Table 1.
Standard chemical composition (g/L) of fresh and withered Moscato bianco grapes after treatment with ozone at different exposure doses and times.
| Citric acid | Tartaric acid | Malic acid | Glucose | Fructose | Glycerol | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh grapes | ||||||
| Control | 0.16 | 6.80 | 1.44 | 134 | 142 | 0.00 |
| DN-24 | 0.19 | 6.44 | 1.65 | 132 | 139 | 0.00 |
| DN-48 | 0.16 | 6.39 | 1.71 | 134 | 142 | 0.00 |
| DH-24 | 0.17 | 7.30 | 1.39 | 146 | 155 | 0.00 |
| DH-48 | 0.18 | 7.58 | 1.53 | 159 | 169 | 0.08 |
| Sig. | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| D | ns | ∗∗ | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| T | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| D∗T | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| Withered grapes | ||||||
| Control | 0.32a | 7.73a | 1.35 | 175 | 188 | 1.48a |
| DN-24 | 0.34a | 6.15b | 1.34 | 182 | 196 | 1.71a |
| DN-48 | 0.34a | 6.19b | 1.72 | 173 | 185 | 1.27ab |
| DH-24 | 0.22b | 5.76b | 1.44 | 175 | 188 | 0.97b |
| DH-48 | 0.25ab | 6.27b | 1.41 | 178 | 190 | 0.81b |
| Sig. | ∗∗ | ∗∗ | ns | ns | ns | ∗∗ |
| D | ∗∗ | ns | ns | ns | ns | ∗∗ |
| T | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ∗∗ |
| D∗T | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ∗∗ |
| Fresh versus Withered grapes | ||||||
| Control | ∗∗ | ∗∗ | ns | ∗∗ | ∗∗ | ∗∗ |
| DN-24 | ∗∗ | ns | ns | ∗∗ | ∗∗ | ∗∗ |
| DN-48 | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ∗∗ |
| DH-24 | ns | ∗∗ | ns | ∗∗ | ∗∗ | ∗∗ |
| DH-48 | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ∗∗ |
Values are expressed as average (n = 3). Different Latin letters indicate significant differences among treatments for fresh and withered grape samples according to the HSD Tukey’s test (p < 0.01). Asterisks denote significant differences among treatments for fresh and withered grape samples or between fresh and withered samples for each treatment according to ANOVA: ∗∗indicates significance at p < 0.01; ns indicates no significant difference. DN, normal dose (30 μL/L); DH, high dose (60 μL/L); 24 and 48, 24 and 48 h of exposure, respectively; D, dose; T, time; and D∗T, dose–time interaction.