of each flower was rated using the following
index
Description
Rating Index
Deep green, no injury
1
Deep green and rotting at the base (<2.54 cm)
2
Deep green and rotting at base the (>2.54 cm)
3
Green and rotting at the base (<5.08 cm)
4
Green and rotting at the base (>5.08 cm)
5
Yellow green and rotting at the base (<7.62 cm)
6
Yellow green and rotting at the base (>7.62 cm)
7
5. Initial and final pH of holding solution. The pH of holding solution was
measured at holding and at the termination of the post harvest life of the cutflower
samples using a pH meter.
6. Daily temperature of the holding room (oC). These was obtained twice a day
(10 AM and 2 PM) using a thermometer.
7. Documentation of the study in pictures.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
11
Figure 1. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis held in different holding
solutions
Figure 2. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis held in different holding
solutions
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
12
Figure 3. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis held in different holding
solutions
Figure 4a. Top view of lisianthus cutflowers at 3rd day of observation.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
13
Figure 4b. Top view of lisianthus cutflowers held in different holding solutions during
the 3rd day of observations
Figure 4c. Top view of lisianthus cutflowers held in different solutions during the
3rd day of observation
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
14
Figure 5. Overview of the cutflowers used in the experiment
Figure 6. Cutflowers harvested at (a) 25% (b) 50% and (c) 75% anthesis at day
1 of observation
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
15
Figure 7a. Maximum flower diameter attained by Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at
25% anthesis
Plate 7b. Maximum flower diameter attained by lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50%
anthesis
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
16
Figure 7c. Maximum flower diameter attained by lisianthus cutflowers harvested
at 75% anthesis
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vaselife
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 1 shows that lisianthus
cutflowers harvested at 50% flower opening stage had the longest aesthetic life of 13.47
days to the first sign of senescence from holding followed by 25% flower opening stage
with a mean of 13.20 days while 75% flower opening stage has the shortest vaselife with
a mean of 11.47 days. Statistically, there were no significant differences obtained on the
vaselife of lisianthus as affected by the different stages of flower maturity at harvest.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. Statistical analysis showed no
significant differences on the effects of the different holding solutions on the vaselife of
lisianthus cutflowers. Cutflowers held in solutions with 10 ml calamansi juice/l of water
had the longest vaselife of 13.33 days followed held in solution 5 ml calamansi/a of water
and in holding solution of 20 ml calamansi juice/l of water with a mean of 12.89 days and
12.56 days respectively. Shortest vaselife was recorded in cutflowers held in holding
solution 15 ml calamansi juice/1 of water with a mean of 12.33 days.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects between the stage
of flower development and effect of holding solution in the vaselife of lisianthus
cutflowers.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
18
Table 1. Vaselife
TREATMENT
MEAN (days)
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
13.20a
50
13.47ab
75
11.47b
Concentration of Calamansi juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control
12.44a
5
12.89a
10
13.33a
15
12.33a
20
12.56a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Volume of Solution Taken Up
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 2 shows that the stage of
flower development at harvest had no significant effects on the volume of solution taken
up measured after the termination of observations. However, cutflowers harvested at
50% anthesis had higher rate of solution uptake compared to flowers harvested at 25%
and 75% anthesis.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. Statistical analysis showed that there
were no significant differences in the volume of holding solution taken up by the
cutflowers as affected by the different holding solutions. Lisianthus cutflowers held in
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
19
solutions with 15 ml calamansi juice/l of water had higher rate of absorption taking up
64.44 ml at the termination of observations.
Interaction effect. Likewise there were no significant effects obtained between
the different varieties of Lisianthus cutflowers and the different concentrations of
calamansi juice in the holding solution with regards to the volume of solution taken up.
Table 2. Final volume of the solution taken up (ml)
TREATMENT
MEAN
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
41.33a
50
57.33a
75
48.33a
Concentration of Calamansi juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control
38.39a
5
44.44a
10
52.22a
15
64.44a
20
44.44a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
20
Maximum Flower Diameter Attained (cm)
Effect of stage of flower development of harvest. Table 3 shows the observed
maximum cutflower diameter attained. Cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis displayed a
maximum flower diameter of 9.29 cm and were significantly bigger compared to the
cutflowers harvested at 25% and 50% anthesis. The smallest blooms were measured
from cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis with a mean of 6.99 cm.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. Differences obtained on the effect of
holding solution did not significantly affect the maximum flower diameter attained.
