Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 6, 117-125

Published Online January 2015 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/as

http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.61009

Compost and Compost Tea Management of

Mini Watermelon Cultivations Affects the
Chemical, Physical and Sensory Assessment
of the Fruits
Loredana Liguori1, Catello Pane2, Donatella Albanese1*, Giuseppe Celano3,
Massimo Zaccardelli2, Marisa Di Matteo1
1
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale, Università di Salerno, Fisciano, Italy
2
Consiglio per la Ricerca e la Sperimentazione in Agricoltura, Centro di Ricerca per l’Orticoltura, Pontecagnano,
Italy
3
Dipartimento delle Culture Europee e del Mediterraneo: Architettura, Ambiente, Patrimoni Culturali (DICEM),
Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Matera, Italy
Email: *dalbanese@unisa.it

Received 4 December 2014; accepted 27 December 2014; published 16 January 2015

Copyright © 2015 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Abstract
Compost, rich in plant nutrients, is a readily available fertilizer with beneficial effects on physical,
chemical, biochemical and biological properties of the soils. Moreover compost-based treatments
can exert protective effects against plant diseases occurrence and/or stimulate an enhanced plant
physiological status with improvements in quantity and quality of crop productions. In this study
the effects of three different compost-based cropping managements on the productive response
and main quality parameters of watermelon fruits were investigated. Treatments, in comparison
with the conventional cultivation method, were: soil amendment with an agricultural waste com-
post (AWC), a municipal waste compost (MWC) and a foliar treatment with a compost tea blend
(CTB). The productive responses and colour parameters related to compost treatments did not
show significant differences compared to control ones, which reached a total yield of about 10.22
kg∙m−2 with a mean weight of 2.74 kg. AWC caused a higher ascorbic acid content with an increase
of 50% than conventional treatment, while fruits obtained by CTB showed higher values in firm-
ness and Quality Index than control samples. The analysis of main sugars highlighted that the ap-
plication of compost as biofertilizer influenced the ratio among fructose, glucose and sucrose with
respect to those observed for control fruits.
*
Corresponding author.

How to cite this paper: Liguori, L., Pane, C., Albanese, D., Celano, G., Zaccardelli, M. and Di Matteo, M. (2015) Compost and
Compost Tea Management of Mini Watermelon Cultivations Affects the Chemical, Physical and Sensory Assessment of the
Fruits. Agricultural Sciences, 6, 117-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.61009
L. Liguori et al.

Keywords
Biostimulants, Compost, Quality, Watermelon

1. Introduction
Among summer fruits, watermelons have a very high favour by consumers because to their high satiety index,
low caloric intake and thirst-quenching and refreshing capability. In recent years, mini and seedless watermelons
(Citrullus lanatus, Thunb.) have been developed to respond to the needs of small families, singles and consum-
ers that have limited refrigerator space. The appeal to the mini watermelons can be further strengthened by the
introduction of sustainable crop production, which gives an added value to the fruit. Increasing interest to food
safety and environmental pollution has stimulated the attention for compost as valid alternative to the use of
chemical fertilizers, beside the recovery of by-products from the refusals. Compost is the final product of the
composting process, a solid state controlled microbial fermentation of organic and no degraded matters, which
can include crop residues, animal wastes, food garbage, organic municipal and industrial wastes. Pane et al. [1]
reported the beneficial effects of agricultural utilization of compost on physical, chemical, biochemical and bio-
logical properties of the soils. In the last years, the development of new products derived from compost, such as
compost teas (CTs) is increasing, due to their positive effects on the crops [2]. CTs are organic products ob-
tained through a liquid-phase compost extraction ranging from few hours to two weeks, with or without active
aeration and the addition of nutrients (molasses, casein, etc.). Many researches have been focused on plant bio-
stimulants due to the increasing attention about the use of natural substances to potentiate crop. In particular,
both composts and compost teas can show this particular bioactivity on plants due to their content in aromatic,
hormone-like organic molecules and useful microorganisms. Compost-based treatments, in fact, can exert pro-
tective effects against plant diseases occurrence [3] and/or stimulate an enhanced plant physiological status [2]
with improvements in quantity and quality of crop productions. The most widely described uses of compost tea
are related, almost exclusively, to its ability in suppressing plant pathogens [4]. Few papers regards the direct
implication of compost-based treatments on the chemical, physical and, especially, on the sensory properties of
vegetables such as lettuce [5], potato [6] and carrot systems [7] [8]. Thus further investigations are required to
provide a clear information about the effects of compost and compost tea in promotion of eat quality among the
worldwide consumed vegetables. Therefore this work, was focused on the effects of compost and compost tea
on the main quality parameters of mini watermelons. To this aim, we hypothesized that the applied com-
post-based formulates may exert a suitable bioactivity on the plants related to the stimulation of quality parame-
ters of the fruits.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Greenhouse Trial
Agronomic trials were carried out in 2012, under a greenhouse system in a loamy soil, at organic farm “Ide-
aNatura” located in Eboli (Salerno, Italy). The experimental design was a randomized complete block with plot
areas of about 100 m2 each, replicated three times. Mini watermelon plants (cv Chicago) were transplanted on
April 12th, on single raw, at distances of 0.50 × 1.80 m, in order to have a density of 1.10 plants∙m−2. Two dif-
ferent experiments based on the comparison among two compost and control amendments and between compost
tea aerial spry treatments and not-treated plots were carried out. The compost treatments were:
• On-farm Agricultural Waste Compost (AWC), prepared from residues of corn, cabbage, fennel and salads
mixed to wood chips [9];
• Municipal organic Waste Compost (MWC) purchased at Gesenu (Perugia, Italy);
• Compost Tea Blend (CTB) prepared by mixing (50% vol.) two 1-week aerated teas produced by water ex-
traction of artichoke and artichoke + fennel green composts (20% vol.) [10].
Composts were applied at a dose necessary to supply 170 kg∙ha−1 of nitrogen, thus 6 ton∙ha−1 of AWC (N =
2.8%) and 8.5 ton∙ha−1 of MWC (N = 2.8%) in dry weight, and were incorporated into the soil at a depth of 15
cm. CTB, water diluted 10% vol., was weekly applied by spraying aerial parts of the plants. Total yield was de-

