Historic, archived document
Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.
// Marketing Research Report No. 274
LIBRA
Ry
Sf^'AL RECORD
^ OCT 9 - 1C58
U.S.
^f^MENT OF AGRICULTURE
OVERSEAS
VENTILATED
SHIPPING TESTS
WITH FLORIDA
ORANGES AND GRAPEFRUIT
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service • Marketing Research Division
■
CONTENTS
Page
Summary 3
Introduction U
Materials and methods U
Results 6
Fruit and air temperatures 6
Condition of test fruit 9
Decay 9
Rind breakdown 13
Relation of source to condition 13
Discussion lu
Appendix 17
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was made possible through the cooperation of a number
of individuals and organizations. The staff of the U. S. consulate,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, and the office of the agricultural attache
of the American Ennbassy in The Hague, The Netherlands gave valuable
assistance.
Cooperation was given also by the Swedish-American L,ine and the
Willhelmsen Line, especially by the captains and first mates of the
ships Tennessee, Teneriffa, Topeka, Maltesholm, and Vretaholm.
The following personnel of the Quality Maintenance and Imiprove-
ment Section of the Biological Sciences Branch, Marketing Research
Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, originated and supervised
the loading of the test shipments and expedited the return of recording
thermiometers from Europe: Randall H. Cubbedge, B. A. Friedman,
C. F. Melvin, and G. A. Meckstroth.
Washington, D. C. September 1958
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D. C. - Price 15 cents
SUMMARY
Ventilated shipments of treated Florida Valencia oranges and Marsh Seedless grape-
fruit were made to the Netherlands late in the citrus season (in March, April, and May 1957).
The purposes were to determine the feasibility of commercially shipping citrus fruits to
European markets without refrigeration at this time of year, and to compare the effec-
tiveness of different chemical treatments to inhibit decay.
Regardless of treatments used to inhibit decay, all 4 of the test shipments of oranges
in ventilated holds arrived in unacceptable condition. Those in the semirefrigerated last
shipment arrived in acceptable condition. Of grapefruit, only 1 of the 5 shipments ar-
rived in totally unacceptable condition.
Shipment under ventilation is therefore not suitable for oranges at this season of the
year. Fair success seems possible with grapefruit shipped in March. In every shipment
except the last, grapefruit arrived with a lower percentage of decay than oranges. Rind
breakdown, in most cases, also was greater in oranges than in grapefruit. The unac-
ceptable arrival condition of many of the treated oranges was due to rind breakdown.
Chemical treatments inhibited decay in oranges and grapefruit. In oranges, biphenyl
+ DH was the most effective, followed by DH alone as the second best, and biphenyl alone
as third. Regardless of treatment, and excepting the semirefrigerated fifth shipment,
orange temperatures were too high and resulted in excessive decay and rind breakdown.
Tennperature proved to be the most important factor in preventing spoilage.
Treated grapefruit from some sources arrived in either acceptable or borderline
condition in most shipments. However, except in the first shipment, the fruit became
unacceptable because of decay or rind breakdown during the holding period after arrival
at Rotterdam.
The source of grapefruit and oranges was also important in relation to the extent of
decay and rind breakdown which developed during the marketing period.
The possibility of precooling oranges and grapefruit so as to obtain lower fruit
temperatures during the early part of the trip, when fruit temperatures in ventilated
shipments are ordinarily high, should be considered.
Reducing elapsed time between harvesting and loading on board ship aJ.so would add
to the potential shelf life of oranges and grapefruit on foreign markets.
-3-
OVERSEAS VENTILATED-SHIPPING TESTS
WITH FLORIDA ORANGES AND GRAPEFRUIT
By T. T. Hatton, Jr., and J. R. Winston, Biological Sciences Branch,
Agricultural Marketing Service
INTRODUCTION
The Florida citrus industry is nnuch interested in the possibility of shipping oranges
and grapefruit to Europe in ventilated holds, rather than the more expensive refrigerated
holds. Although ventilated shipments of Florida citrus fruits from South Atlantic and
Gulf ports are frequently unsuccessful during the winter, an even greater risk exists
during the warmer months late in the season. This study was conducted to determine:
(1) How late in the season ventilated shipments of citrus fruit, which had been chemically
treated to inhibit decay, could successfully be made, taking into consideration the sources
of the oranges and grapefruit, and (2) the relative effectiveness of various chemical treat-
ments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
From nnid-March to mid-May 1957, five shipments of treated Valencia oranges and
Marsh Seedless grapefruit were made from Tampa and Jacksonville, Fla. , to Rotter-
dam, The Netherlands. The first 4 shipments were in ventilated holds, and the fifth was
stowed in the hatch square between refrigerated compartments. The port of Rotterdam
was selected because it receives a large percentage of the citrus fruit imported into
Europe .