However, Lisianthus cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi/l of water had smaller blooms
attaining a diameter of 7.36 cm only. The results imply that the concentration of
calamansi juice in the holding solution did not affect further flower opening in lisianthus
cutflowers harvested at different stage of development.
Interaction effect. Statistical analysis showed that there were no significant
effects between the three stages of flower development and the different holding
solutions with regards to the maximum flower diameter attained. However, cutflowers
harvested at 75% anthesis which were held in 250 ppm citric acid solution attained the
biggest blooms with maximum flower diameter of 10.03 cm, while cutflowers harvested
at 25% anthesis and held in 250 ppm citric acid solution had the smallest blooms with
maximum flower diameter of only 5.83 cm.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
21
Table 3. Maximum flower diameter attained (cm)
TREATMENT
MEAN
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
6.99c
50
7.81b
75
4.29a
Concentration of Calamansi juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control
7.90ab
5
7.36b
10
8.04ab
15
8.59a
20
8.26ab
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Flower Quality
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 4 shows the observed
flower quality rating of lisianthus cutflower from day 1 to day 14. Statistical analysis
showed that there were significant differences obtained on the effect of stage of flower
development at harvest on the flower quality rating of lisianthus cutflowers from day 4
today 10. The lowest flower quality ratings observed at 1.80, 2.46 and 3.80 were from
day 4, 7 and day 10 respectively, which means that lisanthus cutflowers had 30-40%
petals with damage; while on day 13 to day 14 there were no significant differences
noted.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
22
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. There were no significant differences
observed from day 1 to day 14 with regards to the effect of the different holding solutions
on flower quality rating.
Interaction effect. Likewise, there were no significant interaction effects obtained
between the different stage of flower development of lisianthus cutflowers at harvest and
different holding solutions with regards to flower quality rating from day 1 to day 14 of
observations.
Table 4. Flower quality
NUMBER OF DAYS
TREATMENT
1
4
7
10
13
14
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
M E A N
25
1.00a
1.07b
1.27b
2.47b
4.20a
5.00a
50
1.13a 1.33ab 1.60b
2.47b
4.13a
4.80a
75
1.13a
1.80a
2.47a
3.80a
4.47a
5.00a
Concentration of Calamansi
Juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
1.11a
1.78a
1.89a
2.67a
4.33a
5.00a
5
1.00a
1.22a
1.56a
2.78a
4.22a
4.89a
10
1.11a
1.33a
1.89a
2.67a
4.11a
4.89a
15
1.11a
1.33a
1.78a
3.33a
4.33a
4.89a
20
1.11a
1.33a
1.78a
3.11a
4.33a
5.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
23
Leaf Quality
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 5 shows that on day 7 and
day 9 no significant differences obtained on the leaf quality rating as affected by the
different stages of flower development at harvest. However, starting on the 11th day
significant differences were noted. Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis had
the highest leaf quality rating of 2.73 followed by 50% anthesis with a leaf quality rating
of 2.87 which is 25% discoloration and Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis
had the lowest leaf quality rating. Likewise, on day 13 and d ay 14, no significant
differences were obtained, on day 13, lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis had
the highest leaf quality rating of 3.93 which is 50% yellowing; while at day 14 it was
observed that lisianthus cutflowers had the poorest leaf quality rating of 4.87.
