| Literature DB >> 34943102 |
Luigi Formisano1, Michele Ciriello1, Christophe El-Nakhel1, Milena Poledica2, Giuseppe Starace3, Giulia Graziani4, Alberto Ritieni4, Stefania De Pascale1, Youssef Rouphael1.
Abstract
Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is one of the most consumed vegetables worldwide due to its low caloric intake and high fiber, minerals, and phenolic compounds, making it a high-quality functional food. However, fruit quality attributes can be affected by pre-harvest factors, especially environmental stresses. This research aimed to evaluate the influence of two shading nets (white net -30% and pearl grey net -40% shading degree) on the yield and phytochemical profile of tomato fruits grown in summer under the Mediterranean climate. Mineral and organic acid content (by ion chromatography-IC), phenolic profile (by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-UHPLC coupled with an Orbitrap high-resolution mass spectrometry-HRMS), carotenoid content (by high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection-HPLC-DAD), and antioxidant activities DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP (by UV-VIS spectrophotometry) were determined. Tomato fruits grown under the pearl grey net recorded the highest values of total phenolic compounds (14,997 µg 100 g-1 of fresh weight) and antioxidant activities DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP, without affecting either fruit color or marketable yield. The reduction of solar radiation through pearl grey nets proved to be an excellent tool to increase the phytochemical quality of tomato fruits during summer cultivation in a Mediterranean environment.Entities:
Keywords: ABTS; FRAP; HPLC-DAD; Solanum lycopersicum L.; UHPLC/HRMS; chlorogenic acid; industrial tomato; lycopene; rutin; shading screens
Year: 2021 PMID: 34943102 PMCID: PMC8698697 DOI: 10.3390/antiox10121999
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antioxidants (Basel) ISSN: 2076-3921
Photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) during the growing season outside (Control) and under shading nets.
| Treatment | June | July | August |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 1247 ± 5.49 a | 1271 ± 7.02 a | 1127 ± 7.54 a |
| White net | 871 ± 6.66 b | 889 ± 6.43 b | 786 ± 3.38 b |
| Pearl grey net | 703 ± 13.3 c | 727 ± 3.18 c | 633 ± 3.53 c |
| Significance | *** | *** | *** |
*** significant at p ≤ 0.001. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3.
Air temperature during the growing season outside (Control) and under shading nets.
| Treatment | June | July | August |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 25.9 ± 0.37 | 27.5 ± 0.32 | 26.9 ± 0.94 |
| White net | 27.1 ± 0.06 | 29.3 ± 0.31 | 28.0 ± 0.23 |
| Pearl grey net | 26.8 ± 0.53 | 28.2 ± 0.74 | 27.1 ± 0.20 |
| Significance | ns | ns | ns |
ns non-significant according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3.
Effects of shading nets on yield and yield parameters.
| Treatment | Yield | Fruit Number | Mean Marketable | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Marketable | Unmarketable | Total | Marketable | Unmarketable | ||
| (kg pl−1) | (kg pl−1) | (kg pl−1) | (n° fruits pl−1) | (n° fruits pl−1) | (n° fruits pl−1) | ||
| Control | 2.58 ± 0.15 | 2.25 ± 0.02 | 0.33 ± 0.06 | 351.50 ± 9.41 a | 268.11 ± 1.66 a | 83.39 ± 2.06 a | 8.50 ± 0.75 b |
| White net | 2.56 ± 0.24 | 2.12 ± 0.08 | 0.44 ± 0.05 | 251.47 ± 5.55 b | 182.98 ± 0.77 b | 68.48 ± 1.96 b | 11.70 ± 0.76 ab |
| Pearl grey net | 2.20 ± 0.07 | 1.89 ± 0.08 | 0.32 ± 0.04 | 184.88 ± 4.75 c | 141.13 ± 1.09 c | 43.75 ± 1.55 c | 13.37 ± 0.36 a |
| Significance | ns | ns | ns | *** | *** | *** | * |
ns, *, and *** non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05 and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3. Pl = plant.
Effect of shading nets on total soluble solids (TSS), dry matter, CIELab colorimetric parameters, and fruit size.
| Treatment | TSS | Dry Matter | L | a * | b * | Chroma | Hue Angle | Equatorial Diameter | Polar Diameter |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (°Brix) | (%) | (mm) | (mm) | ||||||
| Control | 7.43 ± 0.30 a | 8.71 ± 0.32 a | 36.35 ± 0.12 b | 28.80 ± 0.90 | 23.27 ± 0.64 | 37.03 ± 0.08 ab | 218.94 ± 0.59 | 24.52 ± 0.21 c | 33.16 ± 0.01 b |
| White net | 5.40 ± 0.06 b | 7.63 ± 0.14 b | 38.12 ± 0.24 a | 29.49 ± 0.20 | 23.50 ± 0.16 | 37.70 ± 0.22 a | 218.55 ± 0.21 | 26.26 ± 0.11 b | 36.55 ± 0.17 a |
| Pearl grey net | 5.30 ± 0.25 b | 7.25 ± 0.20 b | 37.32 ± 0.26 ab | 28.21 ± 0.31 | 23.76 ± 0.35 | 36.89 ± 0.03 b | 220.11 ± 0.62 | 27.00 ± 0.04 a | 36.71 ± 0.13 a |
| Significance | ** | * | * | ns | ns | * | ns | *** | *** |
ns, *, **, and *** non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3.
