Development and quality of pineapple guava fruit in two locations with different altitudes in Cundinamarca, Colombia

Abstract

Fruit growth is stimulated by different weather conditions. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of weather conditions on the physicochemical properties of pineapple guava fruit growth. Twenty trees were marked in two production areas located at different altitudes (1,800 and 2,580 m.a.s.l.), and measurements were performed every 7 days from 99 and 141 days post-anthesis to harvest at altitudes of 1,800 and 2,580 m.a.s.l., respectively. The results indicate that altitude and weather conditions greatly influence the growth and development of pineapple guava fruit, and these effects are primarily manifested in the physical characteristics of the fruit. The weight and size of the fruit at harvest are directly related to the altitude of the production area. The weather condition that has the greatest impact on total titratable acidity at harvest is cumulative radiation during fruit growth; the highest value of total soluble solids at harvest corresponds to the location with the higher altitude, lower rainfall and relative humidity and higher cumulative radiation during the fruit growth period. The hue angle and pulp firmness at harvest are not influenced by the location or weather conditions at any location and do not determine the fruit quality at harvest time.

Full text

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-4499.0459
Agrometeorology /Article
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015 359
Development and quality of pineapple guava
fruit in two locations with dierent altitudes in
Cundinamarca, Colombia
Alfonso Parra-Coronado (1*); Gerhard Fischer (2); Jesús Hernán Camacho-Tamayo (1)
(1) Universidad Nacional de Colombia (UNAL), Departamento de Ingeniería Civil y Agricola, Carrera 30,
No 45A-03, 11001, Bogotá D.C., Colombia.
(2) UNAL, Departamento de Agronomía, Bogotá D.C., Colombia.
(*) Corresponding author: aparrac@unal.edu.co
Received: Dec. 22, 2014; Accepted: Mar.16, 2015
Abstract
Fruit growth is stimulated by dierent weather conditions. The aim of this study was to determine the inuence of weather
conditions on the physicochemical properties of pineapple guava fruit growth. Twenty trees were marked in two production
areas located at dierent altitudes (1,800 and 2,580 m.a.s.l.), and measurements were performed every 7 days from 99 and
141 days post-anthesis to harvest at altitudes of 1,800 and 2,580 m.a.s.l., respectively. The results indicate that altitude and
weather conditions greatly inuence the growth and development of pineapple guava fruit, and these eects are primarily
manifested in the physical characteristics of the fruit. The weight and size of the fruit at harvest are directly related to the
altitude of the production area. The weather condition that has the greatest impact on total titratable acidity at harvest is
cumulative radiation during fruit growth; the highest value of total soluble solids at harvest corresponds to the location with
the higher altitude, lower rainfall and relative humidity and higher cumulative radiation during the fruit growth period. The hue
angle and pulp rmness at harvest are not inuenced by the location or weather conditions at any location and do not determine
the fruit quality at harvest time.
Key words: climate, Acca sellowiana (O. Berg) Burret, total soluble solids, titratable acidity, hue angle.
1. INTRODUCTION
Pineapple guava (Acca sellowiana (O. Berg) Burret;
Mirtaceae) is native to South America in the areas of
southern Brazil, Uruguay, upper region of western Paraguay
and northeastern Argentina (Parra-Coronado & Fischer,
2013). It is a perennial and long-lived species adapted to
dierent climatic zones (Fischer, 2003). Under seasonal
conditions in the subtropics, it produces an annual harvest,
whereas in the tropics, it can produce fruit throughout
the entire year (Quintero, 2012). Because of its excellent
adaptation in the areas between 1,800 and 2,700 m.a.s.l.,
it is considered a promising crop for the Colombian Andes.
Currently, signicant commercial production of pineapple
guava is limited to New Zealand, Georgia, Azerbaijan,
Colombia and California, although there is great interest
in establishing its commercial production in Uruguay
and Brazil (Parra-Coronado & Fischer, 2013). Dierent
varieties of pineapple guava are harvested in Colombia,
and this is considered an important factor for pollination
and production of quality fruit. In Colombia, Quintero
(2012) estimated a production area for pineapple guava of
650 ha, and the main producing departments are Boyacá,
Cundinamarca, Santander and Norte de Santander.
Similar to other plant species, pineapple guava fruits
have dened growth stages between anthesis and harvest,
such as cell division, tissue dierentiation, increased size
and maturation (Parra-Coronadoetal., 2006). Growth
can refer to an irreversible increase in dry weight or volume
and changes in shape, size, mass, or a number of structures
that are a function of genotype and the environment
(Krug, 1997) and yield a quantitative increase in the size
and weight of the plant or organ (Ardilaet al., 2011).
e study of fruit growth is useful for determining how
fruit grows with respect to age and how they change in size
and weight at harvest time (Avanzaetal., 2008), as well
as the optimal harvest conditions (Cañizaresetal.,2003),
cultivation practices and harvest management (Casierra
& Cardozo, 2009).
To determine fruit ripeness, which is directly related
to quality, dierent parameters must be considered,
such as skin and/or pulp rmness, total titratable acidity

A. Parra-Coronado et al.
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015360
and content of total soluble solids (Parra-Coronado &
Hernández-Hernández, 2008; Parra-Coronadoetal., 2006).
