Title: Some characteristics of commercial frozen orange juice concentrates processed during the ... citrus seasons
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00066146/00001
 Material Information
Title: Some characteristics of commercial frozen orange juice concentrates processed during the ... citrus seasons
Series Title: Citrus Station Mimeo report
Physical Description: v. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Citrus Experiment Station (Lake Alfred, Fla.)
Florida Citrus Commission
Publisher: Citrus Experiment Station :
Florida Citrus Commission.
Place of Publication: Lake Alfred Fla
Publication Date: 1959-1960-1961-1962
Frequency: annual
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Frozen concentrated orange juice -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Frozen concentrated orange juice industry -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Taste -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Summary: Covers the previous three growing seasons.
Issuing Body: Issued by the Florida Citrus Commission and the Florida Citrus Experiement Station.
General Note: Description based on: 1962; title from caption.
General Note: Latest issue consulted: 1967.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00066146
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 71311969
lccn - 2006229394
 Related Items

Full Text





Citrus Station Mimeo Report 63-h
October 2, 1962


Some Characteristics of Commercial Frozen Orange Concentrates Processed during
the 1959-60, 1960-61, and 1961-62 Citrus Seasons

M. D. Maraulja and R. W. Barron
Florida Citrus Commission
and
R. W. Olsen
University of Florida,
Citrus Experiment Station
Lake Alfred, Florida


Samples of commercial frozen orange concentrates processed during the 1961-
62 citrus season were examined for flavor, stability, and color. These samples
were collected semi-monthly beginning on December 1, 1961, and ending on June 15,
1962. A total of 198 samples from 22 commercial plants were analyzed; 101 of
these were from midseason packs and 97 were from late season packs. The data
obtained were summarized and are presented in Tables 1-8, together with that for
samples examined during the 2 previous seasons, 1959-60 and 1960-61; results are
shown in all of the tables for both the midseason and late season samples so
that any differences in products packed during these two periods will be evident.

Flavor evaluations are given in Tables 1 and 2; these are based upon the
opinions of the flavor panel members who followed instructions given on the
following page. Each of the reconstituted juices was tasted 3 times during the
period from December 27, 1961 to August 30, 1962. The degree of clarification
and gelation after storage of the samples at 40 and 800F. is listed in Table
3; these stability data are presented along with similar data for the 1960-61
season. Frequency distribution tables (Tables 4, 5, and 6) may be used to com-
pare the Hunter Color Difference Meter "Rd", "a", and "b" values of concentrates
produced during 2 seasons. Increases in the "Rd", and "a", and "b" values are
caused by an increase in the lightness (whiteness), redness, and yellowness,
respectively, of the reconstituted juice. Data presented in Tables 7 and 8 show
the relation between the date of packing and the average Hunter color values
"Rd", "a", and "b", for both the orange concentrates and the reconstituted juices.
The midseason and late season packing periods for the 3 seasons were separated on
the basis of the marked change in color of the concentrates when Valencia oranges
became available in quantity for processing. Thus in Table 7, the average Hunter
"a" values indicate that a definite change in color occurred after March 1, March
15, and March 15 during the 1959-60, 1960-61, and 1961-62 seasons, respectively.

Flavor evaluations (Table 1) showed that the flavor of the midseason samples
for 1961-62 was very much better than that for orange concentrates evaluated
during the 1959-60 and 1960-61 seasons. Of the 101 midseason samples examined
during the 1961-62 season, 72% were graded "good" in respect to flavor. Also,
the late season 1961-62 samples were very much better in flavor than those


Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida
10/2/62 MDM










INSTRUCTIONS TO TASTE PANEL


Flavor Evaluation of Frozen Concentrated Orange Juices


Samples: Reconstituted commercial frozen h20 Brix orange
concentrates.


Directions:


(a) Grade for flavor on the following basis and do
not consider other factors, such as color or separation.


Excellent
Very good
Good
Fair


10
9
8-7
6-5


Poor
Very poor
Unpalatable


h-3
2
1


Use excellent, good, or fair only if the juice in your
opinion is acceptable as frozen orange concentrate, and
therefore, would be repurchased by you.


(b) If you score a sample of juice h or lower, indicat-
ing that the product is not acceptable as frozen orange
concentrate, and therefore, would not be repurchased by
you, then indicate all of the flavor defects responsible
for the poor flavor quality.

Indicate flavor defects using only the following descriptive
terms. If necessary, other terms will be added to this list.
If you are not sure of the type of flavor defect in any
juice, which you score 4 or lower, then indicate that it is
nondescript.


Flavor Defects


Too sour (acid)
Too sweet
Excessive peel oil
Too bitter
Too astringent


Heated
Buttermilk
Cardboard
Castor oil
Tallowy


Immature fruit
Overmature fruit
Stale fruit
Insipid


Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida
10/2/62 FWW








-2-


evaluated from the previous 2 seasons. The flavor data for the 1961-62 season
showed that 25% of the 97 late season samples were graded "very good" and 60%
"good". It is possible that some of the reasons for the marked improvement is
the flavor of the frozen orange concentrates packed during the past season
would include the following: (1) the overall flavor of the oranges produced
was, in general, better than that of fruit processed during the 2 previous
seasons, (2) highest average total soluble solids content in orange juices pro-
cessed since the 1949-50 season. The lowest weighted average for total
soluble solids in oranges used for all processed products for the period 1949-
50 season to the 1961-62 season was 11.23f for the 1949-50 season and the
highest was 12.37% for the 1961-62 season and (3) the low level of oxygen in
the concentrates resulting from the use of nitrogen by some plants during some
phases of processing to eliminate air from both juice and concentrate.

Three midseason and 3 late season 1961-62 samples were graded "poor" in
flavor; 4 of these samples were graded "poor" because of the presence of oxi-
dized or COF off-flavors, either initially or after storage at -8*F., 1 sample
because of astringency and a non-descript off-flavor, and 1 sample because of
stale flavor.

Data in Table 2 show that the flavor grades of the 1960-61 and 1961-62
midseason frozen orange concentrates, after abuse for 96 hr. at W0F., was
approximately the same; however, they were slightly better than the grades for
the 1959-60 samples. The flavor of the late season 1961-62 concentrates, after
storage for 96 hr. at 40F., was better than that in the samples from the 2
previous seasons since 32% were graded "good" and 66% graded "fair" as compared
with 86% and 100 of the 1959-60 and 1960-61 concentrates, respectively, were
designated as being of "fair" flavor. The percentage of concentrates that were
graded "poor" after abuse was 11%, 1% and 3% for the 1959-60, 1960-61 and 1961-
62 samples, respectively.

The stability of the 1961-62 concentrates was slightly less than that for
the 1960-61 samples as shown by the data in Table 3 for the degree of clarifi-
cation after storage of the products at 400 and 80 F.

The color of the frozen orange concentrates packed in 1961-62 was poorer
than that in the 1960-61 samples as shown by the data presented in Tables 4, 5,
and 6. The Hunter "Rd" values (Table 4) indicate a marked increase in the amount
of lightness (whiteness) in the midseason 1961-62 samples; however, there was a
slight decrease in this color factor in the late season 1961-62 concentrates. A
very marked decrease in the amount of redness in both the mid- and late season
1961-62 samples is indicated by the decrease in the Hunter "a" values (Table 5).
The data in Table 6 for the Hunter "b" values show that the yellowness in the
reconstituted juices decreased markedly for the 1961-62 midseason samples; also,
that the yellowness decreased very markedly in both the 1961-62 late season
concentrates and reconstituted juices.

Figures from Fruit and Vegetable Division, Florida Department of Agriculture,
Winter Haven, Florida.

Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 MDM











From the color data obtained for the 1961-62 concentrates, it is evident
that the color of these products was poorer than that of any of the frozen
orange concentrate samples examined since the 1957-58 season. The relation of
the date of packing to the average Hunter color values for the 1961-62 orange
concentrates (Table 7) was very similar to that found during the 1957-58
season, when major freezes occurred in the citrus areas of Florida (See Reports
for Ninth Annual Citrus Processors' Meeting, Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
October 2, 1958).

It should be noted that although the flavor of the 1961-62 frozen orange
concentrates was very much better than that examined during previous seasons,
the color of these products was not as good. The Hunter color values show that
there was an unusually low amount of redness (Table 5) and a definite decrease
in the yellowness (Table 6) in both the mid- and late season reconstituted
juice from the concentrate packed during the 1961-62 season. However, data
previously published (Proc. Florida State Hort. Soc. 71: 274-278. 1958) indi-
cated some correlation between the color and flavor of commercial frozen orange
concentrates produced during the 1953-54, 1954-55, 1956-57, and 1957-58 seasons.
It is evident that the 1961-62 results are not in agreement with the previously
published data. Thus, an important question is raised, namely, "What factor or
factors caused the decrease in the color quality of frozen orange concentrate
during the 1961-62 season?" It is desirable that an investigation be undertaken
to obtain an answer to this interesting question.



Acknowledgment s

The 580 samples of Florida frozen orange concentrate examined for this
study were supplied by 23 companies and their cooperation was appreciated.

Thanks are extended for their time, efforts and assistance to personnel
of the U.S.D.A. Agricultural Marketing Service, Winter Haven, Florida, who
obtained the samples from the concentrate plants.

Members of the taste panel during the 1961-62 season were M. D. Maraulja,
R. W. Olsen, Roger Patrick, R. W. Wolford, E. C. Hill, M. H. Dougherty, R. W.
Barron, S. K. Long, Louise Cherry, Gusta Livingston, G. E. Alberding, and F. W.
Wenzel. The taste panel members graded the flavor of the frozen orange concen-
trates and thus made possible the flavor evaluations summarized in this report.
Their help, opinions, and willingness to be on the taste panel was appreciated
very much.







Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 MDM













Table 1. Frequency distribution of flavor grades for samples of commercial
frozen concentrated orange juices collected from Florida processing plants1

1959-60 1960-61 1961-62
Flavor Number of % of Number of % of Number of % of
grade2 samples samples samples samples samples samples
Midseason packs 1
Good 21 21 27 24 73 72
Fair 77 79 82 75 25 25
Poor 0 0 1 1 3 3
Totals 98 100 110 100 101 100

Late season packs 1
Very good 0 0 0 0 24 25
Good 4h 49 57 67 58 60
Fair 45 51 28 33 12 12
Poor 0 0 0 0 3 3
Totals 89 100 85 100 97 100

Total packs for entire season
Very good 0 0 0 0 24 12
Good 65 35 84 h3 131 66
Fair 122 65 110 56 37 19
Poor 0 0 1 1 6 3
Totals 187 100 195 100 198 100
Samples collected semi-monthly from December through June, inclusively, during
each processing season. Samples of midseason packs collected from December 15 to
March 1, inclusively, for the 1959-60 season; from December 15 to March 15,
inclusively, for the 1960-61 season; and from December 1 to March 15, inclusively,
for the 1961-62 season.
2
Based on the evaluation of the flavor of 187 samples for the 1959-60 season, 195
samples for the 1960-61 season, and 198 samples for the 1961-62 season. The
taste panel followed instructions as given on the following page. Each of the
reconstituted juices from the concentrates was tasted at 3 different times. The
data for the 1959-60 season are based on 4080 individual flavor grades; for the
1960-61 season on 4066 grades; and for the 1961-62 season on 4751 grades.



Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 MDM











Table 2.
at O0F. for
from Florida


Frequency distribution of flavor grades after storage for 96 hr.
samples of commercial frozen concentrated orange juices collected
processing plants1


Flavor grade 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62
after 96 hr. Number of % of Number of % of Number of % of
at hO0F.2 samples samples samples samples samples samples

Midseason packs 1
Good 0 0 0 0 1 1
Fair 90 92 108 98 97 96
Poor 8 8 2 2 3 3
Totals 98 100 110 100 101 100

Late season packs 1
Good 0 0 0 0 31 32
Fair 77 86 85 100 64 66
Poor 12 14 0 0 2 2
Totals 89 100 85 100 97 100