All oranges and grapefruit were waxed with a citrus water wax emulsion. The test
packages of oranges and grapefruit were packed in half-boxes (4/5-bushel wirebound
crates) at Orlando and then transported by truck to shipside. Every shipment contained
oranges and grapefruit from 2 different sources (groves), obtained from packing houses.
Oranges were treated with (l) 2 sheets of biphenyl-treated paper (11 x 17 inches)
per box; or (2) 2 percent sodium orthophenylphenate + 1 percent hexamine in a 3-minute
dip, followed by a rapid water rinse (hereafter referred to as DH); or (3) a combination
of the 2 treatnnents . A fourth lot was untreated and served as a control. All oranges
were "color-added" and size 216 except some of the oranges in the first shipment, which
were size 176.
Grapefruit were treated with DH. A second lot was untreated and served as a con-
trol. Some of the grapefruit in the first shipment were size 64, but most were size 70;
the second shipment consisted entirely of size 112, and all remaining shipments were
size 70.
Recording thermometers were placed in boxes of oranges and grapefruit to record
fruit temperature in transit. A thermograph was placed above the load to record the
ambient air temperatures in the hold throughout the voyage. Another thermograph was
placed on an outside deck to record outside air temperature during the crossing. In
most cases, the ship's captain furnished sea temperatures so that relationships between
water temperature and hold temperature could be studied.
-ix-
Upon arrival in Rotterdann, each fruit was exannined for rind breakdown (aging and
pitting) and decay, and the amount of each was calculated per box. After disposal of
decayed fruit, the entire shipnnent was placed in cold storage for 2 weeks with com-
mercially imported citrus fruit, at a temperature of 38° to 40° F. It was then rein-
spected as described, the decayed fruit being again discarded. Finally, the shipment
was held at room temperature for 1 week and again examined. Room temperature aver-
aged 50° in the first shipment, 70° in the last shipment, and 60° for the other shipments.
The oranges and grapefruit were placed in cold storage and then at room temperature to
simulate the handling of commercially imported citrus fruit into The Netherlands.
Trace and slight""- rind breakdown data were not shown in the figures herein because
trace rind breakdown is not commercially detectable, and slight rind breakdown is not
important unless found extensively. Trace and slight rind breakdown data, however, are
included in the tables and statistical analyses in the appendix.
Picking, shipping, and arrival dates are shown for oranges and grapefruit in table 1.
Grapefruit and oranges were shipped in the sanne hold.
Table 1. — Picking, loading, and arrival dates for overseas shipments of Florida oranges
and grapefruit to Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1957
Shipment
Sources"""
Picking dates
Loading
port^
Loading
Arrival
Remarks
No.
Oranges
Grapefruit
date
date
March
1
A
13
14
Jackson-
March
April
Test fruit accompa-
B
12
12
ville
20
6
nied commercially
ventilated fruit
2
C
21
26
Tampa
April
April
Test fruit accompa-
D
20
26
2
17
nied commercially
ventilated fruit
April
3
E
15
15
Jackson-
April
May
Test fruit did not
F
17
17
ville
23
8
accompany commer-
cially ventilated
fruit
4
G
25
24
Tampa
May
May
Test fruit did not
H
27
24
6
21
accompany commer-
cially ventilated
fruit
May
5
I
12
9
Jackson-
May
June
Test fruit stowed
J
14
13
ville
20
4
alone in hatch square
adjacent to refriger-
ated chambers
■'■ Sources (groves) for oranges and grapefruit are different although the lettering is
the same. ^
^ Ships loaded in Jacksonville stopped in Savannah en route to Europe. Ships loaded in
Tampa sailed directly to Europe.
""""Trace" rind breakdown is pinpoint in size up to 1/4 inch in diameter; "slight" rind breakdown is recorded when the dis-
order, or the aggregate of the disorders, is smaller than a dime (5/8-inch diameter) but larger than 1/4 inch in diameter.
-5-
RESULTS
Fruit and Air Temperatures
Outside air temperatures showed more fluctuations and extremes than hold air tem-
peratures. As was expected, outside air temperatures directly influenced temperatures
inside the ventilated holds. Although hold temperatures lagged behind outside air tem-
peratures, whenever outside air temperatures became higher, hold temperatures also
became higher. The same relation prevailed when temperatures became lower. Sea
temperatures had no direct relation to hold temperatures.
In all shipments, outside air temperatures and temperatures in the ventilated holds
were relatively high at time of loading and remained high for the first 5 days at sea.
Ships loaded in Tampa and sailing directly to Europe were exposed to the same compara-
tive durations and extremes of temperature as those loaded in Jacksonville and stopping
in Savannah.
The average temperature inside boxes of oranges and grapefruit at loading ranged
from 68° F. for the second shipment to 78° for the fourth shipment. As is normally the
case, temperatures recorded en route within the boxes of oranges and grapefruit were
usually a few degrees higher than the free air temperatures in the hold. Temperatures
in boxes of oranges and grapefruit on top of the load were usually higher than those on
the bottom of the load. The lowest outside air temperature encountered was 35°, re-
corded on the seventh or eighth day after loading in the first, second, and third ship-
ments.
