Postharvest Characteristics of ‘MN80’ (Triumph™) Apple Fruit Compared to ‘Cortland’ and ‘Honeycrisp’
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71318/apom.2022.76.3.103Keywords:
firmness, sensory evaluations, soluble solids concentration, storage disordersAbstract
‘MN80’, a cross between ‘Honeycrisp’ and ‘Liberty’, a newly-released apple sold under the Triumph trademark, is meant to be marketed primarily to home gardeners and small-scale commercial orchards. It was selected for release based on its fruits’ resistance to apple scab, thus requiring less spraying than scab-susceptible cultivars. The quality of ‘MN80’ fruit from two growing locations over multiple years was assessed at harvest and after storage for four months at 0-1 °C and 4-5 °C. Mean firmness of Wisconsin-grown ‘MN80’fruit decreased as harvest week increased, but mean fruit fresh weight and total soluble solids concentration (SSC) remained the same over harvest time, which was also observed for ME-grown fruit. Fruit stored at 4-5 °C exhibited more shrivel and loss of firmness than fruit stored at 0-1 °C. Percentages of fruit showing internal browning and soft scald in storage increased with harvest date for ME-grown fruit in 2019 but not 2021. Consumer sensory panels evaluating newly-harvested fruit liked ‘Honeycrisp’ and Maine-grown ‘MN80’fruit best, followed by Wisconsin-grown ‘MN80’fruit, then ‘Cortland’ fruit. However, after 4 months of storage, Maine-grown ‘MN80’ fruit had the highest overall liking scores of all the stored cultivars. Mean sensory attribute scores of Maine- and Wisconsin-grown ‘MN80’ fruit changed little with storage, whereas stored ‘Honeycrisp’ and ‘Cortland’ had lower scores than newly-harvested fruit. For all cultivars, storage temperature had no effect on sensory attribute scores. These data suggest that ‘MN80’ fruit retain characteristics that appeal to consumers between harvest and 4-5 months of cold storage.
Downloads
Published
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The American Pomological Society and Editors cannot be held responsible for the views and opinions expressed by individual authors of articles published herein. This also applies to any supplemental materials residing on this website that are linked to these articles. The publication of advertisements does not constitute any endorsement of products by the American Pomological Society or Editors.