Fruit growth and other quality parameters are inuenced by
weather conditions, especially light intensity and temperature
(Calvo,2004), which directly aect fruit formation,
concentration of soluble solids, rmness and color (Kappel
& Neilsen, 1994) and maintain quality during postharvest
handling (Parra-Coronadoetal., 2006).
e decrease in rmness values as the fruit grows is
caused by the transformation of cementitious substances
that provide fruit turgor (protopectins and pectins) into
water-soluble pectic acids and other substances that produce
characteristic fruit softening during the ripening process
(Parra-Coronadoetal.,2006). According to Gálvisetal.(2002),
pulp softening is characteristic of the ripening of certain
fruits and caused by several factors, including the action
of hydrolase enzymes of the cell wall, which act on pectin.
e enzyme responsible for the solubilization of pectin is
polygalacturonase (PG), which exhibits increased activity
as maturation proceeds.
PG activity in pineapple guava is greater inside the
mesocarp; this suggests that softening starts from the inside
to the outside (Parra-Coronado & Fischer, 2013), which is
reected in the lower value of pulp rmness compared to
skin rmness. Cellulases are also related to fruit softening,
and they present low activity in green fruit but rapidly
increase during maturation (Kays, 1997). Fruit rmness
is a relevant characteristic for consumption quality and a
factor that must be considered in the design of packaging
and transportation systems during harvest and post-harvest
(Parra-Coronado & Fischer, 2013).
e investigations of pineapple guava include studies
of the physicochemical characterization of fruit growth
and development for clones and under certain cultivation
conditions (Rodríguezetal., 2006) as well as studies of
the eect of weather and cultivation conditions on the
physiological or ecophysiological processes of the plant
(Fischer, 2003). us far, few studies have been reported
on the inuence of weather conditions on the quality
parameters during fruit growth. erefore, this study aimed
to determine the inuence of weather conditions on certain
quality characteristics during pineapple guava fruit growth
(from anthesis to harvest) under the conditions experienced
at the Colombian Andes.
2. MATERIAL AND METHODS
Location and characterization of the study
locations
e study was conducted at two locations in the department
of Cundinamarca (Colombia), and these locations were
planted with pineapple guava clone 41 (‘Quimba’) in 2006.
Similar harvest management activities, such as pruning and
fertilization, were performed at the two farms to eliminate
the inuence of cultivation variables. e rst site is located
in the town of Tenjo at 4°51’23” N and 74°6’33” W at an
average altitude of 2,580 m.a.s.l., and it has an average
temperature of 12.5°C, relative humidity between 74and86%
and a bimodal rainfall regime with annual rainfall values of
765mm that are concentrated in the periods from March to
May and September to November. e second study site is
located in the town of San Francisco de Sales at 4°57’57” N
and 74°16’27” W at an average altitude of 1,800 m.a.s.l., and
it has an average temperature of 20.6°C, relative humidity
between 63 and 97% and a bimodal rainfall regime with
annual rainfall values of 1,493 mm that are concentrated
in the periods from February to May and September to
November.
A physicochemical characterization of the soil of the
experimental plots of each farm was performed, with six
samples collected per farm at a depth between 10 and 20 cm,
for a total of 12 soil samples. e characterization showed
that the soils of both farms are sandy loam, and the Ca/Mg,
Mg/K, Ca/K and (Ca + Mg)/K ratios indicated that there
are no K and Mg deciencies and Cu and Mn values below
those considered optimum.
Experimental design
Ten trees were collected per basic plot and from two
plots per farm for a total of 40 trees. To study the growth
variations (size and weight) of the total soluble solids
(TSS), total titratable acidity (TTA), hue angle (ºh) and
rmness, one plot per farm and per harvest were considered.
e trees under investigation were placed in the center of the
cultivation plot to maintain uniformity under the weather
conditions and eliminate the edge eect. Each of the plants
(sample unit) was listed, and the ower buds present in
the middle third of the canopy were marked to track fruit
growth and development.
Sampling
Sampling was conducted in 10 trees for each plot,
with random fruits collected per tree on a weekly basis.
To determine fruit growth, sampling was performed from
99 days post-anthesis to harvest for the two locations, and
to determine TSS, TTA, ºh and fruit rmness, sampling was
performed from 99 and 141 days post-anthesis to harvest
for sites at San Francisco and Tenjo, respectively, when the
fruits were large enough to perform the specic analysis.
is procedure was performed during two consecutive
years and two harvests. Because of the prevailing weather
conditions during the research period, the plants under
study only produced an annual harvest.

Development and quality of pineapple guava fruit
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015 361
To determine the periods of anthesis to harvest of the
pineapple guava fruits (Table1), the weather conditions
of the study sites were obtained from the two farms over a
two-year recording period (2012-2014). Meteorological data
were obtained from automated iMETOS ECO D2weather
stations (Pessl Instruments, Weiz, Austria), which record
hourly data for the temperature, rainfall, relative humidity
and total radiation.
Measured variables
e following growth variables were measured in the
study: variation of individual fruit fresh weight (g) using the
gravimetric method and an analytical balance (0.0001g);
fruit equatorial diameter and length (mm) using an electronic
digital caliper to the nearest 0.01 mm; variation of fruit
skin and pulp rmness using a Brookeld CT3-4500
texture analyzer (Brookeld Engineering, Middleboro,
MA, USA) with a TA39 probe and accuracy of ±0.5%,
with two readings per fruit; TSS according to Colombian
regulation NTC4624 (ICONTEC, 1999a) using an Eclipse
refractometer (Bellingham Stanley, Tunbridge Well, UK) with
a scale of 0-32 and accuracy of 0.2 °Brix; TTA according to
regulation NTC 4623 (ICONTEC, 1999b); maturity ratio
(MR) according to the TSS/TTA ratio; skin color (ºh) using
a Minolta CR-400 color meter (Konica Minolta, Ramsey,
NJ, USA). e above-mentioned parameters were obtained
for the fruits of each of the experimental plots. e statistical
design was entirely casualized, with ve replicates per test.
Statistical analysis
To analyze the behavior of each of the quality parameters
and their variation over time, the statistical software
IBM-SPSS v.20 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used,
and a correlation analysis was performed between dierent
fruit quality parameters using the datasets from the two
dierent periods for cultivar and each of the study locations
(one plot per harvest). e results were analyzed using
descriptive statistics, and the standard deviation (SD) was
the dispersion factor. Tukey’s range tests were performed
for fruit quality characteristics at harvest time for each of
the study locations and each harvest.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Fruit growth
Pineapple guava clone 41 growth (‘Quimba’) grows in
three stages (Figure1). e rst stage is slow growth and
continues for 113 and 148 days in San Francisco and Tenjo,
respectively. e second stage is characterized by a period
of increased growth and continues until 141 days in San
Francisco and up to 166 days in Tenjo. e third stage is
rapid growth that continues until physiological maturity is
reached, which corresponds to the nal 14 days of growth
for the two locations. ese results are consistent with the
growth theory of eshy fruits that have simple sigmoid
growth (Salisbury & Ross, 2000) and with reports by
Rodríguezetal. (2006) for pineapple guava 41 and 8-4clones,
although the times between stages were dierent, which is
explained by dierences in the study sites (altitude) and
weather conditions (Table1).
e weight gained in the last 14 days varies between
25and45% with respect to the nal weight for fruits produced
in the town of San Francisco and between 58 and 68% for
fruits produced in the town of Tenjo. is weight behavior is
similar to that of other fruits (Parra-Coronadoetal., 2006)
and reveals the importance of harvesting at the right time
Table 1. Weather conditions in the areas during pineapple guava fruit development
Location Harvest Days1GDD2 (°C) T3 (°C) RH4 (%) P5 (mm) Rad6 [W m–²]
Tenjo 1 180 1,979 12.3 76.4 190 12,303
(2,580 m.a.s.l.) 2 180 1,966 12.3 84.3 417 9,861
San Francisco 1 155 2,728 18.5 86.1 573 7,814
(1,800 m.a.s.l.) 2 155 2,627 18.0 95.1 1,400 10,021
1Days: calendar days from anthesis to harvest. 2GDD: accumulated growing degree-days from anthesis to harvest. 3T: average temperature during the study period. 4RH: average
relative humidity during the study period. 5P: cumulative rainfall from anthesis to harvest. 6Rad: cumulative radiation from anthesis to harvest.
Figure 1. Pineapple guava fruit fresh weight variation in the towns of
Tenjo and San Francisco de Sales. Bars show the standard deviation.

A. Parra-Coronado et al.
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015362
because yields would be lower with an early harvest, which
would aect the income of farmers.
e results obtained in this investigation indicate that
the fruits produced at higher temperatures (18°C in San
Francisco) grow and develop faster and require fewer calendar
days from anthesis to harvest, which is consistent with the
ndings for tomatoes (Gruda, 2005) and cape gooseberry
(Physalis peruviana) (Fischeretal., 2007).
Figure 1 shows that the weight of pineapple guava fruits at
harvest is higher in fruits produced at higher altitudes (Tenjo)
where the cumulative radiation is greater, and a greater number
of calendar days and less thermal time (GDD) is required
from anthesis to harvest (Table1). ese results are consistent
with those observed by Reginaetal.(2010) for ‘Chardonnay’
and ‘Pinot Noir’ grape cultivars grown in the state of Minas
Gerais (Brazil), which have a larger size and fresh mass at
1,150 m.a.s.l. than those grown at 873m.a.s.l. In addition,
Fischeretal. (2007) observed longer fruit development in
cape gooseberry at 2,690m.a.s.l.(75days) compared with
2,300 m.a.s.l. (66 days), which was associated with lower
temperatures at higher altitude. Martínez-Vegaetal.(2008)
found similar results for pineapple guava fruits of clone
41and indicated that the fruits with the lowest fresh weight
values were located in the inner core of the canopy, which
has a low incidence of light radiation, thus supporting
light radiation as “the luminosity factor essential for proper
photosynthesis and the production of photoassimilates for
fruit development.”
e lower weight and size of the fruits produced
under low light intensity (Figure1), which is reected
in the lower cumulative radiation during periods of low
light (Table1), has also been reported in strawberries
(Carusoet al., 2004), ‘Kensington’ mangos (Léchaudel
& Joas, 2007), apples (Nilsson & Gustavsson, 2007)
and plums (Murrayetal.,2005). e larger fresh fruit
weight at higher altitudes could be explained by the higher
transpiration rate related to higher irradiance, which would
provide a prolonged inux of water and nutrients to the fruit
(Murrayetal.,2005; Naizaqueetal.,2014), suggesting that
increased light availability increases and extends the xylem
transport stream to these organs (Martínez-Vegaetal., 2008).
In addition, fruits exposed to full light usually reach a larger
size. Pineapple guava is an “evergreen” fruit; therefore, its
chlorophyll content and photosynthetic and carbohydrate
production capacity is important (Gariglioetal., 2007).
Inaddition, photosynthesis in the adjoining leaves near fruit
that grow under good lighting is promoted by the attraction
of photoassimilates of the fruit (Fischeretal., 2012).
At sites with the highest accumulated rainfall (Tenjo-2with
417 mm and San Francisco-2 with 1,400 mm) and higher
average relative humidity (Table 1), fruits with a greater
weight were produced for the same location, and these rainfall
amounts were similar to the amounts reported by Fischer
(2003), who indicated that a commercial pineapple guava
plantation requires between 700 and 1,200 mm of annual
rainfall (and tolerates up to 2,000 mm) to ensure ongoing
pineapple guava production and good quality. Moreover, in
experiments performed in Granada cultivars with dierent
levels of water decit, Galindoetal. (2014) found that plant
fruits showed decreased weight during water decits, with
lower weights for higher decits. Gruda (2005) indicated
that for tomatoes grown in a range of 30to 90% relative
humidity, the fruit weight was higher in conditions of higher
relative humidity.
Skin and pulp rmness
Skin and pulp rmness of pineapple guava fruit show
the same behavior tendencies over time, with high values
at the beginning of the analysis and decreasing values as the
fruit develops (Figure2). Skin rmness is always greater
than that of the pulp for the same calendar time, with
mean baseline values of 30.3±5 N in San Francisco and
34.0±6.6 N in Tenjo, which decrease as the fruit grows and
reaching values at harvest of 15.2±1.6 N in San Francisco
and 12.5±3.0 N in Tenjo. Pulp rmness had mean initial
values of 19.2±3.0 N in San Francisco and 20.1±5.9 N in
Tenjo, which decrease as the fruit grows and reach values
at harvest of 5.8±2.0 N in San Francisco and 6.6±2.8 N in
Tenjo. Firmness behavior with pineapple guava fruit growth
is consistent with what has been reported for other products,
such as pear (Parra-Coronadoetal., 2006).
e skin rmness of pineapple guava fruits at harvest time
is lower for fruits produced at higher altitudes (Tenjo), which
provides a lower average temperature, greater cumulative
radiation, greater number of calendar days and less GDD
Figure 2. Pineapple guava fruit rmness variation in the towns of
Tenjo and San Francisco de Sales. (a) skin rmness; (b) pulp rmness.
Bars show the standard deviation.

Development and quality of pineapple guava fruit
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015 363
between anthesis and harvest (Table1). ese results are
consistent with what was observed by Kangetal. (2002),
who reported greater rmness for cohombro (cucumber)
produced at higher temperatures, and with those reported by
Murrayetal. (2005), who suggested that prunes produced
under low light intensity had higher rmness values.
In harvests with the highest accumulated rainfall
(Tenjo-2with 417 mm and San Francisco-2 with 1,400 mm)
and higher average relative humidity, fruits were produced
with less skin rmness for the same location; however, pulp
rmness showed no dierences between the two locations
(Table2). Gariglioetal. (2007) reported that high relative
humidity can seriously aect fruit quality; this is the case
with mandarins, which quickly lose their consistency under
high relative humidity.
Content of total soluble solids and total
titratable acidity
TSS and TTA of pineapple guava fruit showed an
increasing trend over time (Figure3). e variations in TSS
were not signicant between the beginning and end of the
observations, with mean values of 10.8±0.6 °Brix at 113days
post-anthesis in San Francisco and 10.6±0.9°Brix at 141days
post-anthesis in Tenjo. e TSS values increased with fruit
growth and reached values at harvest of 11.4±0.8°Brix in
San Francisco and 12.6±0.8 °Brix in Tenjo. TTA showed
mean initial values of 1.1±0.07% in San Francisco and
1.0±0.09% in Tenjo, and the values increased with fruit
growth and reached values at harvest of 1 76±0.07% in San
Francisco and 1.80±0.11% in Tenjo.
e MR is dened as the TSS/TTA ratio, and it showed
a decreasing trend with fruit growth, which is inconsistent
with the behavior of most fruits in which MR increases.
is behavior is caused by the increase of TSS and TTA
during pineapple guava fruit growth, and it indicates that
the translocation of organic acids to the fruits is performed at
a higher rate compared with that of TSS, which is contrary
to what occurs in other fruits, in which TSS increase and
TTA decreases (Parra-Coronadoetal., 2006). e MR value
showed mean initial values of 11.4±0.9 in San Francisco
and 10.8±1.3 in Tenjo, and it decreased with fruit growth,
reaching values at harvest of 6.5±0.7 in San Francisco and
7.0±0.7 in Tenjo.
The behavior of TSS and TTA during pineapple
guava fruit grows is consistent with what was found by
Rodríguezetal. (2006), who reported increases in both
TSS and TTA during the last stage of development of
pineapple guava fruit clones 41 and 8-4. In addition, there
was concordance in the decrease of TSS one week before
reaching physiological maturity, which is explained by the
increased fruit metabolism caused by a signicant increase
in fresh weight, especially in fruit from the town of Tenjo.
e variation of TSS and TTA is also consistent with what
has been reported by Mercado-Silvaetal. (1998) for guavas.
Table 2. Mean values1 of pineapple guava fruit characteristics at harvest time
Parameter Location - Harvest
Tenjo-1 Tenjo-2 San Francisco-1 San Francisco-2
Fresh weight (g) 38.23 ± 4.23 bc 98.93 ± 12.62 a 30.53 ± 4.67 c 45.73 ± 6.83 c
Length (mm) 64.70 ± 2.21 c 76.19 ± 3.25 a 57.35 ± 3.29 c 59.24 ± 4.57 c
Diameter (mm) 35.17 ± 1.40 c 49.07 ± 2.45 a 32.49 ± 2.57 d 40.04 ± 1.93 c
TSS (°Brix) 13.35 ± 0.66 a 11.73 ± 0.91 c 11.19 ± 0.81 c 11.59 ± 0.66 c
TTA (citric acid, %) 1.91 ± 0.12 a 1.68 ± 0.09 c 1.58 ± 0.07 c 1.93 ± 0.06 a
Hue angle (ºh) 124.72 ± 0.75 a 123.63 ± 1.35 a 121.63 ± 2.53 a 124.16 ± 1.36 a
Skin rmness (N) 14.82 ± 3.51 a 10.21 ± 2.64 c 16.20 ± 1.30 a 14.18 ± 1.87 a
Pulp rmness (N) 6.90 ± 2.13 a 6.14 ± 4.03 a 5.47 ± 2.08 a 6.12 ± 1.89 a
1 Mean ± SD. Means followed by dierent letters for the same parameter indicate signicant dierences according to Tukey’s test (p≤ 0.05).
Figure 3. (a) Variation of the contents of total soluble solids (°Brix);
(b) Pineapple guava fruit total titratable acidity variation (% citric
acid) in the towns of Tenjo and San Francisco de Sales. Bars show
standard deviation.

A. Parra-Coronado et al.
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015364
e TSS value of pineapple guava fruits at harvest time
is greater for fruits produced at higher altitudes (Tenjo),
higher cumulative radiation and lower average temperature
and relative humidity (Table1). ese results are consistent
with those reported by Benkeblia & Tennant (2011),
who indicated that weight, TSS and TTA were higher for
dierent fruits grown at low temperatures. Kano (2004)
indicated that at higher temperatures, the content of TSS
in watermelon fruit was lower. Gruda (2005) indicated
that at higher temperatures and lower relative humidity
and light intensity, the content of TSS in tomato fruit
was lower. However, Fischeretal. (2007) found a higher
content of TSS and sucrose in cape gooseberries grown at
2,300 m.a.s.l. (17.4°C and 1,294 mW m
–2
) compared with
those at 2,690 m.a.s.l. (12.5°C and 1,399 mW m–2); thus,
the cardinal temperatures for the growth of dierent fruit
species should be considered.
Martínez-Vegaetal. (2008) found similar results for
cumulative radiation for pineapple guava clone 41 fruits and
indicated that fruits with the lowest TSS values were located
in the inner half of the canopy, where there is a low incidence
of light radiation. Similarly, the same eect of light intensity is
reported for TSS in plums (Murrayetal.,2005), strawberries
(Carusoetal., 2004), ‘Kensington’ mangos (Léchaudel &
Joas, 2007) and apples (Nilsson & Gustavsson, 2007).
e TTA values of pineapple guava fruits at harvest time were
not inuenced by weather conditions in the two locations,
which is consistent with observations in cape gooseberry
grown at 2,300 and 2,690m.a.s.l. (Fischeretal., 2007).
However, Martínez-Vegaetal. (2008) found that TTA in
pineapple guava fruits increased slightly in the less illuminated
sections of the canopy. Nuncio-Jáureguiet al. (2014)
observed that in fruits of Granada, the position on the tree
had no signicant eect on TSS and TTA, which shows
that the fruits exposed to sunlight have similar chemical
compositions as the fruits exposed to shade.
Color change
Color changes occur by chlorophyll degradation and the
synthesis of pigments such as anthocyanins and carotenoids
(Mercado-Silvaetal., 1998). e color, measured as the °h,
represents the color or hue, and it varies from 0° for pure red
color to 180° for pure green color (Hernándezetal., 2007).
e ºh of pineapple guava fruits showed no clear trend
in behavior over time (Figure4), and it remained a green
fruit with small increases in value for the two locations.
e ºh showed initial mean values of 125.0±2.2 ºh and
harvest values of 122.9± 2.0 ºh in San Francisco. In Tenjo,
the ºh showed initial mean values of 125.0±2.1ºh and harvest
values of 124.2±1.1 ºh.
e unclear trend of ºh in pineapple guava fruit is consistent
with what has been reported by Eastetal.(2009), who suggested
that it is not possible to observe signicant changes in skin color
in certain cultivars during fruit ripening. In other pineapple
guava cultivars, the ºh decreased, representing a loss of green
color (Velhoetal., 2011). Increasing temperature promotes
maturation, chlorophyll degradation and ºh reduction in
pineapple guava skin (Amaranteetal.,2008), which does not
change color because of the genetics of the fruit and only varies
within a green color hue. e non-signicant changes in the
ºh value of pineapple guava fruit for the dierent locations
and harvests cannot be used to establish the inuence of
weather conditions on this color parameter.
Correlation analysis
A correlation analysis showed that as the fresh weight of
pineapple guava fruit increases, so does its length (r=0.91),
diameter (r=0.93), TTA (r=0.62) and TSS (r=0.19), whereas a
decrease is observed in skin rmness (r=–0.76), pulp rmness
(r=–0.64) and ºh (r=–0.13), which is consistent with what has
been reported for pineapple guava fruits (Rodríguezetal.,2006;
Velhoetal., 2011), guava (Mercado-Silvaetal., 1998) and
pear (Parra-Coronadoetal., 2006).
Physicochemical characteristics at harvest
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed statistical
dierences between locations and harvests (Table2) for
weight, diameter and length, indicating that the values of these
parameters at harvest are heavily inuenced by the weather
conditions recorded at each location and each harvest during
fruit growth (Fischeretal., 2007; Martínez-Vegaetal.,2008;
Reginaetal., 2010).
e TTA showed statistical dierences for the harvests at
each location (Table2); however, no dierences were observed
between the rst Tenjo harvest and second San Francisco
harvest and between the second Tenjo harvest and rst San
Francisco harvest, indicating that the weather condition that
had the greatest impact on TTA at harvest was likely cumulative
radiation during fruit growth (Table1) (Fischeretal., 2007;
Martínez-Vegaetal., 2008).
Figure 4. Pineapple guava fruit hue angle variation (ºh) in the towns
of Tenjo and San Francisco de Sales. Bars show the standard deviation.

Development and quality of pineapple guava fruit
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015 365
As for TSS, the rst Tenjo harvest showed statistical
dierences with the San Francisco harvests and second Tenjo
harvest (Table2). In the rst Tenjo harvest, the highest
values for TSS were recorded, which corresponded to the
lowest records of rainfall and relative humidity and highest
accumulated radiation during the fruit growth period (Table1)
(Fischeretal., 2007; Léchaudel & Joas,2007; Benkeblia &
Tennant, 2011).
With regard to skin rmness, the second Tenjo harvest
showed statistical dierences with the San Francisco harvests
and rst Tenjo harvest (Table2). e second Tenjo harvest
had the lowest value for skin rmness; however, there was no
clear inuence of the weather conditions recorded during the
fruit growth period (Table1) that would explain this behavior
at harvest (Kangetal., 2002; Murrayetal., 2005).
e ANOVA showed no statistical dierences between
the locations and harvests for ºh and pulp rmness (Table2),
indicating that the values of these parameters at harvest is not
inuenced by the weather conditions during fruit growth
recorded for each location and each harvest and indicate
that these parameters may not be determinants of quality
at harvest time.
4. CONCLUSION
e results obtained in this study show that weather
conditions (temperature, rainfall, relative humidity and
radiation) and altitude have a great inuence on the growth
and development of pineapple guava fruit, and the eects
are primarily manifested in the fruit’s physical characteristics
(fresh weight, length and diameter). e fruits produced at
higher altitudes required a greater number of calendar days
and less GDD from anthesis to harvest.
e weight, size, TTA and SST pineapple guava fruit at
harvest time, have a direct relationship with the altitude of
the production area. Inverse behavior was observed for the
hue angle and rmness. However TSS and hue angle, are not
relevant parameters of fruit quality at harvest
us far, there has been a lack of studies on pineapple
guava, and this has prevented a greater understanding of
the inuence of weather conditions on the fruit’s quality
parameters during fruit growth. is is the rst research
study conducted on this subject, and we recommend further
studies using a wide range of pineapple guava varieties grown
in dierent environment.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the Faculty of Agricultural
Sciences, Universidad Nacional de Colombia at Bogotá, for
nancial support and Dr. Celso Garcia Dominguez, professor
of the Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, and biologist Omar
Camilo Quintero for their valuable support and provision of
equipment and products for the development of this research.
REFERENCES
Amarante, C. V. T., Steffens, C. A., Ducroquet, J. P. H. J., & Sasso,
A. (2008). Qualidade de goiaba-serrana em resposta à temperatura de
armazenamento e ao tratamento com 1-metilciclopropeno. Pesquisa
Agropecuaria Brasileira, 43, 1683-1689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/
S0100-204X2008001200007.
Ardila, G., Fischer, G., & Balaguera López, H. E. (2011). Caracterización
del crecimiento del fruto y producción de tres híbridos de tomate
(Solanum lycopersicum L.) en tiempo fisiológico bajo invernadero.
Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Hortícolas, 5, 44-56. http://dx.doi.
org/10.17584/rcch.2011v5i1.1252.
Avanza, M. M., Bramardi, S. J., & Mazza, S. M. (2008). Statistical
models to describe the fruit growth pattern in sweet orange ‘Valencia
late’. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 6, 577-585. http://dx.doi.
org/10.5424/sjar/2008064-352.
Benkeblia, N., & Tennant, P. F. (2011). Preharvest and harvest factors
influencing the postharvest quality of tropical and subtropical fruits. In
E. M. Yahia (Ed.), Postharvest biology and technology of tropical and
subtropical fruits (Fundamental Issues, 1, p. 112-141). Cambridge:
Woodhead Publishing.
Calvo, G. (2004). Efecto del 1-metilciclopropeno (1-MCP) en pera
variedad Williams cosechadas con dos estados de madurez. Revista de
Investigaciones Agropecuarias, 33, 3-26.
Cañizares, A., Laverde, D., & Puesme, R. (2003). Crecimiento y
desarrollo del fruto de guayaba (Psidium guajava L.) en Santa Bárbara,
Estado Monagas, Venezuela. Revista UDO Agrícola, 3, 34-38.
Caruso, G., Villari, A., & Villari, G. (2004). Quality characteristics of
“Fragaria vesca L.” fruits influenced by NFT solution EC and shading.
Acta Horticulturae, 648, 167-174.
Casierra, F., & Cardozo, M.C. (2009). Análisis básico del crecimiento en
frutos de tomate (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. Quindío) cultivado a
campo abierto. Revista Facultad Nacional de Agronomía, 62, 4815-4822.
East, A. R., Araya, X. I. T., Hertog, M. L. A. T. M., Nicholson, S. E.,
& Mawson, A. J. (2009). The effect of controlled atmospheres on
respiration and rate of quality change in “Unique” feiojoa fruit. Postharvest
Biology and Technology, 53, 66-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
postharvbio.2009.02.002.
Fischer, G. (2003). Ecofisiología, crecimiento y desarrollo de la feijoa.
In G. Fischer, D. Miranda, G. Cayón, & M. Mazorra (Eds.), Cultivo,
poscosecha y exportación de la feijoa (Acca sellowiana Berg) (p. 9-26).
Bogotá: Produmedios.
Fischer, G., Almanza-Merchán, P. J., & Ramírez, F. (2012). Source-sink
relationships in fruit species. A review. Revista Colombiana Ciencias
Hortícolas, 6, 238-253. http://dx.doi.org/10.17584/rcch.2012v6i2.1980.
Fischer, G., Ebert, G., & Lüdders, P. (2007). Production, seeds and
carbohydrate contents of cape gooseberry (Physalis peruviana L.) fruits
grown at two contrasting Colombian altitudes. Journal of Applied
Botany and Food Quality, 81, 29-35.

A. Parra-Coronado et al.
Bragantia, Campinas, v. 74, n. 3, p.359-366, 2015366
Galindo, A., Rodríguez, P., Collado-González, J., Cruz, Z. N., Torrecillas,
E., Ondoño, S., Corell, M., Moriana, A., & Torrecillas, A. (2014).
Rainfall intensifies fruit peel cracking in water stressed pomegranate
trees. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 194, 29-35. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.03.015.
Gálvis, J. A., Arjona, H., Fischer, G., Landwehr, T., & Martínez, R.
(2002). Influencia de la temperatura y el tiempo de almacenamiento
en la conservación del fruto de Mango (Mangifera indica L.) variedad
Van Dyke. Agronomía Colombiana, 19, 23-36.
Gariglio, N. F., Pilatti, R. A., & Agustí, M. (2007). Requerimientos
ecofisiológicos de los árboles frutales. In G. O. Sozzi (Ed.), Árboles
frutales: ecofisiologia, cultivo y aprovechamiento (p. 41-82). Buenos
Aires: Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de Buenes Aires.
Gruda, N. (2005). Impact of environmental factors on product quality
of greenhouse vegetables for fresh consumption. Critical Reviews in Plant
Sciences, 24, 227-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07352680591008628.
Hernández, M. S., Martínez, O., & Fernández-Trujillo, J. P. (2007).
Behavior of Arazá (Eugenia stipitata Mc Vaugh) fruit quality traits during
growth, development and ripening. Scientia Horticulturae, 111, 220-
227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2006.10.029.
Instituto Colombiano de Normas Técnicas y Certificación - ICONTEC.
(1999a). Norma técnica colombiana NTC 4624. Jugos de frutas y
hortalizas. Determinación del contenido de sólidos solubles. Método
refractométrico. Bogotá.
Instituto Colombiano de Normas Técnicas y Certificación - ICONTEC.
(1999b). Norma técnica colombiana NTC 4623. Productos de frutas y
verduras. Determinación de la acidez titulable. Bogotá.