Figures 1 through 5 show the recorded temperatures until time of unloading for
each shipment. Only outside air temperatures and temperatures inside the boxes are
included, since they are the most pertinent.
The first shipment was exposed to relatively cool outside air temperatures through-
out the voyage (fig. 1). The highest average outside air temperatures were in the 60° to
70° F. range at Jacksonville and Savannah as well as for the first few days at sea. On
the eighth day after the ship's departure from Jacksonville, the outside air temperature
dropped and remained low for the remainder of the voyage. However, temperatures in-
side boxes of oranges and grapefruit did not closely follow this sudden drop of outside
air temperature. When the outside air temperature was 35°, the temperature in the
test fruit boxes was 57°. Commercial lots of ventilated oranges and grapefruit, in the
same compartment with the experimental fruit, were inspected on the sixth day after
leaving Jacksonville, and a strong odor of mold was detected. Some oranges and grape-
fruit completely consumed with green mold were observed through the box slats. The
outside air temperature at the time of this inspection was 52° and the temperature of
this fruit ranged from 5Z° to 57°.
The second shipment was exposed to outside air temperatures ranging from 70° to
83° F. at the time of loading and for the first few days at sea (fig. Z). On the sixth and
seventh days at sea, the outside air temperature became lower and remained below 55'
for the rest of the voyage. The seventh day after the ship left Tampa, the outside air
temperature was 35°, and at the same time the free air temperature in the ventilated
hold was 47°.
The third shipment was exposed to outside daytime temperatures of 70° to 90° F.
at the time of loading and for the first few days at sea (fig. 3). Outside air tennpera-
tures at night during this period were 65° to 75°. On the sixth and seventh days after
the ship left Jacksonville, the temperature reached 35°. At the same time, the free
air temperature in the hold was 38° for a short period, which in turn affected the tem-
perature of the fruit only briefly. Thereafter, temperatures ranged between 51° and
55° for the remainder of the voyage.
-6-
o
I/I
o
CN
-c
o
D
c
o
-^
u
D
C
D
— E
3 a
3 Q)
— =
(/)
lO '^
c
0)
CO
0)
O
O
<
111
Of
CD
O
z
2 5
~ O-l .1=
■ ^ OJ CD -
5c55
Ji
.jaO.
■ I
I I
z
<
O
Q.
<
O
a>
u
o
UJ
O
z
<
O
3
tt
a.
<
ec
O
o
o
o
o
CN
GRAPEFRUIT DECAYED
-
-
wk. storage at 40° F
)lding 1 wk. at 50 F
1
At arrival
^.'^ After 2-
/\''^, 'After he
n
<
0)
1
1
O
UJ
<
>-
z
X
a
CO
0)
1
1
o
UJ
<
-J
>-
Z
u
MJ
UJ
X
4-
w
lU
UJ
I
3
ec
X
a
T
ec
X
o
O
H-
a.
a.
o
^-
a.
Z
CO
CO
Z
m
1
1
(
1
1
3
1
1
I
1
X
a.
CO
Q
UJ
a.
Q.
o
CN
O
o
o
< u
Qt: UJ
2
<
Z)
t-
_j
u
=)
c;
u.
in
Q.
<
QC
O
>^
CO
UJ
U
Q
LU
UJ
Ct
UJ
~J
to
1-
X-
_J
*^l
Z)
a:
u
<
s
oc
Q
o
2
<
<t
UJ
o
o
7-
1-
<
z.
tt:
UJ
O
i
<
(-
q:
u
<
^
a.
liJ
-7-^
z
N
-1 =
lO
95
Ov
ii 1-
I— ■
V
0^ < ?°<=
CN
(/)
u.
o
J =
a
I
go >^
_o
UJ
D
-J 1
At arrival
After 2-w
After fiold
^HB
a
i<-
1 1 H^'
^C
E
D
-
W
^:
I/I
i-
■F
(/)
h-
ti
:J
1^^
i^l
U)
D
<D ?
— E
ui a
C
= 0^
CN
CO
0
1 ' 1
' 1 1 1 1 1 I
lb "
^- -
?N 0
' )
to „
-0
1 ( 0)
Hi Q
0
1 ) TJ
_0
1/ ■:;
< 2
0 11/ 0 -
^n)1 /
s .
A' \
UJ "
1' r ^
^ ""
i ^>W J
i / 7*^ **- ~
ff \* 0
Ik E "°
« 1 °
/1\ 0
1 1
70 °°
-1 -r it 1 1 1 1
o
o
Ui
3
0
V7
UJ
3
u
0
0)
0
Q)
Z
UJ
\i
Z
UJ
ii
<
Oi
3
<
Q.
