Assessment of Morphological Traits and Fruit Metabolites in Eleven Fig Varieties (Ficus Carica L.)

Figures & data

Table 1. Cultivars names and their geographical origins

	Cultivars	Geographical Origin
			Local	El quoti Lbied	Morocco
Nabout	Morocco
Fassi	Morocco
Noukali	Morocco
Ghoudan	Morocco
Introduced	Snowden	USA
	White Adriatic	Italy
	Kadota	Italy
	Palmeras	Spain
	Cuello Dama Blanca	Spain
	Breval Blanca	Spain

Table 2. Harvest time and monthly meteorological data from August to early September 2017 in Northern Morocco, Meknes (Ain-Taoujdate experimental station-INRA)

	Cultivars	August						September
		[1–5]	[6–10]	[11–15]	[16–20]	[21–25]	[26–30]	[31–4]	[5–9]
Local	El quoti Lbied
	Nabout
	Fassi
	Noukali
	Ghoudan
Introduced	Snowden
	White Adriatic
	Kadota
	Palmeras
	Cuello Dama Blanca
	Breval Blanca
Total rainfall (mm)		0	0	0	0	0	26.4	0	0
Average temperature (°c)		25.84	28.5	27.56	29.24	29.44	23.64	25.6	25.42
Average solar radiation (W/m^2)		169.29	208.74	243.83	238.28	185.35	123.5	270.21	271.38

Climatic data came from meteorological station installed next to the orchard.

Table 3. Morphological traits of fig cultivars (Mean ± SD)

Cultivars	Weight (g)	Length (mm)	Width (mm)	Stalk Length (mm)	Stalk Width (mm)	Neck Length (mm)	Neck Width (mm)	Ostiole Width (mm)	Peel Thickness (mm)
Breval Blanca	46.44 ± 10.7 b	42.13 ± 7 a	43.92 ± 4 b	9.14 ± 3 b	6.18 ± 1.2 b	6.62 ± 1.8 b	10.67 ± 1.5 a	5.62 ± 1.8 b	8.35 ± 1.5 a
Cuello Dama Blanca	27.1 ± 6.6 d	25.87 ± 3 f	33.95 ± 2.8 d	6.69 ± 1.6 c	3.85 ± 0.4 d	-	-	4.62 ± 0.9 c	3.71 ± 0.5 e
El Quoti Lbied PS20	36.13 ± 7.8 c	33.6 ± 3.2 e	39.52 ± 3.6 c	3.63 ± 0.3 d	4.35 ± 0.3 d	6.64 ± 2 b	6.39 ± 1.2 c	4.9 ± 0.6 c	3.05 ± 0.6 f
Fassi	26.92 ± 3.1 d	32.48 ± 2.1 e	34.6 ± 2.4 d	10.58 ± 3.5 a	3.68 ± 0.5 de	2.08 ± 3.2 c	2.29 ± 3.4 d	3.81 ± 0.6 c	2.25 ± 0.6 g
Ghoudan	37.25 ± 6.2 c	36.14 ± 3.3 b	38.98 ± 5.2 c	9.25 ± 2.1 b	5.31 ± 0.9 c	-	-	5.63 ± 1.9 b	3.24 ± 0.3 f
Kadota	61.53 ± 10.4 a	42.94 ± 4.2 a	50.85 ± 3.9 a	9.12 ± 2.5 b	6.59 ± 1.1 a	9.17 ± 3.1 a	8.87 ± 2 b	7.69 ± 1.2 a	5.01 ± 1.2 c
Nabout	38.27 ± 7.1 c	34.01 ± 3.6 d	38.46 ± 3.8 c	4.07 ± 1.4 d	3.92 ± 0.5 de	-	-	3.07 ± 2 d	5.91 ± 1 b
Noukali	27.32 ± 4.7 d	31.49 ± 2.1 e	38.29 ± 2.3 c	4.63 ± 1.6 d	4.02 ± 0.9 de	-	-	4.23 ± 1 c	1.68 ± 0.5 g
Palmeras	34.94 ± 4.7 c	34.81 ± 1.9 c	43.95 ± 3.1 b	9.33 ± 2 b	5.72 ± 1.1 bc	7.28 ± 0.1 b	7.13 ± 0.2 c	5.81 ± 1.2 b	4.41 ± 0.9 d
Snowden	44.03 ± 10.9 b	34.64 ± 3.5 c	46.67 ± 9.7 b	8.09 ± 2.3 c	5.36 ± 0.4 c	6.99 ± 1.9 b	7.51 ± 1.3 c	4.98 ± 2.9 b	2.84 ± 0.9 g
White Adriatic	26.22 ± 5.5 d	30.99 ± 3.5 e	31.54 ± 2.9 d	8.36 ± 1.1 c	3.57 ± 0.7 e	-	-	4.6 ± 0.8 c	3.08 ± 0.9 f
Mean	36.92 ± 12.6	34.46 ± 5.8	40.07 ± 7	7.54 ± 3.1	4.67 ± 1.3	2.98 ± 3.9	3.18 ± 4.1	5 ± 1.9	3.96 ± 2
ANOVA mean square	1735.04***	349.91***	505.4***	73.58***	14.39***	179.23***	207.82***	22.08***	14.36***