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. It was observed that from day 7 to day
11 lisianthus cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi juice/1 water solution had the best leaf
quality rating of 2.77, while in day 13 to day 14; cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi/1
water had the highest leaf quality rating of 3.89 that was observed in day 13 followed by
lisianthus cutflowers held in 10 ml calamansi juice/1 water with a leaf quality rating of
4.67. On the other hand, cutflowers held in 250 ppm citric acid solution, and three with
20 ml calamansi juice/l of water; had the highest defects of leaves with a mean of 5.00
after the termination of observation.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects noted between the
different stage of flower development at harvest and effects of the different
concentrations of calamansi juice on the holding solution on leaf quality of lisianthus
cutflowers from day 1 to day 14.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
24
Table 5. Leaf quality
NUMBER OF DAYS
TREATMENT
7
9
11
13
14
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
25
1.13a
1.67a
2.73b
4.00a
4.80a
50
1.00a
1.67a 2.87ab 3.93a
4.80a
75
1.00a
1.60a
3.93a
4.33a
4.87a
Concentration of Calamansi Juice
(ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
1.00a
1.89a
3.22a
4.11a
5.00a
5
1.11a
1.44a
2.78a
3.89a
4.67a
10
1.00a
1.78a
3.22a
4.00a
4.67a
15
1.00a
1.67a
3.56a
4.33a
4.78a
20
1.11a
1.44a
3.11a
4.11a
5.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Stem Quality
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Table 6 shows that there were
no significant differences obtained on the stem quality rating as affected by the different
stages of flower developmental at harvest. At day 1 lisianthus cutflowers harvested at
75% anthesis had the lowest stem quality rating of 2.67 (deep green and rotting at the
base (>2.54 cm) while higher stem quality ratings were recorded in cutflowers harvested
at 25% anthesis with a mean of 2.26 (deep green and rotting at the base (<2.54 cm). At
day 14 cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis had the highest stem quality rating of 6.46
(yellow green and rotting an the base (<7.62 cm) while those harvested at 25% anthesis
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
25
and 75% anthesis had the lowest stem quality rating of 6.53 and 6.66 respectively which
is (yellow and rotting at the base 1 >7.62 cm).
Effect of concentration of calamansi juice. No significant differences were
likewise obtained on the stem quality rating of lisianthus cutflowers as affected by the
different holding solutions used at day 1. Results show that ratings range from 2.22 to
2.88 which is (deep green and rotting at the base <2.54 cm. However from day 4 to day
14, highly significant differences were obtained on the stem quality rating of lisianthus
cutflowers as affected by the holding solution. On the 4th day, cutflowers held in 5 ml
calamansi/l of water had the highest stem quality rating of 3.11 (deep green and rooting at
the base (>2.54 cm); while cutflowers held in 250 ppm citric acid solution had the lowest
stem quality rating of 7.0, which was yellow green and rotting at the base (>7.62 cm). At
day 13 to 14 still cutflowers held in 5 ml calamansi juice/1 water had the highest stem
quality rating compared to those held in 250 ppm citric acid, and in 20 ml calamansi/1
water had the lowest stem quality rating of 7.0 which is yellow green and rotting at the
base (>7.62 cm).
Interaction effect. There were no significant differences between the different
stages of flower development at harvest and the different concentrations of calamansi
juice in the holding solution on the stem quality rating of lisianthus from the duration of
observations.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
26
Table 6. Stem quality rating
NUMBER OF DAYS
TREATMENT
1
4
7
10
13
14
Stage of Flower Opening (%)
M E A N
25
2.27a 4.93a
5.73a
5.87a
6.53a
6.53a
50
2.40a 4.67a 5.27b
5.67a
6.27a
6.47a
75
2.67a 5.07a 5.40ab 5.67a
6.67a
6.67a
Concentration of Calamansi
Juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
2.89a 6.44a
7.00a
7.00a
7.00a
7.00a
5
2.22a 3.11d 4.00d
4.22d
5.22b
5.44b
10
2.22a 4.00c
4.56c
5.00c
6.44a
6.56a
15
2.44a 5.33b 5.89b
6.11b
6.78a
6.78a
20
2.44a 5.56b 5.89b 6.33ab 7.00a
7.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT.
Final pH of Holding Solutions
Effect of stage of flower development at harvest. Statistical analysis showed that
there were no significant differences on the final pH of holding solution as affected by
the stage of harvest of lisianthus cutflower. However, the holding solution where
cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis were held had the highest final pH of 6.03 while the
holding solution of cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis and the holding solutions where
cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis had the lower pH of 5.81 (Table 7).
Effect of calamansi juice. Highly significant differences were obtained on the
final pH of the different holding solutions. Solution of 5 ml calamansi juice/l of water
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
27
had the highest pH reading of 6.57, followed by 10ml calamansi juice/1 water with a pH
of 6.14 while solution of 2.50 ppm citric acid solution and 20 ml calamansi juice/1 water
had the lowest pH reading of 5.19 and 5.44 respectively.