3
0
<
0
^
0
<
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
CN
o
Q
<
~i
q:
UJ
3:
I-
UJ
UJ
Q
Qi
UJ
K
O
3
Q:
u.
Uj
Q.
a:
o
a:
Q
<
UJ
o
z
<
o
<
G
z
UJ
.J
>
<
3
3
u
o
<
^-
Of all 5 shipments, the highest temperatures were recorded during the fourth ship-
ment (fig. 4). At the time of loading and for the first 3 days the ship was at sea, the
temperatures in this shipment ranged from 70° to 85° F. Outside air temperatures be-
came lower on the sixth and seventh days at sea. When the outside air temperature was
42°, fruit temperatures were 63° to 67°.
The fifth shipnnent was loaded when temiperatures were approximately 95° F. (fig.
5). The outside air temperatures during midday reached 95° for the first few days after
loading. By the seventh day, the temperatures were mostly in the 55° to 70° range. Two
days before arrival of the ship in Europe, the temperature gradually increased, reach-
ing highs of 77° and 80°, respectively. Fruit temperatures in the hold steadily declined
after loading and leveled off after 5 days at 48° at the bottom of the load and 52° at the
top. Stowage of the test boxes of oranges and grapefruit near refrigerated compartments
accounted for the relatively low fruit temperatures.
Condition of Test Fruit
Statements made concerning effects of chemiical treatments have been statistically
confirmed by an analysis of variance. They are shown in tabular form in the appendix.
Chemical treatments significantly inhibited decay in oranges and grapefruit. How-
ever, except for the semirefrigerated fifth shipment, all shipments of oranges, regard-
less of treatment, arrived in unacceptable 2 condition, due mostly to the combination of
decay and unacceptable rind breakdown"^. Treated grapefruit from some sources ar-
rived in either acceptable or borderline condition in most shipmients.
Decay
Phomopsis stem-end rot and green mold were the major decays observed through-
out the shipments. Stem-end rot was found more frequently than green miold, especially
in oranges. For both oranges and grapefruit, the percentage of stem-end rot increased
with each inspection, while the percentage of green mold decreased. Figures 1 through
5 graphically show the cumulative percentages of decay observed in oranges and grape-
fruit at the 3 inspections- -upon arrival, after 2 weeks in storage, and after holding for
1 week.
Oranges in the first, second, and fifth shipmients arrived with stem-end rot account-
ing for 64 to 68 percent of the decay present, green mold constituting the rennainder.
Of decay present on arrival in the third and fourth shipmients, stenn-end rot accounted
for 97 percent and 88 percent, respectively, and green mold accounted for the smiall
remainder as secondary infection.
In grapefruit, on the other hand, the observed decay on arrival was 65 percent green
mold in the first shipment and 71 percent green mold in the fifth shipment; stem-end rot
constituted the remaining decay. Although the percentage of stenn-end rot increased in
succeeding inspections, green mold still accounted for the greater percentage of decay
in these 2 shipments. On arrival of the second and fourth shipments, decay was 76 and
65 percent stem-end rot, respectively. The third shipment of grapefruit differed from
other shipments in that green mold on arrival accounted for 53 percent of the decay
present, but at subsequent inspections most of the decay was stem-end rot.
^ In this study, condition of oranges and grapefruit was determined by combining the percentage of decay and unacceptable
rind breakdown and classifying them as follows: Acceptable = less than 5 percent; borderline = 5 percent - 8 percent; unaccept-
able = above 8 percent.
^ Unacceptable rind breakdown included all moderate and severe aging and pitting. Moderate rind breakdown was deter-
mined when the aggregate of the disorder exceeded the size of a dime (5/8- inch diameter) but less than the size of a half-dollar
(1-1/8-inch diameter); severe rind breakdown was recorded when it exceeded the size of a half-dollar.
-9-
Untreated oranges in every shipment arrived with significantly more decay than
treated oranges. Biphenyl + DH afforded the best protection from decay. DH alone in-
hibited decay second best, followed last by biphenyl. Treatments on oranges inhibited
decay the same relative amount in all shipments. DH effectively inhibited decay in
grapefruit shipments.
Both oranges and grapefruit had little additional decay during the Z weeks' storage
at 40° F.
Usually, a large amount of decay developed in both treated and untreated oranges
and grapefruit during the final week of holding at room temperature, indicating that the
fungistatic treatments had lost their effectiveness.
Most of the treated oranges in the first shipment arrived with less than 5 percent
decay (fig. l). Of the 3 inspections in this shipment, the greatest amount of decay was
observed at the arrival inspection. At this time, there was no significant difference in
annount of decay between oranges treated with DH and those treated with the biphenyl +
DH treatment. However, both treatmients held decay significantly below that in oranges
given the biphenyl treatment.
