Table 1.

Quality of tomato fruits with applications of SiO₂ nanoparticles (NPs) and stressed by arsenic.

As	SiO2 NPs	Firmness	TSS	pH	EC	ORP
(mg L−1)		(kg cm−1)	(°Brix)		(mS cm−1)	(mV)
0	0	4.60 ± 0.26 ab	5.20 ± 0.28 ab	4.75 ± 0.04 a	3.98 ± 0.27 a–d	54.83 ± 1.25 b
	250	4.21 ± 0.85 b	5.50 ± 0.34 a	4.57 ± 0.02 bcd	3.81 ± 0.15 bcd	61.00 ± 1.79 a
	1000	4.85 ± 0.46 ab	5.33 ± 0.33 ab	4.51 ± 0.02 def	4.17 ± 0.16 abc	51.50 ± 1.15 bc
0.2	0	5.88 ± 0.56 ab	5.25 ± 0.17 ab	4.53 ± 0.02 b–f	3.42 ± 0.47 d	50.17 ± 2.09 c
	250	4.35 ± 0.70 b	5.17 ± 0.17 ab	4.52 ± 0.03 b–f	3.98 ± 0.24 a–d	50.00 ± 1.69 cd
	1000	5.88 ± 0.47 ab	5.33 ± 0.21 ab	4.51 ± 0.02 c–f	4.30 ± 0.28 ab	51.00 ± 0.89 bc
0.4	0	4.97 ± 1.01 ab	5.28 ± 0.16 ab	4.58 ± 0.02 b	3.51 ± 0.29 cd	41.00 ± 1.32 e
	250	5.45 ± 0.89 ab	5.05 ± 0.03 ab	4.52 ± 0.02 b–f	4.19 ± 0.25 abc	45.67 ± 0.92 d
	1000	5.48 ± 0.24 ab	5.50 ± 0.18 a	4.51 ± 0.02 def	3.87 ± 0.48 a–d	40.17 ± 1.01 e
0.8	0	5.27 ± 0.71 ab	5.37 ± 0.20 ab	4.47 ± 0.02 f	4.22 ± 0.11 ab	38.17 ± 1.96 efg
	250	5.73 ± 0.57 ab	5.23 ± 0.09 ab	4.54 ± 0.02 b–e	4.50 ± 0.14 ab	38.83 ± 0.48 ef
	1000	5.25 ± 0.54 ab	5.17 ± 0.29 ab	4.51 ± 0.01 c–f	4.41 ± 0.18 ab	39.83 ± 1.82 e
1.6	0	5.31 ± 0.92 ab	5.42 ± 0.20 ab	4.52 ± 0.02 c–f	4.25 ± 0.10 ab	36.67 ± 1.87 efg
	250	6.18 ± 0.39 a	4.83 ± 0.17 b	4.55 ± 0.02 b–e	4.15 ± 0.13 abc	37.17 ± 1.19 efg
	1000	4.78 ± 0.56 ab	5.33 ± 0.36 ab	4.55 ± 0.01 b–e	4.00 ± 0.36 a–d	35.00 ± 2.35 fgh
3.2	0	4.86 ± 0.57 ab	5.42 ± 0.20 ab	4.50 ± 0.04 ef	4.14 ± 0.12 abc	31.83 ± 2.15 h
	250	5.73 ± 0.77 ab	5.37 ± 0.20 ab	4.54 ± 0.02 b–e	4.53 ± 0.11 a	36.83 ± 1.47 efg
	1000	5.72 ± 0.46 ab	5.03 ± 0.03 ab	4.58 ± 0.02 bc	4.15 ± 0.25 abc	34.17 ± 1.72 gh
CV (%)		30.05	10.30	1.29	14.92	9.04

As: arsenic; TSS: Total soluble solids; pH: Hydrogen potential; EC: Electric conductivity; ORP: oxidation reduction potential; CV: Coefficient of variation. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences according to Fisher’s Least Significant Difference test (p ≤ 0.05).