Interaction effect. Statistical analysis shows no significant interaction effects
between the stage of flower development at harvest and the different holding solution
with regards to final pH of the holding solution at the termination of observations.
Daily Temperature (oC)
The daily temperature of the holding room was recorded every 10:00 a.m. to 2:00
p.m. Observations show that there were no drastic fluctuations in the temperature of the
holding room which ranged from 21oC to 22oC.
Table 7. Initial and final pH of holding solution
TREATMENT
INITIAL
FINAL
Stage of Flower Development at Harvest (%)
25
5.81a
50
6.03a
75
5.81a
Concentration of Calamansi Juice (ml/liter)
250 ppm citric acid (control)
6.2
5.19c
5
6.1
6.57a
10
5.9
6.14ab
15
5.2
6.05b
20
5.2
5.44c
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
28
Table 8. Daily temperature (oC)
TEMPERATURE (oC)
DATE
10:00 a.m.
2:00 p.m.
October 21, 2008
21
22
October 22, 2008
22
22
October 23, 2008
22
22
October 24, 2008
22
22
October 25, 2008
22
22
October 26, 2008
22
22
October 27, 2008
21
21
October 28, 2008
21
22
October 29, 2008
21
22
October 30, 2008
22
22
October 31, 2008
22
22
November 1, 2008
22
22
November 2, 2008
22
22
November 3, 2008
22
22
November 4, 2008
21
22
November 5, 2008
22
22
November 6, 2008
22
22
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
Lisianthus cutflowers were harvested at their different stages of flower
development at 25%, 5% and 75% and were pulsed – fed with 10% sucrose in 24 hours.
It was held in various concentration of calamansi juice and .25 grams of citric acid that
was used in S0 as control.
Result show that Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis held in 10 ml/1
of water had longer vaselife compared to cutflowers harvested at 25% and 75% anthesis
and held in different holding solutions.
In terms of maximum flower diameter, Lisianthus harvested at 25% antehsis held
in 5 ml/1 of water had the smallest diameter of 6.26 cm while the biggest blooms were
attained by those cutflowers harvested at 75% anthesis with a mean of 10.03 cm.
Good stem qualities were recorded in cutflowers harvested at 25%, 50% and 75%
anthesis held in 5 ml/1 of water. For the flower quality cutflowers harvested at 25%,
50% and 75% anthesis held in 5 ml/1 of water, 10 ml/l of water and 15 ml/l of water
solution had the highest quality rating showing a lesser damaged in flowers. Likewise
showing a lesser damaged in leaf quality.
Conclusion
Results show that calamansi juice at 10 ml/1 of water of the holding solution only
can be used to prolong the vaselife of Lisianthus cutflowers harvested at 50% anthesis for
15.0 days; while concentrations of 10 ml calamansi juice/1 water and 15 ml calamansi
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
30
juice/1 of water can be used in cutflowers harvested at 25% anthesis for 14 days of
vaselife.
Recommendation
It is therefore recommended, that holding solutions with calamansi juice at the
rate of 10 ml/1 of water only, can be used to prolong the vaselife of lisianthus cutflowers
harvested at 50% anthesis. In terms of maintenance of flower quality; calamansi juice at
the concentration of 5, 10 and 15 ml/1 of water can be used. Further studies on the use
of other sources of acidifiers are recommended to prolong the vaselife of lisianthus
cutflowers.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
LITERATURE CITED
ANONYMOUS. Pan American Seed. Undated Cut flower Lisianthus. Retrieved Oct.
20, 2007 from http://www.ballseed.com/media/culture/pas/lisianthus
cutflower.pdf.
AGRICARTA. 1999. Agricarta: Postharvest care of cutflowers. Retrieved
October 20, 2007 from
http://www.aginfonet.com/agricarta/content/skdriedflower/postharvest+cave.ht
ml
FOX, R. 1998. Lisianthus. A specialty cutflower. Retrieved Oct. 20, 2007 from
http://www.hydroponics.com.au/php/viewtopic.php.2t=43
GILL, S.A. undated. Production of Lisianthus as a cutflower, retrieved Oct. 20, 2007
from http://www.agri.umd.edu/MCE/publications/publication.cfm)ID=169.