All treated oranges in the second shipment, except some of those treated with the
biphenyl + DH treatment, arrived with more than 8 percent decay (fig. 2). The biphenyl
+ DH treatment again significantly inhibited decay the most, followed by DH and then
biphenyl. In this shipment, most of the decay occurred in transit, only a relatively
small amount occurring during the holding periods.
Upon arrival of the third shipment, only oranges treated with the biphenyl + DH
treatnnent arrived with less than 5 percent decay (fig. 3). Some of the oranges treated
with biphenyl and with DH arrived with 5 to 8 percent decay. This shipnnent of oranges
differed from previous shipments in that more decay developed during the holding periods
than during transit.
All oranges in the fourth shipment arrived in unacceptable condition due to decay
(fig. 4). Decay in oranges of this shipment was the highest of all orange shipments. Upon
arrival of the shipment, the odor of decayed fruit could be detected some distance from
the ship. Even though the chemical treatments significantly reduced decay, the oranges
were not acceptable. Decay during transit was far more than that which developed during
holding, yet decay during holding also was comparatively high.
Generally, oranges in the fifth shipment arrived with less decay than those in pre-
vious shipnnents (fig. 5). Most of the treated oranges in the shipment arrived in excel-
lent condition. All chemical treatments again effectively inhibited decay. Although
treated oranges in this shipnnent arrived in excellent condition, they were sinnilar to
the 2 previous shipments in having a brief storage and holding life. Decay observed at
the final inspection was high.
Treated grapefruit in the first and second shipments arrived with less than 5 per-
cent decay, while decay in untreated grapefruit of these 2 shipments ranged from 5.2 to
9.2 percent (figs. 1 and 2). A statistical analysis showed that DH significantly inhibited
decay. More decay developed during the transit period than during holding.
Grapefruit in the third shipment arrived with more decay than other grapefruit
shipments (fig. 3). Decay in untreated grapefruit at arrival ranged from 11.3 to 14. 6
percent, while decay on treated fruit ranged from 6. 7 to 7. 1 percent; DH significantly
reduced the amount of decay. More decay developed during the final week of holding at
room tennperature than occurred during transit.
Treated grapefruit in the fourth shipment arrived with decay ranging from 5.4 to
9. 0 percent; untreated grapefruit arrived with decay ranging from 6. 3 to 13. 8 percent
(fig. 4). Decay during the final 1-week holding at room temperature was excessive in
•10-
c
tl E
CO
1 '
1 1
1 '
1 ' 1 '
-D
O
1
_0
1
*0
i
LU Q
E
0'
^J
0£ -<
^
5
3 ^
k
o
CO
1
< ^
0
f
Q^ </)
^^^
^^
LU »
3
rJr "O
H-
O
7/ I -
\
r
J>
/
op of 1
L. 1
1 .
u
5
1 , 1 1
o
o
o
o
CN
o
o
o
Q
Q:
UJ
a:
1-
lu
z
a:
o
a:
3
U.
UJ
o
<
Q
o
<
a:
o
u
LU
-J
<
>
>
o
2
2
3
U
O
<
3
Z)
U
Qi
O
2
LU
H
<
CL
LLI
CI
l/>
ID
-11-
^°
z
N
o ^
^
Ov
^ K
< " -
V
°^ < ^^ ^
T
%^ o
"5 v: .
— X
■i- ?^
:
Z D
Q£
: h'i
^
s^
gl
: o/>
: .-s: "^ —
: — 5 -5
^
^ :
^ O
s; :
. .— '--g .i^
>;
7 ^
^i
At arr
After
'^.fter
^1
^;
1 I 1
1 ' <
^1
ii
■J
1
1
i2l
D
*. Si
C
— E
U) .0.
0)
lU
o
z
<
O
3
UJ
a.
<
O
O
z
<
O
«/l
f
■T|
_
U- ■
;
: 0
: C3 "
-
: (-"^ :
-
o
: ^ :
^^
UJ
>-
o
UJ :
c: •— • :
7]
^
; --e ;
o ;
re -^
f" ■
: o 53 :
3 :
: .s- :
oe '
: -a: \ •
^
UJ ;
; 1
2-W
o
CN
a. :
O i
-^ ill :
_
1 1 '^ 1
■ ■ -» ■ 1
1
r>-
1 1 1 1
1
^ 5
<
O
1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1
1
T
-o
[i
—
0
0
^
-
r
-
*o "•^
P
«/)
1)
^ o
a
r
ec °
0
I
2?
•- (
—
< ?
ll
. -
oc ^
1
£<
■o ri
~ ■
5^
0 ^
,
-
UJ -
_j
H- — .
•o ^pS
*5
—
0 i
o
-
■o
0 fj
^
^ J
3
-
1
O
_
1 1
1 1 .1 . 1 .
1
I
o
o
o
o
o
CN
o
a:
<
itj
<
Q
K
O
UJ
Q.
Q.