Kang, H. M., Park, K. W., & Saltveit, M. E. (2002). Elevated growing
temperatures during the day improve the postharvest chilling tolerance
of greenhouse-grown cucumber (Cucumis sativus) fruit. Postharvest
Biology and Technology, 24, 49-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-
5214(01)00129-6.
Kano, Y. (2004). Effects of summer day-time temperature on sugar
content in several portions of watermelon fruit (Citrullus lanatus). The
Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 79, 142-145.
Kappel, F., & Neilsen, G. H. (1994). Relationship between light
microclimate, fruit growth, fruit quality, specific leaf weight and N and P
content of spur leaves of ‘Bartlett’ and ‘Anjou’ pear. Scientia Horticulturae,
59, 187-196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-4238(94)90012-4.
Kays, S.(1997). Postharvest physiology of perishable plant products.
Athens: Exxon Press.
Krug, H. (1997). Enviromental influences on development growth
and yield. In H. C. Wien (Ed.), The physiology of vegetable crops (p.
101-180). London: Cabi Publishing.
Léchaudel, M., & Joas, J. (2007). An overview of preharvest factors
influencing mango fruit growth, quality and postharvest behaviour.
Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology, 19, 287-298. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1590/S1677-04202007000400004.
Martínez-Vega, R. R., Fischer, G., Herrera, A., Chaves, B., & Quintero, O.
C. (2008). Características físico-químicas de frutos de feijoa influenciadas
por la posición en el canopi. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Hortícolas,
2, 21-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.17584/rcch.2008v2i1.1170.
Mercado-Silva, E., Bautista, P. B., & Garcia-Velasco, M. A. (1998). Fruit
development, harvest index and ripening changes of guavas produced
in Central Mexico. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 13, 143-150.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5214(98)00003-9.
Murray, X. J., Holcroft, D. M., Cook, N. C., & Wand, S. J. E. (2005).
Postharvest quality of ‘Laetitia’ and ‘Songold’ (Prunus salicina Lindell)
plums as affected by preharvest shading treatments. Postharvest
Biology and Technology, 37, 81-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
postharvbio.2005.02.014.
Naizaque, J., García, G., Fischer, G., Melgarejo, L.M. (2014). Relación
entre la densidad estomática, la transpiración y las condiciones ambientales
en feijoa (Acca sellowiana (O. Berg) Burret). Revista UDCA: Actualidad
y Divulgación Científica, 17, 115-121.
Nilsson, T., & Gustavsson, K. E. (2007). Postharvest physiology of
‘Aroma’ apples in relation to position on the tree. Postharvest Biology and
Technology, 43, 36-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2006.07.011.
Nuncio-Jáuregui, N., Calín-Sánchez, A., Carbonell-Barrachina, A., &
Hernández, F. (2014). Changes in quality parameters, proline, antioxidant
activity and color of pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) as affected by fruit
position within tree, cultivar and ripening stage. Scientia Horticulturae,
165, 181-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2013.11.021.
Parra-Coronado, A., & Fischer, G. (2013). Maduración y comportamiento
poscosecha de la feijoa (Acca sellowiana (O. Berg) Burret). Una revisión.
Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Hortícolas, 7, 98-110. http://dx.doi.
org/10.17584/rcch.2013v7i1.2039.
Parra-Coronado, A., & Hernández-Hernández, J. E. (2008). Fisiología
postcosecha de frutas y hortalizas (4. ed.). Bogotá: Facultad de Ingeniería,
Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Parra-Coronado, A., Hernández-Hernández, J. E., & Camacho-Tamayo, J.
H. (2006). Estudio de algunas propiedades físicas y fisiológicas precosecha
de la pera variedad Triunfo de Viena. Revista Brasileira de Fruticultura,
28, 55-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-29452006000100017.
Quintero, O. C. (2012). Feijoa (Acca sellowiana Berg). In G. Fischer
(Ed.), Manual para el cultivo de frutales en el trópico (p. 443-473).
Bogotá: Produmedios.
Regina, M. A., Carmo, E. L., Fonseca, A. R., Purgatto, E., Shiga, T.
M., Lajolo, F. M., Ribeiro, A. P., & Mota, R. V. (2010). Influência da
altitude na qualidade das uvas ‘Chardonnay’ e ‘Pinot Noir’ em Minas
Gerais. Revista Brasileira de Fruticultura, 32, 143-150. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1590/S0100-29452010005000023.
Rodríguez, M., Arjona, H. E., & Campos, H. A. (2006). Caracterización
fisicoquímica del crecimiento y desarrollo de los frutos de feioja
(Acca sellowiana Berg) en los clones 41 (Quimba) y 8-4. Agronomía
Colombiana, 24, 54-61.
Salisbury, F. B., & Ross, C. W. (2000). Fisiología de las plantas 3:
desarrollo de las plantas y fisiología ambiental. (p. 527-564). Madrid:
Thompson Editores Spain, Paraninfo S.A.
Velho, A. C., Amarante, C. V. T., Argenta, L. C., & Steffens, C. A. (2011).
Influência da temperatura de armazenamento na qualidade pós-colheita
de goiabas serranas. Revista Brasileira de Fruticultura, 33, 14-20. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-29452011005000016.