HERMANO, F.G. 2006. Growing Exotic Temperature Cutflowers. Published by
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 64-69.
KEBASEN, CHESTER B. 2002. Postharvest Characteristics of Carnation (Dianthus
caryophyllus) cutflowers as affected by stage of harvest and holding solutions.
Pp. 1-10.
MIGUEL, STEPHANIE M. 2008. Performance of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum)
under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. Pp. 1-4.
REID, M.S. 2000. Postharvest technology research and information center. Retrieved
Oct. 20, 2007 from http://postharvest.ucdavis.edu/index.html.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA) 2000. Tropical
Products Transport Handbook: Cutflowers and Florest greens. Retrieved Oct.
20, 2007 from http://www.amf.usda.gov/tmd/tropical/index.htm.
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Vaselife (days)
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
10
14
14
38
12.67
S1
10
14
10
34
11.33
S2
14
14
14
42
14.00
S3
14
14
14
42
14.00
S4
14
14
14
42
14.00
50% S0
14
9
14
37
12.33
S1
14
14
17
45
15.00
S2
17
14
14
45
15.00
S3
10
17
10
37
12.33
S4
14
10
14
38
12.67
75% S0
14
9
14
37
12.33
S1
9
14
14
37
12.33
S2
9
10
14
33
11.00
S3
14
9
9
32
10.67
S4
14
10
9
33
11.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
35.378
17.689
3.10 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
5.911
1.478
0.26 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
42.622
5.328
0.93 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
171.333
5.711
TOTAL
44
255.244
Ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.80%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
33
Appendix Table 2. Final volume of solution taken-up (ml)
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
40
30
40
110
36.67
S1
30
50
30
110
36.67
S2
30
40
40
110
36.67
S3
50
100
30
180
60.00
S4
40
30
40
110
36.67
50% S0
30
40
40
110
36.67
S1
40
40
50
130
43.33
S2
150
50
40
240
80.00
S3
30
140
50
220
73.33
S4
30
90
40
160
53.33
75% S0
50
40
40
130
43.33
S1
50
80
30
160
53.33
S2
50
40
30
120
40.00
S3
50
110
40
180
60.00
S4
50
50
30
130
43.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1937.778
17.689
3.10 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
3533.333
1.478
0.26 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
2840.000
5.328
0.93 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
25133.333
5.711
TOTAL
44
33444.444
Ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 59.20%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
34
Appendix Table 3. Maximum flower diameter attained (cm)
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
4.5
8.0
5.0
17.5
5.83
S1
5.6
7.7
5.5
18.8
6.27
S2
8.0
5.5
6.0
19.5
6.50
S3
7.5
8.9
8.0
24.4
8.13
S4
8.2
8.0
8.5
24.7
8.23
50% S0
7.5
9.0
7.0
23.5
7.83
S1
6.0
7.5
8.2
21.7
7.23
S2
9.2
8.0
8.0
25.2
8.40
S3
7.5
7.5
9.4
24.4
8.13
S4
8.0
9.8
5.5
23.3
7.77
75% S0
10.0
10.2
9.9
30.1
10.03
S1
9.5
8.0
8.2
25.7
8.57
S2
9.5
9.8
9.4
28.7
9.57
S3
9.5
10.0
9.0
28.5
9.50
S4
8.5
8.9
8.9
26.3
8.77
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
40.556
20.278
18.31**
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
7.517
1.879
1.69ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
13.272
1.659
1.49ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
33.407
1.113
TOTAL
44
94.752
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.14%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
35
Appendix Table 4. Flower quality rating day 1
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
1
1
1
3
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
50% S0
1
2
1
4
1.33
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
2
1
4
1.33
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
75% S0
1
1
1
3
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
2
1
4
1.33
S4
1
2
4
1.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.178
0.089
1.00ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.089
0.022
0.25ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.711
0.089
1.00ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
2.667
0.089
TOTAL
44
3.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 27.38%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
36
Appendix Table 5. Flower quality rating of day 41
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
1
1
4
1.33
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
50% S0
1
4
1
6
2.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
2
1
4
1.33
S3
2
1
1
4
1.33
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
75% S0
1
4
1
6
2.00
S1
2
1
2
5
1.67
S2
2
1
2
5
1.67
S3
1
2
2
5
1.67
S4
1
2
3
6
2.0