-, Fruits without neck

Different letters (a-g) in columns represent statistically significant differences among cultivars at p < 0.05.

***, denote significant difference at level of 0.001

Figure 1. Box and whisker plot of fig skin chromatic coordinates of studied cultivars (L*: lightness; c*: Chroma; h°: Hue angle). Breval B: ’Breval Blanca’; CDB: ‘Cuello Dama Blanca’; EQL PS20: ‘El Quoti Lbied PS20ʹ; White A: ‘White Adriatic’

Figure 2. Content levels of individual sugars (g.kg⁻¹dw) in whole fruit of 11fig cultivars. Average values ± standard deviation are presented statistically significant differences (p < .05) among cultivars are presented over error bars (a-j). Box and whisker plots were used to show the distribution of adata set

Figure 3. Organic acids content (g kg⁻¹) of the whole fruits in 11 fig cultivars. Average values ± standard deviation are presented statistically significant differences (P < .05) among cultivars are presented over error bars (a-f). Box and whisker plots were used to show the distribution of adata set

Figure 4. Loading plot and score plot after principal component analysis of the variables and individuals in the plane by two first principal components ((PC1 and PC2) with atotal variance of 56.14%). Each group was presented in different colors

Table 4. Phenolic compounds (Total phenols, flavonoids, anthocyanins, and total proanthocyanidins) of studied cultivars

Cultivars	TP (mg GAE/100g dw)	TF (mg CE/100g dw)	TA (mg cyanidin-3-rutinoside eq/100g dw)	TPA (cyanidin eq/100g dw)
Breval Blanca	252.52 ± 32.6 e	63.41 ± 0 b	24.8 ± 2.48 a	0.97 ± 0.1 d
Cuello Dama Blanca	408.1 ± 56.6 cd	30.47 ± 2.94 d	16.74 ± 1.45 bc	6.64 ± 1.9 a
El Quoti Lbied PS20	364.39 ± 1.6 cd	25.18 ± 0 de	5.37 ± 1.65 be	2 ± 0.1 c
Fassi	524.74 ± 35.9 a	30.18 ± 3.82 d	14.88 ± 5.37 bc	2.05 ± 0.7 c
Ghoudan	131.21 ± 6.9 f	43.12 ± 11.47 c	11.16 ± 7.03 bc	1.5 ± 0.5 c
Kadota	327.21 ± 16.2 d	14.59 ± 7.65 e	7.23 ± 2.27 de	0.96 ± 0 c
Nabout	90.75 ± 0.1 f	29.29 ± 4.12 d	3.1 ± 0.62 e	1.82 ± 0.4 c
Noukali	478.64 ± 76.1 ab	20.18 ± 0.88 de	23.77 ± 6.41 a	1.05 ± 0 c
Palmeras	93.35 ± 4.9 f	47.2 ± 5.32 b	10.95 ± 4.34 cd	2.09 ± 0.3 b
Snowden	424.52 ± 70 cd	27.53 ± 1.76 d	5.37 ± 0.83 de	3.96 ± 0.7 b
White Adriatic	132.68 ± 3.8 f	83.71 ± 10.47 a	19.63 ± 3.93 b	0.82 ± 0.5 c
Mean	293.46 ± 27.7	37.71 ± 4.9	131 ± 3.3	2.16 ± 0.47
ANOVA mean square	73540.28***	1066.47***	151.2***	8.98***

Average values ± standard errors of mean are presented. Different letters (a–j) in columns represent statistically significant differences among cultivars at P < 0.05.

