4.7 Article

Physical characteristics and mineral composition of two pepper cultivars under organic, conventional and soilless cultivation

Journal

SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE
Volume 150, Issue -, Pages 259-266

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2012.11.020

Keywords

Low-input; Hydroponic; Sensory attributes; Hue; Chroma

Categories

Funding

  1. Fundacion Seneca Region de Murcia [11967/PI/09]
  2. FEDER
  3. European Social Funds
  4. Ministerio de Espana de Ciencia e Innovacion through the Ramon and Cajal Subprogram

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study aims to compare pepper quality and mineral composition in two different cultivars (Almuden and Quito) under organic or conventional management (experiment 1) and under soil or soilless cultivation (experiment 2). This work falls into the category of research center studies, which compare cropping systems under identical environmental conditions. The effect of the experimental factors cropping system (CS), harvesting time (HT) and cultivar (CV) - and their interactions were studied. In general, conventional management led to larger, firmer and thicker peppers than observed in organic fruits, with a similar greenish colour but lower colour intensity. However, some exceptions were recorded since the effect of CS on most fruit quality parameters depended on the HT and/or CV. Conventional peppers showed higher concentrations of N and P than organic fruits and also, only in the case of Almuden, a higher NO3- concentration. Peppers grown under the soilless system showed higher NO3- and lower Ca concentrations and were less greenish (lower hue) than those grown in soil. Significant two-way and/or three-way interactions between CS and the other experimental factors were detected for weight, firmness and flesh thickness. The results obtained for fruit weight in Quito showed this cultivar to be the less suitable for soilless cultivation. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available