Torage. The content material of malic acid was twice as higher in 2017 than 2018 in `Ananasnaya’ fruit, whereas in `Geneva’ fruit, no distinction was observed amongst years. The composition with the Disodium 5′-inosinate Purity & Documentation atmosphere determined the rate of reduction in both acids. The concentration of CO2 at the level of ten contributed to upkeep with the contents of citric and malic acid in `Ananasnaya’ fruit at a Flavonol Biological Activity statistically unchanged level in both years of study. Similar relationships were observed in `Geneva’, but not as successful at inhibiting acid loss. On the other hand, fruits stored in ULO conditions had been characterized by a dynamic loss of each discussed acids through storage.Table 3. Alterations in sucrose contents (g00 g-1 F.W.) measured in `Geneva’ and `Ananasnaya’ minikiwi fruits inside the postharvest period. Time of Storage (Weeks) 2017 Storage Conditions DCA ULO eight.four 0.4 six.05 0.1 6.49 0.four five.80 0.2 7.00 0.two 6.69 0.2 6.68 0.4 six.74 b ns 5.43 0.three five.83 0.3 four.51 0.3 6.44 0.four 5.73 0.three 4.97 0.3 five.90 a six.7 0.1 5.00 0.two four.93 0.three three.95 0.2 3.93 0.3 3.88 0.1 four.05 0.three 4.63 b 4.25 0.three 4.11 0.2 3.60 0.4 three.49 0.3 three.25 0.1 2.70 0.three four.01 a 4.95 0.4 five.45 0.3 4.45 0.two five.41 0.4 four.86 0.1 4.43 0.3 five.17 c five.87 0.two 5.47 0.1 five.37 0.2 six.31 0.4 six.21 0.2 five.71 0.4 five.94 d 5.73 0.1 five.57 0.two four.89 0.1 four.70 0.two 4.46 0.1 4.36 0.two five.19 b six.28 0.7 7.ten 0.5 6.15 0.1 7.60 0.1 7.50 0.two six.99 0.three 7.ten c 6.86 0.1 7.40 0.3 7.30 0.4 7.20 0.six 7.60 0.three 7.80 0.1 7.50 d ns Ananasnaya 0 two four six 8 10 12 Typical Significance six.6 0.1 5.00 0.two five.00 0.1 four.24 0.1 4.29 0.1 four.05 0.1 3.57 0.2 four.68 a five.70 0.3 five.95 0.two 5.24 0.two five.55 0.three five.21 0.1 4.95 0.2 five.61 c 6.28 0.1 5.88 0.1 five.81 0.2 six.07 0.2 five.89 0.1 five.47 0.two six.00 d 6.81 0.two six.57 0.3 six.28 0.3 6.32 0.2 5.97 0.two five.69 0.2 6.52 b CA1 CA2 Geneva 0 2 four 6 eight 10 12 Typical Significance 8.00 0.4 six.12 0.3 six.29 0.two five.56 0.two five.86 0.two 5.22 0.1 four.73 0.2 five.97 a 7.00 0.5 7.02 0.three six.41 0.1 six.76 0.two 6.51 0.two 6.03 0.3 six.85 b 7.16 0.1 7.16 0.three 7.10 0.three six.84 0.1 6.80 0.2 six.72 0.1 7.ten c ns DCA ULO CA1 CA2DCA, dynamic controlled atmosphere, 0.four CO2 :0.4 O2 ; ULO, ultra-low oxygen, 1.five CO2 :1.5 O2 ; CA1, controlled atmosphere, five CO2 :1.five O2 ; CA2, controlled atmosphere, ten CO2 :1.five O2 ; normal deviation; statistically considerable difference (Newman euls variety test): for five . for 1 . For comparing the averages: effect of storage time (column); ns, lack of statistical significance; different letters are assigned to statistically significant differences when comparing storage situations (average for time of storage).Mass loss is an crucial indicator on the customer high-quality of fruit, describing its drying up. Data analysis showed that each cultivars of fruits have been characterized by a relatively comparable price of mass loss through storage (Table 9). Nevertheless, immediately after 12 weeks of storage, the `Geneva’ fruit exhibited a greater mass loss than the fruit of `Ananasnaya’. The discussed index was determined by the circumstances in which the fruit was stored. In each years of research, it was found that high concentrations of carbon dioxide at levels of 5 and ten inhibited fruit mass loss through storage. Fruits stored inside the CA1 and CA2 circumstances immediately after 12 weeks lost 42 and 54 significantly less weight, respectively, than the fruit stored in an ultralow oxygen (ULO) technology environment. The rate of mass loss of fruit stored in DCAAgronomy 2021, 11,8 ofand ULO was considerably more rapidly inside the initial storage period; a slowdown was observed right after 8 weeks of storage. Despite really significant mass loss, reaching the value of 3 a.