-<
<
Q
<
oj
J
o
o
z
<
ct:
=}
(-
^ i^
u
-42-
grapefruit of this shipment, and was several times greater than that which developed in
transit.
Treated grapefruit in the semirefrigerated fifth shipment arrived with decay rang-
ing from 4. 6 to 7. 1 percent; decay in untreated grapefruit ranged from 7. 5 to 11.7 per-
cent (fig. 5). A high amount of decay developed during the final week of holding at 70° F.
Rind Breakdown
Throughout the shipments, pitting was never a factor on oranges. On grapefruit,
pitting was observed in every shipment, but was usually only a trace or slight. Aging
was the most common type of rind breakdown found on both fruits.
Figures 1 through 5 graphically show the percentages of unacceptable rind break-
down observed in oranges and grapefruit at the 3 inspections. Since chemical treatment
had no great effect on the extent of rind breakdown, the figures do not show the amount
of rind breakdown according to chemical treatment. A statistical analysis showed that
DH had no significant effect on the extent of rind breakdown in grapefruit when compared
with untreated fruit (table 5). There was likewise, no statistically significant difference
in the extent of rind breakdown between untreated oranges and those treated with DH
(table 4). However, oranges treated with biphenyl and biphenyl + DH showed significantly
less rind breakdown than those treated with DH alone, but the differences were slight and
of little or no comfnercial innportance. In the figures, the amount of rind breakdown at
each inspection is shown separately instead of cumulatively because the same fruits
were observed each time for extent of rind breakdown, instead of being discarded as
was decayed fruit.
Oranges in the first shipment arrived with average unacceptable rind breakdown of
10.4 percent in oranges from 1 source and 23.7 percent in those from the other source
(fig. 1).
Unacceptable rind breakdown in the second shipment of oranges on arrival was
heavy, accounting for an average of 13.8 percent in oranges from 1 source and 19. 1
percent in those from the other source (fig. 2).
In the third shipment of oranges, rind breakdown in the form of severe aging was
responsible for the cull condition of over one-third of the entire shipment on arrival
(fig. 3). Many of the oranges in this shipment also had a desiccated appearance on ar-
rival.
Oranges in the fourth shipment arrived with an average of 19. 5 percent unaccept-
able rind breakdown in oranges from 1 source and 33. 5 percent in those from the other
source (fig. 4).
In the fifth, or semirefrigerated, shipment, rind breakdown was negligible and
oranges arrived in good condition (fig. 5).
All grapefruit arrived with a negligible amount of rind breakdown except that from
1 source in the third shipment (figs. 1 to 5),
Relation of source to condition
Source of oranges and grapefruit in most shipments influenced the annount of decay
and rind breakdown.
Although the source of grapefruit had only slight effect on the amount of decay on
arrival, large differences were apparent after a week of holding at room temperature.
This was strikingly different from the record for oranges, which often had great dif-
ferences in the amount of decay on arrival that were related to the source of fruit.
-13-
DISCUSSION
The importance of temperatures in ventilated overseas shipments of oranges and
grapefruit cannot be overemphasized. The excellent condition in which the last, unven-
tilated, semirefrigerated shipment arrived dennonstrated the importance of cool tem-
peratures en route. This is especially apparent since these oranges and grapefruit,
picked late in the season, were more mature than fruit picked earlier and would nor-
mally be of poor keeping quality. Regardless of chenaical treatment to inhibit decay,
cool temperatures were paramount for extending the storage and holding life of oranges
and grapefruit.
Temperatures in the hold did not respond as quickly or beconne as low as outside
air temperatures, and these relationships indicate that ventilated holds had a relatively
slow replacement of air. Therefore, any means of taking advantage of cool outside air
would be desirable in ventilated shipments at this time of the year.
Because outside and hold air temperatures were highest during the first 5 days after
loading, attention should be given to the problem of reducing the temperatures of fruit
and hold, and maintaining low levels during this period. Precooling of oranges and
grapefruit might be considered.
Since the ventilated holds were on the top deck and above the water line, sea tem-
peratures had little, if any, direct effect on tennperatures in the ventilated holds.
The elapsed time from picking until the oranges and grapefruit were loaded aboard
ship was usually from 6 to 8 days, but ran as long as 13 days. No doubt careful selec-
tion and proper timing to lessen the elapsed time from tree to ship would add to stor-
age and holding life.
Although chemical treatments reduced decay, oranges and grapefruit in shipments
like the third and fourth, which were exposed to the highest temperatures encountered,
arrived in the worst condition. Where decay on treated oranges was negligible, severe
or moderate rind breakdown usually caused them to be unacceptable. For example, in
the third shipment all oranges treated with biphenyl + DH arrived with a small amount
of decay and would have been acceptable had not excessive rind breakdown been present.
Rind breakdown is a serious disorder, not only because it causes poor appearance but
because it provides a possible means for the entrance of decay organisnns.