Effect of shading nets on mineral accumulation in fruits. Data are expressed as mg 100 g−1 fw.
| Treatment | P | K | Mg | Na | Malate | Citrate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 14.88 ± 0.94 a | 412.08 ± 4.76 b | 13.04 ± 0.53 | 6.84 ± 0.72 | 34.15 ± 1.91 a | 140.36 ± 7.84 a |
| White net | 7.63 ± 0.41 b | 445.65 ± 1.08 a | 12.49 ± 0.43 | 5.29 ± 0.17 | 26.78 ± 0.74 b | 109.90 ± 1.20 b |
| Pearl grey net | 9.21 ± 0.15 b | 361.43 ± 3.58 c | 11.23 ± 0.30 | 6.14 ± 0.32 | 29.89 ± 1.02 ab | 104.33 ± 2.92 b |
| Significance | ** | *** | ns | ns | * | ** |
ns, *, **, and *** non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3.
Effect of shading nets on lutein, lycopene, β-carotene, and total carotenoids accumulation in fruits. Data are expressed as mg 100 g−1 fw.
| Treatment | Lutein | Lycopene | Total Carotenoids | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 0.022 ± 0.001 b | 1.666 ± 0.061 b | 0.358 ± 0.012 b | 2.046 ± 0.074 b |
| White net | 0.024 ± 0.000 ab | 2.881 ± 0.053 a | 0.623 ± 0.013 a | 3.528 ± 0.065 a |
| Pearl grey net | 0.027 ± 0.001 a | 2.828 ± 0.080 a | 0.643 ± 0.018 a | 3.498 ± 0.099 a |
| Significance | * | *** | *** | *** |
* and *** significant at p ≤ 0.05 and 0.001. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3.
Effect of shading nets on phenolic compounds accumulation in fruits. Data are expressed as µg 100 g−1 fw.
| Phenolic Compounds | Treatment | Significance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | White Net | Pearl Grey Net | ||
| PHENOLIC ACID DERIVATIVES | ||||
| Chlorogenic acid | 3363 ± 105 a | 2470 ± 47 b | 1799 ± 46 c | *** |
| Homovanillic acid-O-hexoside | 939 ± 38 b | 1,151 ± 24 a | 956 ± 23 b | ** |
| Caffeic acid-O-hexoside | 418 ± 19 a | 372 ± 5 b | 343 ± 11 b | ** |
| Coumaric acid-O-hexoside | 74 ± 5 a | 56 ± 1 b | 81 ± 2 a | ** |
| Ferulic acid | 20 ± 0 c | 48 ± 2 b | 61 ± 3 a | *** |
| Ferulic acid-O-hexoside | 19 ± 1 b | 34 ± 2 a | 21 ± 2 b | * |
| Caffeic acid | 16 ± 1 b | 27 ± 1 a | 25 ± 1 a | ** |
| Total phenolic acid derivatives | 4848 ± 164 a | 4157 ± 80 b | 3287 ± 78 c | *** |
| FLAVONOID DERIVATIVES | ||||
| Rutin | 2944 ± 101 b | 2481 ± 48 c | 4414 ± 112 a | *** |
| Kampferol-3-diglucoside | 1979 ± 82 b | 1578 ± 24 c | 3245 ± 80 a | *** |
| Naringenin | 1199 ± 50 b | 450 ± 15 c | 1851 ± 51 a | *** |
| Rutin-O-pentoside | 333 ± 11 b | 387 ± 4 b | 732 ± 20 a | *** |
| Rutin-O-hexoside | 167 ± 6 a | 161 ± 2 a | 140 ± 6 b | * |
| Kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside | 105 ± 5 c | 164 ± 10 b | 225 ± 4 a | *** |
| Naringenin-C-diglycoside | 72 ± 6 b | 78 ± 4 b | 225 ± 10 a | *** |
| Apigenin-C-hexoside-hexoside | 34 ± 1 c | 57 ± 2 b | 84 ± 1 a | *** |
| Naringenin-C-hexoside | 37 ± 1 b | 30 ± 1 c | 66 ± 1 a | *** |
| Quercetin-O-dihexoside | 14 ± 0 b | 12 ± 0 c | 21 ± 1 a | *** |
| Genistin | 10 ± 0 b | 10 ± 1 b | 21 ± 0 a | *** |
| Total flavonoid derivatives | 6896 ± 263 b | 5407 ± 107 c | 11,025 ± 276 a | *** |
| HYDROXYCINNAMOYLQUINIC ACID DERIVATIVES | ||||
| Dicaffeoylquinic Acid | 505 ± 28 a | 266 ± 3 b | 557 ± 22 a | *** |
| Tricaffeoylquinic Acid | 128 ± 7 a | 39 ± 3 b | 128 ± 5 a | *** |
| Total hydroxycinnamoyl quinic acid derivatives | 633 ± 35 a | 305 ± 5 b | 685 ± 26 a | *** |
| Total phenolic compounds | 12,377 ± 460 b | 9869 ± 183 c | 14,997 ± 378 a | *** |
*, **, and *** non-significant or significant at p ≤ 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3.
Effect of shading nets on DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP antioxidant activities. Data are expressed as mmol Trolox equivalents kg−1 dw.
| Treatment | DPPH | ABTS | FRAP |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 32.21 ± 0.40 c | 39.18 ± 0.09 b | 27.51 ± 0.31 b |
| White net | 35.54 ± 0.37 b | 35.33 ± 0.30 c | 27.64 ± 0.17 b |
| Pearl grey net | 40.72 ± 0.22 a | 43.70 ± 0.58 a | 34.38 ± 0.81 a |
| Significance | *** | *** | *** |
*** significant at p ≤ 0.001. Different letters within each column indicate significant differences according to Tukey’s HSD test (p = 0.05). All data are expressed as mean ± standard error, n = 3.
Figure 1Heatmap analysis summarizing the results of yield, mineral, and quality parameters of Solanum lycopersicum L. fruits grown under different shade treatments (Control, White net, and Pearl grey net).