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
4.133
2.067
3.44*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
1.689
0.422
0.70ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.978
0.122
0.20ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
18.000
0.600
TOTAL
44
24.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 55.32%
* - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
37
Appendix Table 6. Flower quality rating at day 7
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
1
1
4
1.33
S1
2
2
1
5
1.67
S2
2
1
1
4
1.33
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3
1.00
50% S0
1
4
1
6
2.00
S1
1
1
1
3
1.00
S2
1
4
1
6
2.00
S3
2
1
1
4
1.33
S4
1
3
1
5
1.67
75% S0
1
4
2
7
2.33
S1
4
1
1
6
2.00
S2
4
1
2
7
2.33
S3
2
4
3
9
3.00
S4
2
2
4
8
2.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
11.511
5.755
4.64*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.667
0.167
0.13ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.533
0.43ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
37.333
1.244
TOTAL
44
53.778
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 62.75%
* - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
38
Appendix Table 7. Flower quality rating at day 10
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
1
1
7
2.33
S1
5
2
5
12
4.00
S2
3
1
1
5
1.67
S3
3
2
1
6
2.00
S4
2
3
2
7
2.33
50% S0
1
5
1
7
1.33
S1
1
3
1
5
1.67
S2
1
4
1
6
2.00
S3
5
1
5
11
3.67
S4
1
5
2
8
2.67
75% S0
2
5
3
10
3.33
S1
5
1
2
8
6.67
S2
5
5
3
13
4.33
S3
3
5
5
13
4.33
S4
3
5
5
13
4.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
17.778
8.889
3.25*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
3.200
0.800
0.20ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
20.667
2.583
0.95ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
82.000
TOTAL
44
123.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 56.79%
* - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
39
Appendix Table 8. Flower quality rating at day 13
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
1
1
13
4.33
S1
5
4
5
14
4.67
S2
4
4
4
12
4.00
S3
4
4
4
12
4.00
S4
4
4
4
12
4.00
50% S0
4
5
4
13
4.33
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
3
4
4
11
3.67
S3
5
3
5
13
4.33
S4
4
5
4
13
4.33
75% S0
4
5
4
13
4.33
S1
5
4
3
12
4.00
S2
5
5
4
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.933
0.467
1.31 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.356
0.089
0.25 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
2.844
0.356
1.00 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
10.667
0.356
TOTAL
44
14.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.97%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
40
Appendix Table 9. Flower quality rating at day 14
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
5
5
15
5.00
S1
5
5
5
15
5.00
S2
5
5
5
15
5.00
S3
5
5
5
15
5.00
S4
5
5
5
15
5.00
50% S0
5
5
5
15
5.00
S1
5
5
4
14
4.67
S2
4
5
5
14
4.67
S3
5
4
5
14
4.67
S4
5
5
5
15
5.00
75% S0
5
5
5
15
5.00
S1
5
5
5
15
5.00
S2
5
5
5
15
5.00
S3
5
5
5
15
5.00
S4
5
5
5
15
5.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.400
0.200
3.00 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.133
0.033
0.50 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.033
0.50 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
2.000
0.067
TOTAL
44
2.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 5.23%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
41
Appendix Table 10. Leaf quality rating at day 7
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
1
1
1
3
1.00
S1
2
1
1
4
1.33
S2
1
1
1
3
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3
1.00
S4
1
1
1
4
1.33
50% S0
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
75% S0
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S1
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S2
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S3
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
S4
1
1
1
3.00
1.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.178
0.089
2.00 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.133
0.033
0.75 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.033
0.75 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
1.333
0.044
TOTAL
44
1.9112.80
0
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 20.18%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
42
Appendix Table 11. Leaf quality rating day 9
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
1
2
5
1.67
S1
3
1
2
6
2.00
S2
2
1
2
5
1.67
S3
1
2
2
5
1.67
S4
1
2
1
4
1.33
50% S0
3
2
2
7
2.33
S1
1
1
2
4
1.33
S2
1
2
1
4
1.33
S3
3
1
2
6
2.00
S4
2
1
1
4
1.33
75% S0
S1
S2
S3
S4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.400
0.200
3.00 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.133
0.033
0.50 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
0.267
0.033
0.50 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
2.000
0.067
TOTAL
44
2.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 5.23%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
43
Appendix Table 12. Leaf quality rating at day 11
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
1
2
8
2.67
S1
5
2
5
12
4.00
S2
3
1
4
8
2.67
S3
2
2
3
7
2.33
S4
1
3
2
6
2.00
50% S0
3
5
3
11
3.67
S1
1
2
2
5
1.67
S2
2
3
2
7
2.33
S3
5
1
5
11
3.67
S4
3
5
1
9
3.00
75% S0
2
5
3
10
3.33
S1
5
1
2
8
2.67
S2
5
5
4
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
3
5
5
13
4.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
12.978
6.489
3.14*
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
2.800
0.700
0.34 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
22.800
2.850
1.38 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
62.000
2.067
TOTAL
44
100.578
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 45.23%
* - significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
44
Appendix Table 13. Leaf quality rating at day 13
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
3
4
12
3.00
S1
5
4
5
14
4.67
S2
4
3
4
11
3.67
S3
4
4
4
12
4.00
S4
3
4
4
11
3.67
50% S0
4
5
4
13
4.33
S1
3
3
4
10
3.33
S2
3
4
4
11
3.67
S3
5
3
5
13
4.33
S4
4
5
3
12
4.00
75% S0
3
5
4
12
4.00
S1
5
2
4
11
3.67
S2
5
5
4
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.378
0.689
1.07 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
0.078
0.244
0.38 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
5.956
0.744
1.16 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
19.333
0.644
TOTAL
44
27.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 19.60%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
45
Appendix Table 14. Leaf quality rating at day 14
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
5
4
5
14
4.67
S1
5
5
5
15
5.00
S2
5
4
5
14
4.67
S3
4
5
5
14
4.67
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
50% S0
4
5
5
14
4.67
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
5
4
13
4.33
S3
5
4
5
14
4.67
S4
5
5
4
14
4.67
75% S0
4
5
5
14
4.67
S1
5
2
4
11
3.67
S2
5
5
5
15
5.00
S3
5
5
5
15
5.00
S4
4
5
5
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.533
0.267
0.71 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
1.689
0.422
1.12 ns
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.244
0.405
1.07 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
11.333
0.378
TOTAL
44
16.800
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.36%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
46
Appendix Table 15. Final pH of the holding solution
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
4.9
5.2
4.4
14.5
4.83
S1
6.6
6.8
6.5
19.9
6.63
S2
6.2
6.3
6.0
18.5
6.17
S3
6.1
6.3
6.3
18.7
6.23
S4
6.0
5.0
4.5
15.5
5.17
50% S0
4.8
6.2
4.7
15.7
5.23
S1
6.9
6.5
6.8
20.2
6.73
S2
6.8
6.6
5.5
18.9
6.30
S3
6.0
5.8
6.3
18.1
6.03
S4
6.2
6.1
5.2
17.5
5.83
75% S0
4.5
6.0
6.0
16.5
5.50
S1
6.1
6.4
6.5
19.0
6.33
S2
6.0
6.1
5.8
17.9
5.97
S3
5.5
6.4
5.8
17.7
5.90
S4
5.3
4.8
5.9
16.0
5.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.484
0.242
0.97 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
11.156
2.789
11.19**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
1.511
0.189
0.76
2.25
3.17
Error
30
7.480
0.249
TOTAL
44
20.632
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 8.49%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
47
Appendix Table 16. Stem quality rating day 1
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
2
4
2
8
2.67
S1
2
2
2
6
2.00
S2
2
2
2
6
2.00
S3
2
2
2
6
2.00
S4
2
4
2
8
2.67
50% S0
2
4
2
8
2.67
S1
2
2
2
6
2.00
S2
2
2
2
6
2.00
S3
2
2
4
8
2.67
S4
2
2
4
8
2.67
75% S0
4
2
4
10
2.33
S1
4
2
2
8
2.67
S2
4
2
2
8
2.67
S3
2
4
2
8
2.67
S4
2
2
2
6
2.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.244
0.622
0.78ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
2.667
0.667
0.83
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.200
0.400
0.50ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
24.000
0.800
TOTAL
44
255.244
Ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 36.59%
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
48
Appendix Table 17. Stem quality rating at day 4
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
6
6
6
18
6.00
S1
2
2
4
8
2.67
S2
6
4
4
14
4.67
S3
6
4
6
16
5.33
S4
6
6
6
18
6.00
50% S0
7
6
7
20
6.67
S1
2
4
2
8
2.67
S2
4
2
4
10
3.33
S3
4
6
6
16
5.33
S4
4
6
6
16
5.33
75% S0
7
6
7
20