There were instances where treatment definitely prevented oranges and grapefruit
from arriving in borderline or unacceptable condition. For example, grapefruit in the
first shipment and oranges in the fifth shipment would have arrived in unsatisfactory or
questionable condition had not chemical treatment been used.
Although green nnold caused less decay than stem-end rot, most green mold was
detected at the arrival inspection and was found to accompany mec^hanical injury to the
oranges and grapefruit. Since green mold flourishes in cool temperatures and Phomopsis
stem-end rot prefers warnner temperatures, shipments exposed to cool temperatures
contained more green mold than those exposed to higher temperatures.
High percentages of decay during the final week of holding occurred in the last 3
shipments of oranges and grapefruit. This is probably due to the more advanced maturity
of the fruit, which was susceptible to the entry of decay, especially when a high in-
cidence of rind breakdown was present as well as the higher holding temperatures.
During the final week of holding at room temperature there was little difference in
the amount of decay development between treated and untreated oranges, and in some
cases the untreated oranges had less decay, indicating that the fungistatic treatments
had lost their effectiveness at the time of the final inspection. The exception to this was
in treated oranges of the semirefrigerated last shipment, which developed significantly
Ij i/^
K
o
CN
D
CD
C
o
to
-^
o
o
<
3
z
2 s
— 5-5
^ <1> CD
S 55
O
o
o
CN
Q ::
111
o
>- ^■
< >.
UJ ':
Q i;
C=)
1 —
1 1 re
_, o
'■: 'to •— "
^ -
torage
lolding
1
u. ■:■
UU :
3
Q
a:
LU
o
a:
Q
UJ
a.
a.
:3
u.
ui
Q.
<
o
Q
UJ
UI
O
<
o
<
u
UI
<
>
u
o
<
Z3
u
o
<
LU
<
-15-
less decay during the final week, indicating that the effectiveness of fungistatic treat-
ments was prolonged by lower temperatures.
Under the conditions of these tests, grapefruit appear to be more adaptable for
ventilated shipments than oranges. In every shipment except the last, grapefruit ar-
rived with a lower percentage of decay than oranges. Rind breakdown, in most cases,
also was greater in oranges than grapefruit. Regardless of treatment, all shipments
of oranges arrived in unacceptable condition except those in the semirefrigerated last
shipnaent. The unacceptable arrival condition of many of the treated oranges was due to
rind breakdown. Of grapefruit, only the third shipment arrived in totally unacceptable
condition.
None of the oranges shipped in ventilated holds between mid-March and mid-May
arrived in satisfactory condition, because rind breakdown and decay were excessive.
Treated grapefruit in the first Z shipments, made in March and early April, arrived
with less than 5 percent decay. After holding at Rotterdam, there was an average of
8. 6 percent decay in the treated fruit of the second shipment, but only 3. 3 percent in
the treated fruit of the first shipment made on March 20. However, rind breakdown
developed on grapefruit from 1 of the 2 sources in this shipment to such an extent as to
make the fruit unmarketable after this long a holding period.
On the basis of these tests, it does not appear feasible to make ventilated shipments
or oranges from Florida as late as mid-March. Fair success was obtained with grape-
fruit shipped in mid-March, but not with later shipments.
-16^
APPENDIX
Table 2.--Mean-'- number of decayed fruit per box in test shipments of Florida Valencia
oranges, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1957
Shipment
No.
Inspection
Treatments
Upon
arrival
After 2
weeks at
40O F.
storage
After 1
week at
room tem-
perature
Average of
treatment
means
Untreated
1
2
3
4
5
Average
16.5
30.1
15.1
45.4
9.1
23.2
3.3
3.3
4.8
4.8
5.4
4.3
5.0
3.8
12.0
16.0
17.1
10.8
12.8
Biphenyl
1
2
3
4
5
Average
9.7
22.7
9.8
39.9
5.7
17.6
2.7
3.3
4.3
3.1
4.1
3.5
2.8
3.6
11.3
17.9
11.9
9.5
10.2
DH
1
2
3
4
5
Average
3.5
16.1
7.2
30.8
4.3
12.4
2.2
2.8
6.9
5.2
4.3
4.3
4.3
2.8
16.8
19.3
14.9
11.6
9.4
Biphenyl + DH
1
2
3
4
5
Average
2.7
12.2
4.4
23.4
3.3
9.2
2.0
2.3
4.5
5.4
2.1
3.3
2.8
3.7
14.2
22.3
13.8
11.4
7.9
Average of inspec-
tion means
15.6
3.8
10.8
LSD"^ for treatment means .01 = 1.9
" " " " .05 =1.4
" " inspection " .01 = 5.8
" " " " .05 = 4.3
"'" Each mean represents the average number of decayed oranges per box from 6 boxes in the
first shipment and 12 boxes in the other shipments.
^ LSD - Difference required for significance between treatment or inspection means at 1-
percent level (.01) or 5-percent level (.05).