Total packs for entire season
Good 0 0 0 0 32 16
Fair 167 89 193 99 161 81
Poor 20 11 2 1 5 3
Totals 187 100 195 100 198 100
Samples collected semi-monthly from December through June, inclusively, during
each processing season. Samples of midseason packs collected from December 15
to March 1, inclusively, for the 1959-60 season; from December 15 to March 15,
inclusively, for the 1960-61 season; and from December 1 to March 15, inclusively,
for the 1961-62 season.
2 Based on the evaluation of the flavor of 187 samples for the 1959-60 season,
195 samples for the 1960-61 season, and 198 samples for the 1961-62 season.
The reconstituted juices from the concentrates were tasted by M. D. Maraulja,
F. W. Wenzel and R. W. Olsen.





Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 MDM








Table 3. Comparison of frequency distribution tables for degree of clarification and gelation after storage of
samples at 40F. and 80F., in samples from midseason and late season packs of commercial frozen concentrated orange
juices collected semi-monthly during the 1960-61 and 1961-62 citrus seasons
After 96 hr. at 40F. After 2h hr. at 80F.
Degree of Midseason Late season Total Midseason Late season Total
clarification1 samples % samples % samples % samples % samples % samples %
Season 60-61 61-62 60-61 61-62 60-61 61-62 60-61 61-62 60-61 61-62 60-61 61-62
Samples 110 101 85 97 195 198 110 101 85 97 195 198
None 98.2 86.6 98.8 93.6 98.5 89.9 88.2 86.6 89.3 88.2 88.7 87.4
Slight 1.8 3.8 0.0 3.2 1.0 3.5 1.8 0.0 1.2 1.0 1.5 0.5
Definite 0.0 8.6 1.2 3.2 0.5 6.1 3.6 2.9 7.1 5.4 5.2 4.0
Extreme 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 6.h 10.5 2.4 5.4 4.6 8.1

Degree of
gelation

O-None 61.8 71.4 68.2 74.2 64.6 72.8 77.3 83.8 84.7 80.6 80.6 82.4
1-Very slight 33.7 23.8 29.4 23.6 31.8 23.7 19.1 11.4 12.9 17.2 16.4 14.1
2-Slight 1.8 1.9 1.2 2.2 1.5 2.0 0.9 3.8 2.4 2.2 1.5 3.0
3-Semi-gel 2.7 2.9 1.2 0.0 2.1 1.5 2.7 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5
4-Solid gel 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


1 Clarification measured by percentage light transmittance of centrifuged reconstituted
with 730 filter and 14 ml. cell. None = 0-59%; Slight = 60-69%; Definite = 70-84%; and


juice using Lumetron 402-E
Extreme = 85-10C%.


Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 MDM














Table 4. Comparison of frequency distribution tables of Hunter "Rd" values
for samples from midseason and late season packs of commercial frozen concentrated


orange .uices collected semi-monthly during the 1960-61 and 1961-62


citrus seasons


Concentrates_
Hunter Color Midseason Late season Total
Difference Meter samples % samples % samples %
Rd Season 1960-61 1961-62 1960-61 1961-62 1960-61 1961-62
Samples 110 101 85 97 195 198
18.0-18.9 4.7 3.2 2.1 1.5
19.0-19.9 7.1 6.5 3.1 3.0
20.0-20.9 0.9 11.8' 22.6 5.6 10.6
21.0-21.9 3.6 1.0 18.8 25.8 10.3 12.7
22.0-22.9 11.8 6.6 23.5 17.2 16.9 11.6
23.0-23.9 15.5 16.2 9.4 14.0 12.8 15.1
24.0-24.9 20.0 16.2 12.9 4.3 16.9 10.6
25.0-25.9 12.7 18.0 7.1 3.2 10.3 11.1
26.0-26.9 13.7 22.8 4.7 1.1 9.8 12.7
27.0-27.9 10.0 10.5 5.6 5.6
28.0-28.9 8.2 4.7 4.6 2.5
29.0-29.9 2.7 1.0 2.1 1.5 1.5
30.0-30.9 0.9 1.0 0.5 0.5
31.0-31.9 2.0 1.0

Reconstituted juices
19.0-19.9 3.5 3.2 1.5 1.5
20.0-20.9 17.6 12.9 7.7 6.0
21.0-21.9 3.6 1.9 25.9 33.4 13.3 16.7
22.0-22.9 23.7 7.6 31.8 29.0 27.2 17.6
23.0-23.9 28.2 21.9 15.3 16.1 22.5 19.3
24.0-24.9 29.1 33.3 5.9 3.2 19.0 19.3
25.0-25.9 11.8 21.9 2.2 6.7 12.6
26.0-26.9 3.6 11.4 2.1 6.0
27.0-27.9 1.0 0.5
28.0-28.9 1.0 0.5


Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 RWB













Table 5. Comparison of frequency distribution tables of Hunter "a" values
for samples from midseason and late season packs of commercial frozen concentrated
orange juices collected semi-monthly during the 1960-61 and 1961-62 citrus seasons
Concentrates
Hunter Color Midseason Late season Total
Difference Meter samples % samples % samples %
a Season 1960-61 1961-62 1960-61 1961-62 1960-61 1961-62
Samples 110 101 85 97 195 198
11.1-12.0 1.2 0.5 -
10.1-11.0 -
9.1-10.0 9.4 4.1 -
8.1- 9.0 1.8 42.3 19.5 -
7.1- 8.0 2.7 1.0 30.6 3.2 14.9 2.0
6.1- 7.0 10.9 0.0 15.3 29.0 12.8 13.6
5.1- 6.0 23.6 6.7 1.2 47.3 13.8 25.8
4.1- 5.0 34.6 12.4 18.3 19.5 15.2
3.1- 4.0 20.9 32.4 2.2 11.8 18.2
2.1- 3.0 5.5 37.0 3.1 19.7
1.1-2.0 8.6 4.5
Less than 1.1 1.9 1.0

Reconstituted juices
0.0 to -0.9 1.2 0.5 -
-1.0 to -1.9 0.9 5.9 3.1 -
-2.0 to -2.9 37.6 16.4 -
-3.0 to -3.9 6.4 1.9 45.9 20.4 23.6 10.6
-4.0 to -4.9 19.1 4.8 8.2 49.h4 14.4 25.7
-5.0 to -5.9 51.8 26.7 1.2 26.9 29.7 26.8
-6.0 to -6.9 21.8 56.1 2.2 12.3 30.8
Less than 6.9 10.5 1.1 6.1


Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 RWB















Table 6. Comparison of frequency distribution tables of Hunter "b"
values for samples from midseason and late season packs of commercial frozen
concentrated orange juices collected semi-monthly during the 1960-61 and
1961-62 citrus seasons
Concentrates
Hunter Color Midseason Late season Total
Difference Meter samples % samples % samples %
b Season 1960-61 1961-62 1960-61 1961-62 1960-61 1961-62
Samples 110 101 85 97 195 198
More than 35.9 2.7 3.8 1.2 2.1 2.0
35.0-35.9 13.6 10.5 12.9 13.3 5.6
34.0-34.9 24.6 29.5 18.8 22.0 15.7
33.0-33.9 30.9 31.4 41.2 2.2 35.4 17.6
32.0-32.9 23.6 18.1 21.2 6.5 22.6 12.6
31.0-31.9 4.6 4.8 4.7 29.0 4.6 16.2
30.0-30.9 1.9 49.4 24.2
29.0-29.9 12.9 6.1

Reconstituted juices
32.0-32.9 1.2 0.5 -
31.0-31.9 8.2 3.8 24.7 15.4 2.0
30.0-30.9 22.7 22.9 51.7 2.2 35.4 13.1
29.0-29.9 53.6 33.3 21.2 9.7 39.5 22.2
28.0-28.9 14.6 31.4 1.2 65.5 8.7 47.5
27.0-27.9 0.9 7.6 22.6 0.5 14.7
26.0-26.9 -
25.0-25.9 1.0 0.5


Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 RWB






Table 7. Relationship of
juices collected from Florida


date of packing to average Hunter color values for commercial frozen concentrated orange
processing plantsI


Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 RWB


Hunter Color Difference Meter average values for concentrates
1959-60 season 187 samples 1960-61 season 195 samples 1961-62 season 198 samples
Approx. Number Number Number
date of Rd a b of Rd a b of Rd a b
packed samples samples samples
12/1 1 23.7 4.4 33.3
12/15 12 26.4 5.5 35.6 4 23.4 3.9 32.8 11 25.3 4.0 33.5
1/1 17 25.8 4.7 33.5 18 25.2 4.7 33.8 17 25.4 3.3 33.6
1/15 23 25.6 4.7 33.3 22 25.7 4.1 34.1 21 25.7 2.7 32.3
2/1 22 25.8 4.5 33.1 22 25.3 4.9 34.0 18 25.8 3.2 34.4
2/15 16 25.6 5.3 33.1 23 25.3 5.3 33.4 20 25.5 3.4 34.0
3/1 8 25.9 6.0 32.9 17 24.3 5.6 33.3 10 26.3 3.0 32.7
3/15 3 25.0 7.5 32.9 4 24.9 5.8 34.4 3 25.0 3.2 32.0
4/1 7 23.7 8.0 32.8 3 22.6 6.5 34.0 -- 23.7 .6 32.0
4/15 19 24.0 7.7 32.9 15 22.4 8.2 34.0 15 22.3 5.1 31.3
5/1 23 22.7 8.5 32.4 20 22.7 7.8 33.8 21 22.7 5.0 30.8
5/15 21 23.0 8.3 33.2 19 22.2 8.2 33.6 20 21.5 5.8 30.8
6/1 16 22.9 8.6 33.2 17 22.1 8.1 33.3 21 21.7 6.0 30.5
6/15 11 22.3 8.1 33.3 16 21.4 6.1 31.0
1 Samples collected semi-monthly from December through June, inclusively, during each processing season.










Table 8. Relationship of date of packing to average Hunter color values for commercial frozen concentrated orange
juices collected from Florida processing plants1
Hunter Color Difference Meter average values for reconstituted juices
1959-60 season 187 samples 1960-61 season 195 samples 1961-62 season 198 samples
Approx. Number Number Number
date of Rd a b of Rd a b of Rd a b
packed samples samples samples
12/1 1 23.7 -5.1 30.0
12/15 12 25.3 -4.5 31.2 4 23.9 -5.5 29.6 11 24.1 -5.2 28.9
1/1 17 25.2 -5.1 29.5 18 23.7 -5.2 29.6 17 24.4 -6.0 29.1
1/15 23 25.0 -5.2 29.4 22 24.3 -5.8 29.9 21 24.9 -6.4 28.0
2/1 22 25.1 -5.2 29.1 22 23.8 -5.3 29.8 18 24.9 -6.3 31.2
2/15 16 24.8 -5.0 29.4 23 23.8 -5.2 29.2 20 24.4 -6.2 29.4
3/1 8 25.6 -4.6 29.5 17 23.3 -5.0 29.4 10 24.4 -6.8 28.8
3/15 3 ---- 2.0 -3.7 30.0 4 23.6 -5.1 30.1 3 22.7 -7.0 27.3
4/1 7 23.8 -2.7 30.4 3 21.7 -3.2 30.7 4 24.0 -5.4 29.6
4/15 19 24.1 -2.9 30.5 15 22.3 -3.1 31.0 15 22.3 -5.2 28.1
5/1 23 23.1 -2.5 30.2 20 22.3 -3.3 30.6 21 22.4 -4.8 28.3
5/15 21 23.2 -2.9 30.6 19 21.7 -2.8 30.3 20 21.9 -4.5 28.3
6/1 16 23.1 -2.7 30.4 17 21.8 -3.0 30.1 21 21.8 -4.2 28.0
6/15 11 22.0 -2.8 30.2 16 22.0 -4.2 28.5
1
Samples collected semi-monthly from December through June, inclusively, during each processing season.



Florida Citrus Experiment Station
and Florida Citrus Commission,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
10/2/62 RWB




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs