{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.039285714285714285, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01875, 'mean_word_length': 5.479768786127168, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effect of mechanical and water‐based postharvest treatments on storability of ‘Hayward’ kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa)

Abstract A trial (15 orchards; n = 37500 fruit) was conducted to determine the impact of postharvest wetting and drying procedures on the subsequent storage characteristics at 0°C of ‘Hayward’ kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa). Treatments were a control (commercial practice before storage), wetting in water or MgSO4 solution, and passive (drip‐drying) or active (brush rollers and fan) drying before curing. Cumulative fruit loss in the Control after 20 weeks of storage was 2.2%. This increased by 71% with dry brushing, with wetting having negligible additional impact. Dipping fruit in MgSO4 solution had no adverse consequence on total losses beyond use of water alone. There was no difference in overall fruit losses between passive and active drying processes, or between treatments containing wet and dry fruit where equivalent mechanical procedures were imposed. Physiological pitting (0.4%) was the only individual quality disorder where losses increased (to 1–1.2%) when fruit were wetted.