Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://gnanaganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8443/jspui/handle/123456789/1897
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | GANGADHAR SWAMY | - |
dc.contributor.author | K. CHANDAN | - |
dc.contributor.author | K.B. NAIK | - |
dc.contributor.author | S.J. PRASHANTH | - |
dc.contributor.author | S.K. NATARAJ | - |
dc.contributor.author | G.B. SREENIVASALU | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-10-17T14:20:29Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-10-17T14:20:29Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://gnanaganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/1897 | - |
dc.description.abstract | An investigation to compare the different methods of drying was carried out in the Department of Floriculture and Landscaping K.R.C.College of Horticulture, Arabhavi in 2002-03. The rose cultivator used for the experiment was Gladiator. The half opened rose flowers were treated with appropriate concentration of (1:5) for 12 hours and 8 treatments were followed in the experiment under average room temperature and relative humidity. The data recorded were analyzed by following factorial CRD. With respect to drying methods shade drying was best for quality parameters scoring viz., colors (3.41), shape (3.45), appearance (4.05) and texture (4.10). Sun dried flowers showed the least acceptable quality. Silica gel was the most promising desiccant. The interaction effect showed that shade drying by embedding in silica gel would yield the best quality dried flowers as it scored best for all the quality parameters and was at par with oven drying with silica gel as embedding material. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | Asian Science | en_US |
dc.subject | Drying | en_US |
dc.subject | Flower | en_US |
dc.subject | Rose | en_US |
dc.subject | Quality | en_US |
dc.title | Comparison of different methods of drying in rose cv. GLADIATOR | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Article Archives |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
COMPAR~1.PDF Restricted Access | Comparison of different | 1.51 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.