6.67
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
4
4
12
4.00
S3
6
4
6
16
5.33
S4
6
6
6
14
4.67
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.244
0.622
0.74ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
63.111
15.778
18.68**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
6.755
6.844
1.00ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
25.333
0.844
TOTAL
44
96.444
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.79%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
49
Appendix Table 18. Stem quality rating at day 7
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
6
4
6
16
5.33
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
6
7
6
19
6.33
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
4
4
12
4.00
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
4
6
6
16
5.33
75% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
4
6
14
4.67
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
6
6
6
18
6.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
1.644
0.822
2.85ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
50.355
12.589
43.58**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
2.578
0.322
1.12ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
8.667
0.289
TOTAL
44
63.244
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 9.75%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
50
Appendix Table 19. Stem quality rating at day 10
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
7
6
6
19
6.33
S3
6
6
6
18
6.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
4
4
12
4.00
S2
4
6
6
16
5.33
S3
6
6
7
19
6.33
S4
6
7
7
21
6.33
75% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
6
17
5.67
S2
7
4
6
17
5.67
S3
6
7
7
20
6.67
S4
6
6
7
19
6.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.844
0.422
0.86ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
34.311
8.578
17.55**
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
7.822
0.978
2.00ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
14.667
0.489
TOTAL
44
57.644
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.48%
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
51
Appendix Table 20 Stem quality rating at day 13
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
7
18
6.00
S2
7
6
6
19
6.33
S3
7
6
6
19
6.33
S4
7
7
21
7.00
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
6
4
14
4.67
S2
6
7
7
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
75% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
6
17
5.67
S2
7
7
6
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.311
0.156
0.29 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
15.111
3.778
7.08 **
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.689
0.461
0.86ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
16.00
0.533
TOTAL
44
35.111
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.14 %
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
52
Appendix Table 21 Stem quality rating day 14
R E P L I C A T I O N
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
25% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
7
4
7
18
6.00
S2
7
6
6
19
6.33
S3
7
6
7
20
6.67
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
50% S0
7
7
7
21
7.00
S1
4
6
4
14
4.67
S2
6
7
7
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
75% S0
7
7
7
20
7.00
S1
7
4
6
17
5.67
S2
7
7
6
20
6.67
S3
7
7
7
21
7.00
S4
7
7
7
21
7.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE 0.05 0.01
Factor A
2
0.311
0.156
0.29 ns
3.32
5.39
Factor B
4
15.644
3.911
7.33 **
2.69
4.02
A x B
8
3.022
0.378
0.71 ns
2.25
3.17
Error
30
16.000
0.533
TOTAL
44
34.978
ns – not significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.10 %
** - highly significant
Postharvest Characteristics of Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by
Stage of Harvest and Calamansi Juice as Holding Solution / Adoracion C. Sumakbay. 2009
Document Outline
- Postharvest Characteristics ofLisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum) Cutflowers as affected by Stage of Harvest andCalamansi Juice as Holding Solution
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- The Plant
- Harvesting and Postharvest Handling
- Floral Preservatives
- Food or Energy Source
- Biocides
- Vaselife
- Water pH
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- Vaselife
- Volume of Solution Taken Up
- Maximum Flower Diameter Attained (cm)
- Flower Quality
- Leaf Quality
- Stem Quality
- Final pH of Holding Solutions
- Daily Temperature (oC)
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- Summary
- Conclusion
- Recommendation
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES