J. AMER. SOC. HORT. SCI. 115(3):440-443. 1990.

Storage Characteristics of Small Watermelon

Cultivars
L.A. Risse
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Horticultural Research Laboratory,
2120 Camden Road, Orlando, FL 32803
J.K. Brecht, S.A. Sargent, and S.J. Locascio
Vegetable Crops Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
J.M. Crall and G.W. Elmstrom
Agricultural Research and Education Center, Leesburg, FL 32748
D.N. Maynard
Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Bradenton, FL 32508
Additional index words. chilling injury, decay, firmness, total soluble solids, conditioning, flesh color
Abstract. Two newly released cultivars of small watermelons [Citrullus lunatus (Thumb.) Matsum and Naki], ‘Mick-
ylee’ and ‘Minilee’, plus two other cultivars, Baby Fun and Sugar Baby, were stored at various temperatures from 1
to 21C for up to 4 weeks plus 1 week at 21C over two seasons. All cultivars were susceptible to chilling injury (CI)
when stored below 7C; however, ‘Minilee’ was less susceptible than the other cultivars tested. Chilling injury increased
with storage length. Conditioning at 26C for 3 days before storage at 1C reduced CI and increased the percentage
of marketable watermelons after storage. Decay percentage increased with storage time and was highest on fruit held
at 1C where CI led to decay. The flesh of ‘Mickylee’ and ‘Minilee’ was firmer than that of the other cultivars tested
and ‘Mickylee’ and Minilee’ retained their firmness better during storage. Total soluble solids concentration decreased
with increased storage temperature. ‘Minilee’ watermelons were superior to the other three cultivars in postharvest
storage potential and exhibited the least CI and decay.

Watermelon production in the United States has traditionally Materials and Methods
centered around production of large-fruited types. United States Three independent storage tests were conducted; two at Or-
per-capita consumption has dropped 30%, from 8.2 kg during lando and one at Gainesville, Fla. The fruit for the Orlando tests
the 1950s to 5.9 kg during the 1980s. The drop in watermelon were harvested from plantings at the Univ. of Florida’s Agri-
consumption has been attributed to smaller families, inconven- cultural Research Centers at Bradenton or Leesburg during 1987
ience in handling large watermelons, and, if sliced at retail, and 1988. Three harvests were made for each test in 1987 and
higher per-unit prices. Small watermelon cultivars, sometimes 1988 with ‘Baby Fun’, ‘Mickylee’, and ‘Minilee’. One harvest
called icebox watermelons; have been available for many years. at Gainesville was made from plantings at Univ. of Florida’s
Their yield and quality have not been as good as that of the Horticultural Unit plots with ‘Baby Fun’, ‘Mickylee’, ‘Minilee’,
large melons. Two recently released cultivars, Minilee and and ‘Sugar Baby’. Harvested fruit for the Gainesville test were
Mickylee, developed by Crall (1986), have acceptable yields rinsed with tap water to remove field debris and dipped for 1
and excellent eating quality. These two cultivars also are resis- min in a 0.5% solution of sodium-o-phenyl-phenate (SOPP)
tant to anthracnose and fusarium wilt. The flesh of these fruit (FMC Freshguard, Lakeland, Fla.). Fruit for the Orlando tests
is very crisp and total soluble solids (TSS) range from 10% to were not treated.
12% at maturity. In recent years, imports of watermelons of
Five fruit of each cultivar were stored at 1, 7, 13, or 21C for
‘Mickylee’ and ‘Minilee’ from Central and South America and 1, 2, 3, or 4 weeks plus 1 additional week at 21C for the tests
the Caribbean Islands have been increasing. in 1987 at Orlando. For the 1988 Orlando test, five fruit of each
Watermelons generally are not refrigerated when shipped do- cultivar were stored at 1, 7, 13, or 21C for 3 weeks plus 1
mestically. However, refrigerated storage and transit may be additional week at 21C. Two additional treatments were added
used to extend the shelf life during export shipment. The rec- to this test: conditioning at 26C for 3 days at high (90% ± 5%)
ommended range is 10 to 15C (Hardenburg et al., 1986). At or low (60% ± 5%) RH before storage at 1C. Five fruit of each
lower temperatures, fruit are susceptible to CI and decay (Dow cultivar for the Gainesville test were stored at 5, 10, 15, or 20C
et al., 1979) and loss of color (Showalter, 1960). At higher for 2 or 4 weeks plus 4 additional days at 20C. Storage rooms
temperatures, fruit are subject to decay (Leupeschen, 1961) and in the Orlando tests were maintained at the desired temperature
sugar loss (Chisholm and Picha, 1986). Prestorage conditioning ± 0.5C and RH of 85% ± 5%; those in the Gainesville test
at 26C for 4 days reduces development of CI and increases the were maintained at the desired temperature + 0.5C. Relative
percentage of marketable fruit following storage (Picha, 1986). humidity was 90% ± 5% in the 5, 10, and 15C rooms and 70%
The objective of this study was to determine the storage qual- ± 5% in the 20C room. All melons were in storage within 4
ity potential of small watermelon cultivars in the range of 1 to to 8 hr after harvest.
21c. At Orlando, the fruit were scored at each evaluation for CI
(1 = none, 2 = <10% of surface area, 3 = 11% to 25%, 4
= 26% to 50%, and 5 = > 50%), stem condition (sound or
Received for publication 20 Apr. 1989. The cost of publishing this paper was not), and decay. CI of watermelon surface is indicated by
defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. Under postal regulations, this
paper therefore must be hereby marked advertisement solely to indicate this brownish, water-soaked areas. Marketable fruit were considered
fact. to be without decay and not overripe. The fruit were then cut