118
 L. Liguori et al.

termined in an assay area of about 11 m2 for each plot. For each compost treatment five fruits were analyzed for
the evaluation of the main agronomical, chemical, physical and sensory parameters.

2.2. Analyses
Moisture and pH were determined in accordance with the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC)
official methods [11]. Sugars were analyzed by HPLC system equipped with a 4.6 × 250 mm steel Carbohy-
drate-Cartridge column (Waters, USA). The mobile phase was acetonitrile—water solution (75:25), with column
at 30˚C and 1 ml/min flow rate. Peaks were detected by a refractive index detector (Hewlett Packard, Agilent)
and concentrations were calculated with external standards.
Ascorbic acid was determined by ion exchange chromatography according to Cinquanta et al. [12].
Firmness was measured by compression tests using a texturometer (Ametek Lloyd Instruments LRX plus,
United Kingdom), with specific software (Nexygen batch 4.1). The size of watermelon samples analyzed was
standardized with a cylinder cutter into pieces 2 cm in diameter and 1 cm in height. Firmness of watermelon
samples was obtained from load and strain curves recorded during the compression of cylindrical samples to
50% of initial height, using two horizontal parallel plates, with the sample placed on the middle of the lower
plate [13]. The crosshead speed was 50 mm per min with a cell load of 50 N. Six repetitions from each water-
melon sample and for five replicates, were performed. Colour of the flesh was measured with a CR-200 Chro-
mometer (Minolta, Japan) having an aperture size of 10 mm. Hunter values (L, a*, b*) were monitored on the
middle of half watermelon; three readings were obtained from each fruit for a total of fifteen measurements for
each treatment [14]. Chroma (C*) is the saturation or vividness of colour. As chromaticity increases, a colour
becomes more intense; as it decreases, a colour becomes more dull. Hue angle (H˚) is the basic unit of colour
and can be interpreted, for example, as 0˚ = red and 90˚ = yellow. Both Chroma and Hue angle are derived from
a* and b* using the following equations C* = (a2 + b2)1/2; H˚ = arctan (b*/a*).

2.3. Overall Quality Assessment

A comprehensive survey of the sensory characteristics of colour of the pulp, crispness, sweetness, juiciness,
mealinins and global odours of mini watermelons, was carried out. The intensity of the sensory terms was scored
on nine-point structured scale (1 = none; 9 = extreme). Random samples of different treatments were presented
in three-digit coded plates and were separately evaluated by 12 untrained consumer panelists. The mean scores
for each attribute were finally summed to give an overall sensory score known as the Quality Index (QI). For the
calculation of QI, mealiness attribute was considered as negative value.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

All analyses were performed in triplicates. The average and standard deviation of each chemical, physical and
sensory parameters results were subjected to a mono-factorial variance analysis (ANOVA), and the significance
of differences (P < 0.05) among means was determined with Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) test.
Statistical analysis was performed using an SPSS version 13.0 for Windows (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

3. Results
3.1. Productive Response
The productive responses to AWC, MWC and CTB treatments, compared to their control plots, were reported in
Table 1. The parameters investigated did not show substantial differences compared to control plots, which
reached, on average, 10.22 kg∙m−2. MWC soil amendment, instead, significantly reduced total yield (−15%),
likely due to an initial compost phytotoxicity that determined a slight growth reduction in the early phases of the
cycle. Similarly, all the remaining measured agronomic traits of the fruits proved to be not affected by treat-
ments.