-17-
Table 3. — Mean.-'- number of decayed fruit per box in test shipments of Florida Marsh Seed-
less grapefruit, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1957
Shipment
No.
Inspection
Treatments
Upon
arrival
After 2
weeks at
40° F.
storage
After 1
week at
room tem-
perature
Average of
treatment
means
Untreated
1
2
3
4
5
Average
2.8
5.0
6.2
5.0
4.8
4.8
1.4
1.7
2.8
2.6
2.0
2.1
1.4
3.0
7.5
17.2
12.7
8.4
5.1
DH
1
2
3
4
5
Average
2.0
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.3
3.3
1.1
1.8
2.1
2.1
1.7
1.8
1.2
2.4
7.3
16.6
10.4
7.6
4.2
Average of inspection
means
4.1
1.9
8.0
LSD^ for treatment means .01 = 0.8
" " " " .05 = 0.5 •
" " inspection " .01 = 4.6
" " " " 05 =33
■'- Each mean represents the number of decayed grapefruit per box from 18 boxes in the
first shipment and 24 boxes in the other shipments .
LSD - Difference required for significance between treatment or inspection means at
1-percent level (.01) or 5-percent level (.05).
-18-
Table 4. --Mean rind
breakdown index""" per box
in test shipments of Florida Valencia
oranges, Rotterdam, The
Netherlands,
1957
Treatments
Shipment
No.
Inspection
Upon
After 2
weeks at
After 1
week at
Average of
treatment
arrival
40° F.
room tem-
means
storage
perature
1
0.90
1.15
1.39
2
1.01
1.31
1.54
Untreated
3
2.34
2.93
3.59
1.76
4
2.11
2.40
3.26
5
0.27
0.54
1.61
Average
1.33
1.67
2.28
1
0.81
0.98
1.37
2
1.13
1.37
1.56
Biphenyl
3
2.40
2.77
3.45
1.63
4
1.97
2.19
2.91
5
0.18
0.40
1.05
Average
1.30
1.54
2.07
1
1.14
1.34
1.63
2
1.18
1.55
1.72
DH
3
2.47
2.95
3.56
1.83
4
2.16
2.42
3.12
-
5
0.22
0.42
1.52
Average
1.43
1.74
2.31
1
0.92
1.16
1.42
2
1.17
1.41
1.49
Biphenyl + DH
3
2.29
2.73
3.50
1.67
U
1.94
2.20
2.95
5
0.19
0.43
1.18
Average
1.30
1.59
2.11
Average of inspection
means
1.34
1.63
2.19
LSD
It
^ for treatment means
II 11 M
" inspection "
.01 = 0.14
.05 = 0.10
.01 = 0.18
.05 = 0.13
""" Each mean represents the average rind breakdown index per box in oranges from 12
boxes except those means in the first shipment representing fruit treated with biphenyl
and untreated fruit, in which case the average was taken from 10 boxes of oranges. For
statistical analyses, ratings were given for the amount of rind breakdown observed on
each orange: None - 0, trace = 1, slight = 2, moderate = 3, and severe = 4. The numeri-
cal ratings of individual, undecayed oranges in each box were added and then averaged.
This procedure gave one value, a rind breakdown index on a per-fruit basis, for each box
of oranges.
^ LSD - Difference required for significance between treatment or inspection means at
1-percent level (.01) or 5-percent level (.05).
-19-
Table 5. --Mean rind breakdown index^ per box in test shipments of Florida Marsh Seedless
grapefruit, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 1957
Shipment
No.
Inspection
Treatments
Upon
arrival
After 2
weeks at
40° F.
After 1
week at
room tem-
Average of
treatment
means
storage
perature
1
0.05
0.20
0.40
2
0.32
0.48
0.74
Untreated
3
0.55
0.85
1.39
0.55
4
0.13
0.30
1.02
5
0.27
0.44
1.06
Average
0.26
0.45
0.92
1
0.05
0.24
0.45
2
0.32
0.45
0.69
DH
3
0.51
0.75
1.24
0.49
4
0.12
0.23
0.77
5
0.23
0.36
0.89
Average
0.25
0.41
0.81
Average of inspection
means
0.25
0.43
0.87
LSD^ for treatment means = n.s.
Inspection
.01 = 0.44
.05 = 0.32
■'■ Each mean represents the average rind breakdown index per box in grapefruit from 24
boxes.. For statistical analyses, ratings were given for the amount of rind breakdown ob-
served in each grapefruit: None = 0, trace = 1, slight = 2, moderate = 3, and severe = 4.
The numerical ratings of individual, undecayed, grapefruit in each box were added and then
averaged. This procedure gave one value, a rind breakdown index on a per-fruit basis, for
each box of grapefruit.
^ LSD = Difference required for significance between inspection means at 1-percent
level (.01) or 5-percent level (.05).
<fU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1958 O -479747
-20-
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11