440 J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 115(3):440-443. 1990.

 Table 1. Chilling injury rating and percentage of marketable watermelons stored for 1, 2, 3, or 4
z
weeks at 1, 7, 13, or 21C plus 1 additional week at 21C (three tests, 1987, Orlando).

z
All storage rooms maintained at ± 0.5C and 85% ± 5% RH.
y
x
Melons ripe and not decayed.
Chilling injury ratings: 1 = none, 2 = <10% of surface area, 3 = 11% to 25%, 4 = 26% to 50%,
and 5 = >50%.
w
Means separation in row by Duncan’s multiple range test, P = 0.05.

Table 2. Quality characteristics of three small watermelon cultivars Two tissue sections (3 × 3 × 10 cm) from opposite fruit halves
stored at 1, 7, 13, or 21Cz for 4 weeks plus 1 additional week at were used to measure flesh firmness in the Gainesville test. The
21C (three tests, 1987, Orlando). firmness was measured with a firmness testing device (Chatillon
Model HTCM, John Chatillon and Sons, New York) with a
crosshead speed of 20 cm·min-1 and equipped with a round-
ended probe (1.1 cm in diameter).
The TSS content of the juice was determined by homogeniz-
ing in a blender the two tissue sections used for flesh firmness,
centrifuging an aliquot of the resultant slurry at 12,000 × g,
and measuring the supernatant with an Abbé refractometer in
the Gainesville test. TSS was determined by squeezing juice
from the heart section, previously used for color and firmness
measurements, directly onto a hand-held refractometer in the
Orlando tests.
All data were statistically analyzed using an analysis of var-
z iance, and Duncan’s multiple range test was used to separate
Storage rooms maintained at ± 0.5C and 85% ± 5% RH.
y
Melonsripe and not decayed. means.
x
Means separation in columns by Duncan’s multiple range test, P =
0.05. Results
All three cultivars in the 1987 tests at Orlando were suscep-
in half before being evaluated for ripeness stage at Gainesville tible to CI at 1 at 7C. ‘Minilee’ was the least-susceptible cultivar
(1 = unripe, 2 = ripe, 3 = overripe). Rind thickness was (Table 1). CI was more severe at 1 than 7C and the severity of
measured at three equally spaced locations around the circum- CI increased with increased storage time. The percentage of
ference of the fruit. Color of a section of flesh at the center or marketable watermelons was highest at 21C and lowest at 1C
heart area was measured with a color difference meter (Model (Table 1). At 1 and 7C, most of the decay originated on the
D25-9, Hunterlab, Reston, Va.) signal processor with an optical sites of CI, and at 13 and 21C, most decay originated from the
sensor (model D25-L). stem end. Decay increased with storage time. ‘Mickylee’ and
A section of flesh (3 × 8 cm and ≈ 2 cm deep) in the Orlando ‘Minilee’ fruit were less susceptible to decay than ‘Baby Fun’.
tests was cut from the central area of the fruit and a food-testing ‘Mickylee’ and ‘Minilee’ fruit were firmer than ‘Baby Fun’ fruit
system (Model 1132, Instron, Canton, Mass.) was used to mea- during storage (Table 2). TSS values were higher for ‘Baby
sure firmness. Firmness was measured by applying a load cell Fun’ and ‘Minilee’ than for ‘Mickylee’ fruit. TSS decreased
calibrated to a range of 0-10 kg at a constant speed of 5 cm·min-1 with increased storage temperature. The percentage of market-
equipped with a round-ended probe (1.1 cm in diameter). The able watermelons was highest for ‘Mickylee’ fruit, followed by
amount of force required to enter the fruit surface to a depth of ‘Minilee’ and ‘Baby Fun’ fruit, during this extended storage
5 mm was recorded. Three readings were taken on each melon. period. Storage at 21C resulted in the highest percentage of

J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 115(3):440-443. 1990. 441

 Table 3. Quality characteristics of three small watermelon cultivars stored at 1C (with and without con-
ditioning), 7, 13, or 21C for 3 weeks plus 1 additional week at 21C (three tests, 1988, Orlando)z.

z
Conditioning 3 days at 26C at either high (90% ± 5%; HRH) or low RH(60% ± 5%; LRH). All other
storage rooms maintained at ± 0.5C and 85% ± 5% RH.
y
Melons ripe and not decayed.
x
Means separation in columns by Duncan’s multiple range test, P = 0.05.

Table 4. Quality characteristics of four small watermelon cultivars stored at 5, 10, 15,
or 20C for 4 weeks (one test, 1987, Gainesville)z,y.

z
All storage rooms maintained at ± 0.5C and 90% to 95% RH in 5, 10, and 15C rooms
and 70% RH in 20C room.
y
Mean separation in columns (within a given storage temperature) by Duncan’s multiple
range test, P = 0.05.
x
Ripeness: 1 = unripe, 2 = ripe, 3 = overripe.
w
After storage for 4 weeks plus 4 days at 20C.

442 J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 115(3):440-443. 1990.

 marketable fruit and 1C in the lowest. At 1 and 7C storage, CI ature. Conditioning (3 days at 26C) of small watermelons re-
was severe and decay originated at the sites of Cl during the duced the incidence and severity of CI and increased the
additional week of storage at 21C. percentage of marketable fruit for storage at 1C, which is similar
In the 1988 tests at Orlando, ‘Baby Fun’ fruit were more to the findings of Picha (1986). Conditioning not only reduced
susceptible to Cl than either ‘Mickylee’ or ‘Minilee’ fruit during CI, but increased the percentage of sound stems. The high tem-
storage for 3 weeks at 1C (with or without conditioning at 26C perature of conditioning before cold storage tended to dry out
for 3 days), plus 1 week at 21C (Table 3). Prestorage condi- the stems, which, presumably, reduced infection from the stem
tioning reduced the incidence and severity of CI. ‘Mickylee’ end of the fruit. Film-wrapping of melons caused excessive
and ‘Minilee’ fruit were firmer than ‘Baby Fun’ fruit during decay originating at the stem end, presumably because of the
storage, and firmness was not affected by increased storage high relative humidity inside the wrapping (unpublished data).
temperature. TSS values were higher for ‘Mickylee’ than for Data from a related test in Gainesville showed that artificially
‘Baby Fun’ or ‘Minilee.’ The stems of ‘Minilee’ fruit had better drying stems resulted in less decay than dipping fruit in SOPP-
appearance (absence of mold or decay) than those of either treated water.
‘Baby Fun’ or ‘Mickylee’ fruit. Fruit stored at 21C and at 1C Some shippers of small watermelons from Central America
with conditioning had more sound stems than fruit stored at 1, are using shipping temperatures <7C without CI; however, transit
7, or 13C. ‘Baby Fun’ fruit were overripe and had more decay times are <1 week. Perhaps some inadvertent conditioning of
than ‘Mickylee’ or ‘Minilee fruit during storage. The incidence fruit also occurs after harvest and before shipment, when time
of overripe fruit was the lowest for storage at 1C, with or with- between harvest and shipment is 2 to 4 days (M. Harris, per-
out conditioning, and highest for storage at 21C. The incidence sonal communication).
of decay was highest in fruit stored at 1C. Storage at 1C with In our studies, long-term storage at 20C produced the highest
conditioning resulted in the highest amount of marketable fruit, percentage of marketable fruit and, generally, the lowest per-
and storage at 1C without conditioning in the lowest (Table 3). centage of decayed fruit. However, fruit from long-term storage
The humidity level during conditioning (90% or 60% RH) did at 20C also had the lowest amount of TSS. The fruit flesh was
not affect any of the quality factors studied. Prestorage condi- also not as crisp as at lower storage temperatures. Therefore,
tioning reduced the severity of CI with reduced incidence of 10 to 15C was in the best range for long-term storage for non-
decay and maintained a desirable stem condition. conditioned small watermelons. For ‘Mickylee’ and ‘Minilee,’
The ripeness rating in the test at Gainesville for all cultivars storage at 1C with conditioning at 26C for 3 days would be
tended to increase with increased storage temperatures during 4 acceptable for long-term storage. These data agree with the rec-
weeks of storage at 5, 10, 15, or 20C (Table 4). There were no ommendations of Hardenburg et al. (1986) and Dow et al. (1977)
differences among cultivars except for storage at 5C. The initial for large-type watermelons. Prestorage conditioning at ambient
ripeness ratings indicated that the fruit generally were harvested temperatures before storage at 1C should enhance longevity of
somewhat before being fully ripe. ‘Mickylee’ generally had the watermelon during storage.
deepest red flesh, as indicated by the higher Hunter ‘a’ values,
while ‘Sugar Baby’ had the lowest after storage. Firmness of Literature Cited
the flesh was quite variable after storage, but ‘Mickylee’ fruit Chisholm, D.N. and D.H. Picha. 1986. Effect of storage on sugar and
tended to be firmer than the other three cultivars. Rind thickness organic acid contents of watermelons. HortScience 21:1031- 1033.
tended to decrease with increasing storage temperatures. Decay Crall, J.M. 1986. ‘Minilee’ and ‘Mickylee,’ two icebox-type water-
tended to be lower at 20C than at 10 or 15C storage and equal melon cultivars with excellent fruit quality and resistance to both
to that at 5C. ‘Minilee’ fruit had the lowest amount of decay anthracnose and fusarium wilt. Univ. of Fla. Cir. S-336.
compared to other cultivars at 10C and above. Most decay was Dow, A.T., R.H. Segall, D.L. Hopkins, and G.W. Elmstrom. 1979.
Effects of storage temperature and field fungicide treatments on de-
limited to the stem end of the fruit, indicating that decay was cay of Florida watermelons. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 91:149-
from infection through the stem. 150.
Hardenburg, R.E., A.E. Watada, and C.Y. Wang. 1986. The com-
Discussion mercial storage of fruits, vegetables, and florist and nursery stocks.
Small watermelon cultivars respond similarly to large-fruited USDA Agr. Hdbk. 66.
Leupschen, N.S. 1961. The development of Mycosphaerella black rot
types during storage. ‘Mickylee’ and ‘Minilee’ responded very
and Pellicularia rolfsii rot of watermelons at various temperatures.
well to long-term storage. They maintained crispness, firmness, Plant Dis. Rptr. 45:557-559.
and TSS content. ‘Minilee’ fruit were less susceptible to CI and Picha, D.H. 1986. Postharvest fruit conditioning reduces chilling injury
had less decay than the other cultivars tested. Subjecting small in watermelons. HortScience 21(6):1407-1409.
watermelons to storage at ≤ 7C for more than 1 week induced Showalter, R.K. 1960. Watermelon color as affected by maturity and
CI and led to decay after subsequent holding at room temper- storage. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 73:289-293.

J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 115(3):440-443. 1990. 443