3.2. Quality Parameters

The force corresponding to breakdown of the fruit tissue during compression test of flesh fruits was used as
firmness of the mini watermelon samples. Fruit firmness and texture are most closely associated with cell wall

119
L. Liguori et al.

Table 1. Effects of treatments with composts (a) and compost tea (b) on productive response of mini watermelon cropping
system.
(a)

Fruits
Total yield
Sample
(kg∙m−2) Weight −2 Major diameter Minor diameter Pericarp thickness
N˚ m
(kg) (cm) (cm) (cm)
CTRL 9.82 ± 0.27a 3.12 ± 1.12a 4.44 ± 0.64a 16.73 ± 0.50a 15.20 ± 1.11a 1.24 ± 0.14a

MWC 8.70 ± 0.98a 3.10 ± 1.38a 4.04 ± 0.89a 16.67 ± 0.11a 15.65 ± 0.60a 1.14 ± 0.11a

AWC 9.64 ± 0.39a 3.12 ± 1.10a 4.29 ± 0.54a 16.73 ± 0.42a 15.66 ± 0.95a 1.23 ± 0.17a

(b)

Fruits
Total yield
Sample
(kg∙m−2) Weight Major diameter Minor diameter Pericarp thickness
N˚ m−2
(kg) (cm) (cm) (cm)
CTRL 10.62 ± 1.13a 2.36 ± 0.07a 4.66 ± 0.43a 16.60 ± 0.53a 15.80 ± 0.20a 1.21 ± 0.06a

CT 9.42 ± 1.27a 2.90 ± 0.59a 4.02 ± 0.51a 16.53 ± 1.28a 15.62 ± 1.22a 1.18 ± 0.11a

Different letters mean significant difference (P < 0.05).

structure and composition. Firmness is determined largely by the physical anatomy of the tissue, particularly cell
size, shape and packing, cell wall thickness and strength, and the extent of cell-to-cell adhesion, together with
turgor status [15].
The comparison of firmness parameter detected on mini watermelon samples grown with and without differ-
ent types of compost was shown in Table 2. CTB samples showed higher firmness when compared with its re-
spective control, whereas MWC treatment exhibited the lowest (P < 0.05) firmness than control and AWC. For
these latter, no significant differences were found. Although differences were found in firmness values among
samples, all mini watermelon samples firmness value ranged from 4.27 to 5.89 N, in accordance with previous
studies [16] [17].
Brittle properties of flesh fruits were recorded through rigidity value (Table 2). In this case, the CTB treat-
ment did not show positive effect than the control, in contrast to AWC, that displayed the highest value.
The amount of the principal sugars (glucose, fructose and sucrose) detected in mini watermelon flesh culti-
vated by different treatments, was reported in Figure 1. Control samples exhibited higher sugar content than
those treated by different types of compost. The concentration of these sugars changed in function of the treat-
ment employed during the cultivation of the plant. In fact, the mini watermelon samples treated by composts
showed low content of sucrose if compared with their respective control. Unlike CTB samples, where sucrose
was found at higher amount than monosaccharide sugars, MWC and AWC samples showed fructose as the main
sugar.
Colour parameters detected on the middle of the different watermelon samples were reported in Table 2. and
were in the range recorded by Pardo et al. [18], who characterized the colour of 21 different cv of watermelon
fruits in terms of L, a*, b*, Chroma and Hue parameters. Statistical analysis carried out on colour parameters of
fruit samples cultivated conventionally and using different type of compost, highlighted that all the samples
showed similar values without significance differences among them.
The use of different types of compost, compared to conventionally cultivation, showed significant differences
in vitamin C content (Table 2). AWC influenced positively the amount of ascorbic acid with an increase of 50%
than control. Opposite effect was, instead, observed in fruit samples treated by MWC and CTB, that exhibited
significant (P < 0.05) percentage decrease (48% and 28% respectively) when compared to their respective con-
trol.
The quality assessment of mini watermelons was reported in Table 3, which highlighted some similarity with
chemical and physical results. In fact, no significant differences were detected about the flesh colour among
control and compost treated mini watermelons. Samples treated with AWC were perceived more odorous than
MWC and control samples; similarly, CTB samples had a highly significant score (P < 0.05) in comparison with
control samples. During tasting, mini watermelons presented some differences both for positive attributes, such

120
 L. Liguori et al.

Table 2. Colour, ascorbic acid content (mg/100g fw) and texture parameters detected on mini watermelons grown with
different types of compost (agricultural waste compost AWC, municipal waste compost MWC (a) and a compost tea blend
(CTB) (b).
(a)
Ascorbic acid Flesh Flesh rigidity
Sample L* a* b* C* H˚
(mg/100g fw) firmness (N) (KN/m)
CTRL 40.08 ± 3.70a 20.11 ± 3.01a 19.15 ± 2.22a 27.88 ± 2.79a 43.80 ± 5.19a 8.62 ± 0.20c 5.20 ± 0.26a 3.47 ± 0.17b

MWC 39.40 ± 2.42a 22.27 ± 1.13a 18.74 ± 1.70a 29.13 ± 1.69a 40.04 ± 2.38a 5.84 ± 0. 15b 4.27 ± 0.21b 3.29 ± 0.16b

AWC 39.59 ± 1.87a 22.78 ± 1.07a 16.65 ± 2.65a 28.26 ± 2.40a 35.91 ± 3.55a 12.93 ± 0.18a 4.91 ± 0.24a 4.43 ± 0.22a

(b)
Ascorbic acid Flesh Flesh rigidity
Sample L* a* b* C* H˚
(mg/100g fw) firmness (N) (KN/m)
CTRL 36.42 ± 3.01a 21.49 ± 3.58a 15.08 ± 4.29a 27.64 ± 4.31a 34.38 ± 4.10a 8.23 ± 0.15a 4.12 ± 0.21b 4.02 ± 0.20a

CTB 35.85 ± 1.86a 18.37 ± 1.25 a 15.19 ± 2.66a 23.87 ± 2.52a 39.29 ± 3.72a 5.98 ± 0.09b 5.89 ± 0.29a 4.27 ± 0.21a

Different letters (a, b, c) mean significant difference (P < 0.05).

Table 3. Quality assessment of mini watermelons grown with different types of compost (agricultural waste compost AWC,
municipal waste compost MWC (a) and a compost tea blend (CTB) (b).
(a)

Sample Flesh colour Global odours Crispness Juiciness Sweetness Mealiness Quality Index

Control 7.00 ± 0.35a 6.71 ± 0.38ab 6.57 ± 0.40a 7.71 ± 0.20ab 7.43 ± 0.38a 1.57 ± 0.20a 33.86 ± 1.8a

MWC 7.33 ± 0.63a 6.33 ± 0.30b 5.17 ± 0.28b 6.15 ± 0.35b 7.17 ± 0.28a 3.17 ± 0.40b 30.3 ± 1.4b

AWC 7.83 ± 0.35a 7.33 ± 0.40a 7.50 ± 0.35c 8.00 ± 0.30a 7.67 ± 0.42a 2.17 ± 0.30a 36.2 ± 2.0a

(b)

Sample Flesh colour Global odour Crispness Juiciness Sweetness Mealiness Quality Index

CTRL 8.00 ± 0.26b 6.83 ± 0.99a 6.33 ± 0.32b 7.50 ± 0.35b 8.33 ± 0.32b 4.50 ± 0.38b 32.50 ± 3.2b

CTB 9.00 ± 0.63a 8.00 ± 0.53a 7.83 ± 0.41a 8.67 ± 0.52a 8.83 ± 0.41a 2.33 ± 0.30a 40.00 ± 1.3a

Different letters (a, b, c) mean significant difference (P < 0.05).

(a) (b)

Figure 1. Sugars content (g/100g fw) in mini watermelon samples with different types of compost: (a) AWC and
MWC; (b) CTB.

121
L. Liguori et al.

as crispness, juiciness and sweetness, and negative ones like mealiness. In fact, it is worth noting that crispness
of mini watermelons grown with AWC was significantly higher than control and MWC samples, which pre-
sented the lowest score. About juiciness, mini watermelons treated with AWC and MWC were different (P <
0.05) between them but not with respect to the control samples.
Mini watermelons grown with MWC had the highest score of mealiness with respect to AWC and control
samples, which were perceived similarly. This tasting attributor affects negatively the Quality Index. The as-
sessment of mini watermelons grown with CTB revealed significant differences (P < 0.05) when compared with
its control, as regard crispness, juiciness and mealiness. In fact, CTB mini watermelons were crispier and juicier
but less mealy than control samples. Lastly, CTB samples were preferred to the control ones, whereas AWC
mini watermelons were preferred to MWC and control samples.

4. Discussion
Compost and compost teas are largely reported to be complementary to conventional methods of crop manage-
ment for the enhancement of the quality associated to the agricultural products [19]. These results, for the first
time, confirm this potential also on mini watermelon fruits, due to a general increase in some chemical, physical
and sensory characteristics.
Sugars content together with colour of the flesh are the most important parameters that influence the con-
sumer acceptability of mini watermelon fruits. As reported elsewhere [20] glucose, fructose and sucrose were
the principal sugars in mini watermelon fruits.
The kind and amount of various carbohydrates directly influence fruit flavour components, such as sweetness
[21].
Carbohydrate accumulation is closely related to stachyose metabolism [22], photosynthates translocation ca-
pacity in phloem [23] [24], galactose metabolism [25] and sucrose metabolism in the fruit [26]. The terminal su-
crose metabolism is more important for its influence in the final carbohydrates accumulation [27]. Moreover,
fructose and glucose accumulation happens in early stage fruit development, while sucrose ones occurs as a
characteristic of its maturity [28] [29]. Lower sucrose concentration of mini watermelons fertilized with compost
can be attributed to the slow release of nutrients and its unavailability at the critical stage of nutrient require-
ment.
Ascorbic acid (AA) has long been considered an important nutritional component of the fruits. The concentra-
tion of vitamin C in watermelon’s flesh depends on several factors such as cultivar, environmental conditions
and cultural practices. In fact, it ranges from 38.2 - 69.8 mg/kg fw, as reported by Leskovar et al. [30], to 576.2
mg/kg fw, as detected by Melo et al. [31]. Vitamin C concentration, detected in all mini watermelons differently
treated, falls in the range reported in literature.
The differences found for vitamin C, but also for the other quality parameter investigated, among fruit sam-
ples treated by compost with respect to their control, may be attributed to a different concentration and/or re-
lease of potassium salt to the plant. Lester et al. [32] showed that firmness, total sugars and ascorbic acid were
positively influenced in muskmelon fruits by a higher K salt application.
The efficacy of AWC soil amendment and CTB foliar spray were particularly evident on the qualitative in-
trinsic parameters of the fruits rather than on agronomic traits while, MWC decreased overall parametric set.
Few previous studies concerning the use of the compost to grow plants of this species highlighted a low sensi-
tive yield response to compost amendment [33], as well as more different effects depending by soil type and
compost property [34]. Likely, this particular behaviour is due to the continue struggle between compost, pro-
moting growth factors, and the appearance of allelopathy to which watermelon is reported to be very sensible
[35] [36]. Nevertheless, it was showed that watermelon plants may receive benefits in term of protection from
biotic adversities, from long-term compost soil applications [37]. Since compost and compost tea suppressive-
ness can play a crucial role in defense of plants from biotic stress, it may be also considerated as an indirect de-
terminant of intrinsic and extrinsic crop quality [3] [10]. Moreover, here, it cannot be excluded that organic
treatments have had, at used rates, only a biostimulant function in order to improve plant physiological status [2].
In agreement with previous findings carried out on tomato [38] and early potato [39] growing systems organic
management may positively affects sensory quality and nutritional value of the products regardless of the yield.
Similarly, Vogtmann et al. [40] reported an improvement of food quality and storage performance of some
vegetables induced by compost without any particular effects on the quantity. Concerning the compost tea,

122
 L. Liguori et al.

Fayed [41] and Stino et al. [42] reported the enhancement of physical and chemical traits of pomegranate and
peaches, respectively, following aerial applications on trees. The authors, in order to explain the observations,
agreed on a nutriactive hypothesis based on the increased assumption of microelements by foliar feeding. Here,
sensory evaluation revealed that AWC and CTB application gave increased acceptance of fresh-cut mini water-
melon, suggesting that compost-based formulates could contribute to improve the sensory quality by enhancing
fruit aroma attributes. Previously, Radovich et al. [43] reported the capability of a compost to affect positively
flavour and aroma intensity in basil. In mini watermelon extracts, volatile aliphatic aldehydes and alcohols, were
described to be the most bioactive molecules responsible for odour and consumers acceptance [44] [45]. Here, it
is possible to hypothesize the involvement of compost-based treatments in stimulation of secondary metabolites
biosynthesis. Accordingly, Siddiqui et al. [46] found that compost tea treatments caused an increase in the con-
centration of terpenoid-related compounds in the aromatic medicinal herb, Centella asiatica. From this point of
view, further investigations about the influence of compost and compost tea treatment on the volatile com-
pounds that affect the aroma flavour of vegetable products are necessary.

5. Conclusion
The results of this study highlighted that two compost amendments and a compost tea aerial spry treatments did
not change growth and yield factor of the crop. Compost-based treatments seemed to influence the quantitative
profile of sugars of the fruits even if the sweetness, judged by the panelists did not show significant differences
among the samples. Compost tea, specifically, provided improvement for Quality Index which represented the
overall sensory score of the watermelons and thus higher preferences by the consumers. The data obtained in
this study allowed presuming that the compost and compost tea should be used as a valid and promising alterna-
tive to the use of chemical stimulants in mini watermelon cropping systems.

Acknowledgements
Greenhouse trial of this research was supported by the “BioCompost” Project, funded by the PSR 2007/2013
European funding programme (F.E.A.S.R., Measure 124).

References
[1] Pane, C., Villecco, D. and Zaccardelli, M. (2013) Short-Time Response of Microbial Communities to Waste Compost
Amendment of an Intensive Cultivated Soil in Southern Italy. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 44,
2344-2352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2013.803566
[2] Zaccardelli, M., Pane, C., Scotti, R., Palese, A.M. and Celano, G. (2012) Use of Compost-Tea as Bio-Agrochemicals
and Bio-Stimulants in Horticulture. Italus Hortus, 19, 17-28.
[3] Pane, C., Piccolo, A., Spaccini, R., Celano, G., Villecco, D. and Zaccardelli, M. (2013) Agricultural Waste-Based
Composts Exhibiting Suppressivity to Diseases Caused by the Phytopathogenic Soil-Borne Fungi Rhizoctonia solani
and Sclerotinia minor. Applied Soil Ecology, 65, 43-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2013.01.002
[4] Scheuerell, S.J. and Mahaffee, W.F. (2002) Compost Tea: Principles and Prospects for Plant Disease Control. Compost
Science and Utilization, 10, 313-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.2002.10702095
[5] Masarirambi, M.T., Hlawe, M.M., Oseni, O.T. and Sibiya, T.E. (2010) Effects of Organic Fertilizers on Growth, Yield,
Quality and Sensory Evaluation of Red Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) “VenezaRoxa”. Agriculture and Biology Journal of
North America, 1, 1319-1324. http://dx.doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2010.1.6.1319.1324
[6] Wszelaki, A.L., Delwiche, J.F., Walker, S.D., Ligget, R.E., Scheerens, J.C. and Kleinhenz, M.D. (2005) Sensory Qual-
ity and Mineral and Glycoalkaloid Concentrations in Organically Grown Redskin Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum).
Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 85, 720-726. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2051
[7] Haglund, A., Johansson, L., Berglund, L. and Dahlstedt, L. (1999) Sensory Evaluation of Carrots from Ecological and
Conventional Growing Systems. Food Quality and Preference, 10, 23-29.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(98)00034-2
[8] Gilsenan, C., Burke, R.M., Barry, R.C., O’Sullivan, G. and Pierce, E. (2008) An Evaluation of the Sensory Properties
of Irish Grown Organic and Conventional Carrots (Daucus carota L.) and Mushrooms (Agaricus bisporus). School of
Culinary Arts and Food Technology, Dublin.
[9] Zaccardelli, M., Villecco, D., Pane, C., Ragosta, G., Palese, A.M. and Celano, G. (2012b) “On Farm” Composting of
Vegetable Residues. Proceeding of the ISWA World Solid Waste Congress, Firenze, 17-19 September.

123
L. Liguori et al.

[10] Pane, C., Celano, G., Villecco, D. and Zaccardelli, M. (2012) Control of Botrytis cinerea, Alternaria alternata and
Pyrenochaeta lycopersici on Tomato with Whey Compost-Tea Applications. Crop Protection, 38, 80-86.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2012.03.012
[11] AOAC (1990) Official Methods of Analysis. 15th Edition, Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington.
[12] Cinquanta, L., Albanese, D., Cuccurullo, G. and Di Matteo, M. (2010) Effect on Orange Juice of Batch Pasteurization
in an Improved Pilot-Scale Microwave Oven. Journal of Food Science, 75, 46-50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01412.x
[13] Cuccurullo, G., Giordano, L., Albanese, D., Cinquanta, L. and Di Matteo, M. (2012) Infrared Thermography Assisted
Control for Apples Microwave Drying. Journal of Food Engineering, 112, 319-325.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2012.05.003
[14] Albanese, D., Cinquanta, L., Cuccurullo, G. and Di Matteo, M. (2013) Effects of Microwave and Hot-Air Drying
Methods on Colour, β-Carotene and Radical Scavenging Activity of Apricots. International Journal of Food Science
and Technology, 48, 1327-1333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.12095
[15] Harker, F.R., Stec, M.G.H., Hallett, I.C. and Bennett, C.L. (1997) Texture of Parenchymatous Plant Tissue: A Com-
parison between Tensile and Other Instrumental and Sensory Measurements of Tissue Strength and Juiciness. Post-
harvest Biology and Technology, 11, 63-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5214(97)00018-5
[16] Mao, L., Karakurt, Y. and Huber, D.J. (2004) Incidence of Water-Soaking and Phospholipid Catabolism in Ripe Wa-
termelon (Citrullus lanatus) Fruit: Induction by Ethylene and Prophylactic Effects of 1-Methylcyclopropene. Posthar-
vest Biology and Technology, 33, 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2003.12.007
[17] Ramos-Villarroel, A.Y., Aron-Mafteib, N., Martín-Bellosoc, O. and Soliva-Fortunyc, R. (2012) Influence of Spectral
Distribution on Bacterial Inactivation and Quality Changes of Fresh-Cut Watermelon Treated with Intense Light Pulses.
Postharvest Biology and Technology, 69, 32-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2012.03.002
[18] Pardo, J.E., Gómez, R., Tardáguila, J., Amoz, M.R. and Váron, R. (1997) Quality Evaluation of Watermelon Varties
(Citrullus vulgaris s.). Journal of Food Quality, 20, 547-557. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4557.1997.tb00495.x
[19] Naidu, Y., Meon, S. and Siddiqui, Y. (2013) Foliar Application of Microbial-Enriched Compost Tea Enhances Growth,
Yield and Quality of Muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.) Cultivated under Fertigation System. Science Horticolturae, 159,
33-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2013.04.024
[20] Rouphael, Y., Schwarz, D., Krumbein, A. and Colla, G. (2010) Impact of Grafting on Product Quality of Fruit Vegeta-
bles. Science Horticolturae, 127, 172-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2010.09.001
[21] Xu, C.Q., Li, T.L. and Qi, H.Y. (2006) Effects of Grafting on Development, Carbohydrate Content, and Sucrose Me-
tabolizing Enzymes Activities of Muskmelon Fruit. Acta Horticolturae Sinica, 33, 773-778.
[22] Taji, T., Ohsumi, C., Iuchi, S., Seki, M., Kasuga, M. and Kobayashi, M. (2002) Important Roles of Drought- and
Cold-Inducible Genes for Galactinol Sythase in Stress Tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Journal, 29, 417-426.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.0960-7412.2001.01227.x
[23] Li, T.L. (2000) Relation between the Vascular System and Photosynthate Translocation Pathways in Tomato Plants.
Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural, 69, 69-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.2503/jjshs.69.69
[24] Brian, G.A., Felix, K. and Robert, T. (2003) Symplastic Continuity between Companion Cells and the Translocation
Stream: Long-Distance Transport Is Controlled by Retention and Retrieval Mechanisms in the Phloem. Journal of
Plant Physiology, 13, 1518-1528.
[25] Dai, N., Petreikov, M., Portnoy, V., Katzir, N., Pharr, D.M. and Schaffer, A. (2006) Cloning and Expression Analysis
of a UDP Galactose/Glucose Pyrophosphorylase from Melon Fruit Provides Evidence for the Major Metabolic Path-
way of Galactose Metabolism in Raffinose Oligosaccharide Metabolizing Plants. Journal of Plant Physiology, 142,
294-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.083634
[26] Lingle, S.E. and Dunlap, J.R. (1987) Sucrose Metabolism in Netted Muskmelon Fruit during Development. Journal of
Plant Physiology, 84, 386-389. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.84.2.386
[27] Zhang, M.F., Li, Z.L., Chen, K.S., Qian, Q.Q. and Zhang, S.L. (2003) The Relationship between Sugar Accumulation
and Enzymes Related to Sucrose Metabolism in Developing Fruits of Muskmelon. Acta Physiologica Sinica, 29, 455-
462.
[28] Gross, K.C. and Pharr, D.M. (1982) A Potential Pathway for Galactose Metabolism in Cucumis sativus L., A
Stachyose Transporting Species. Journal of Plant Physiology, 69, 117-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.69.1.117
[29] Studer Feusi, M.E., Burton, J.D., Williamson, J.D. and Mason Pharr, D. (1999) Galactosyl-Sucrose Metabolism and
UDP-Galactose Pyrophosphorylase from Cucumis melo L. Fruit. Physiologia Plantarum, 106, 9-16.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-3054.1999.106102.x
[30] Leskovar, D.I., Bang, H.J., Crosby, K., Maness, N., Franco, J.A. and Perkins-Veazie, P. (2004) Lycopene, Carbohy-

124
 L. Liguori et al.

drates, Ascorbic Acid, and Yield Components of Diploid and Triploid Watermelon Cultivars Are Affected by Deficit
Irrigation. The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology, 79, 75-81.
[31] Melo, E.A., Lima, V.L.A.G., Maciel, M.I.S., Caetano, A.C.S. and Leal, F.L.L. (2006) Polyphenol, Ascorbic Acid and
Total Carotenoid Contents in Common Fruits and Vegetables. Brazilian Journal of Food Technology, 9, 89-94.
[32] Lester, G.E., Jifon, J.L. and Rogers, G. (2005) Supplemental Foliar Potassium Application during Muskmelon Fruit
Development Can Improve Fruit Quality, Ascorbic Acid and Beta Carotene Contents. Journal of the American Society
for Horticultural Science, 130, 649-653.
[33] Lu, W., Yang, X., Sibley, J.L., Caylor, A.W., Foshee, W.G., Zhang, Y., Bannon, J.S. and Gilliam, C.H. (2008) Mixed
Municipal Solid Waste Compost as a Soil Amendment on Yield and Heavy Metal Accumulation in Okra and Water-
melon. International Journal of Vegetable Science, 14, 369-379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19315260802307256
[34] Huel, N.V. and Mai, Y. (2002) Manganese Toxicity in Watermelon as Affected by Lime and Compost Amended to a
Hawaiian Acid Oxisol. Hort Science, 37, 656-661.
[35] Hao, Z.P., Wang, Q., Christie, P. and Li, X.L. (2007) Allelopathic Potential of Watermelon Tissues and Root Exudates.
Science Horticolturae, 112, 315-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2006.12.030
[36] de Albuquerque, M.B., dos Santos, R.C., Lima, L.M., Melo Filho, P.A., Nogueira, R.J.M.C., da Câmara, C.A.G. and
Ramos, A.R. (2011) Allelopathy, an Alternative Tool to Improve Cropping Systems. A Review. Agronomy for Sus-
tainable Development, 31, 379-395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/agro/2010031
[37] Hozores-Hampton, M., McSorley, R. and Stansly, P.A. (2012) Effects of Long-Term Organic Amendments and Soil
Sanitation on Weed and Nematode Populations in Pepper and Watermelon Crops in Florida. Crop Protection, 41, 106-
112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2012.03.017
[38] Thybo, A.K., Edelenbos, M., Christensen, L.P., Sørensen, J.N. and Thorup-Kristensen, K. (2006) Effect of Organic
Growing Systems on Sensory Quality and Chemical Composition of Tomatoes. LWT—Food Science and Technology,
39, 835-843.
[39] Lombardo, S., Pandino, G. and Mauromicale, G. (2012) Nutritional and Sensory Characteristics of “Early” Potato Cul-
tivars under Organic and Conventional Cultivation Systems. Food Chemistry, 133, 1249-1254.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.10.005
[40] Vogtmann, H., Matthies, K., Kehres, B. and Meier-Ploeger, A. (1993) Enhanced Food Quality: Effects of Composts on
the Quality of Plant Foods. Compost Science and Utilization, 1, 82-100.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.1993.10771129
[41] Fayed, T.A. (2010) Effect of Compost Tea and Some Antioxidant Applications on Leaf Chemical Constituents, Yield
and Fruit Quality of Pomegranate. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 6, 402-411.
[42] Stino, R.G., Fayed, T.A., Ali, M.M. and Alaa, S.A. (2010) Enhancing Fruit Quality of Florida Prince Peaches by Some
Foliar Treatments. Journal of Horticolturae Science and Ornamental Plants, 2, 38-45.
[43] Radovich, T.J., Cavaletto, C.G. and Valenzuela, H.R. (2000) Effect of Compost and Mineral Fertilizer Applications on
the Sensory Quality of Basil (Ocium basilicum L.). Hort Science, 35, 465-472.
[44] Genthner, E.R. (2010) Identification of Key Odorants in Fresh-Cut Watermelon Aroma and Structure-Odor Relation-
ships of Cis,cis-3,6-nonadienal and Ester Analogs with Cis,cis-3,6-nonadiene, Cis-3-nonene and Cis-6-nonene Back-
bone Structures. Thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign.
[45] Pino, J., Marbot, R. and Aguero, J. (2003) Volatile Components of Watermelon (Citrullus lanatus [Thunb.] Matsum. et
Nakai) Fruit. Journal of Essential Oil Research, 15, 379-380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10412905.2003.9698616
[46] Siddiqui, Y., Islam, T.M., Naidu, Y. and Meon, S. (2011) The Conjunctive Use of Compost Tea and Inorganic Fertil-
izer on the Growth, Yield and Terpenoid Content of Centella asiatica (L.) Urban. Science Horticolturae, 130, 289-295.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2011.05.043

125