TP: Total phenols; TF: Total flavonoids; TA: Total anthocyanins; TPA: Total proanthocyanidins; GAE: Gallic acid equivalent; CE: Catechin equivalent.

***, denote significant difference at level of 0.001.

Table 5. Free radical scavenging activity (DPPH and ABTS) and ferric reducing ability (FRAP) (mean ±SE in mmol TE/g dw) of studied cultivars

Cultivar	DPPH(mmol TE/g dw)	ABTS(mmol TE/g dw)	FRAP(mmol TE/g dw)
Breval Blanca	83.16 ± 6.93 b	6.41 ± 0.66 b	4.29 ± 0.53 ed
Cuello Dama Blanca	20.84 ± 2.3 c	3.73 ± 0.61 c	4.14 ± 0.58 def
El Quoti Lbied	14.28 ± 1.42 d	3.59 ± 0.43 c	1.09 ± 0.04 j
Fassi	17.52 ± 0.98 cd	5.96 ± 0.52 b	6.06 ± 0.9 bc
Ghoudan	17.78 ± 0.73 cd	1.76 ± 0.48 d	2.89 ± 0.33 ef
Kadota	17.3 ± 1.27 cd	2.43 ± 1.02 d	2.55 ± 1.27 efj
Nabout	88.1 ± 3.37 a	4.44 ± 0.55 c	10.65 ± 0.18 a
Noukali	17.95 ± 1.47 cd	8.04 ± 0.3 a	7.44 ± 2.2 bc
Palmeras	18.02 ± 1.96 cd	1.43 ± 0.25 d	4.95 ± 0.12 cd
Snowden	14.76 ± 1.61 d	1.75 ± 0.51 d	3.53 ± 0.81 ef
White Adriatic	15.21 ± 1.37 d	2.11 ± 0.46 d	1.97 ± 0.88 fj
Mean	38.16 ± 2.12	2.78 ± 0.66	4.50 ± 0.71
ANOVA mean square	1967,25***	14,53***	18,51***

Average values ± standard errors of mean are presented. Different letters (a–j) in columns represent statistically significant differences among cultivars at P < 0.05.

TE: Trolox equivalent.

**; *** denote significant of difference at level 0.01 and 0.001, respectively.

Table 6. Analysis of variance (Wilk’s test) and canonical correlations of biochemical components and morphological traits. The highest ones are in bold

Discriminant biochemical components (set1)	Canonical variate	Morphological traits (Set2)	Canonical variate
Sucrose	−0.012	Weight	−0.587
Glucose	−0.033	Length	−0.352
Fructose	−0.291	Width	0.824
Citric acid	0.613	Stalk Length	−0.293
Malic acid	0.555	Stalk Width	−0.458
Total phenols	0.092	Neck Length	−0.470
Total anthocyanins	0.377	Neck Width	0.374
Total flavonoids	−0.179	Ostiole Width	0.30018
ABTS	0.485	Peel Thickness	0.27054
DPPH	0.280
FRAP	−0.113
Total proanthocyanidins	−0.257
L*	0.301
c*	0.368
h*	−0.169
Eigenvalue	14.35
Canonical correlation	0.967
Wilks Lambda	0.065
Degree of freedom	85.22

Table 7. Canonical variates and related statistics

Variates	Eigenvalue	% of variance	Cumulative % of variance	Canonical correlation	Squared canonical correlation	Wlik’s lambda	FValue	Pr > F
1	40.41	48.45	48.45	0.99	0.98	0	3.23	< 0.0001
2	23.68	28.4	76.85	0.98	0.96	0	2.47	< 0.0001
3	10.66	12.78	89.63	0.96	0.91	0	1.83	0.04
4	3.44	4.13	93.76	0.88	0.77	0.01	1.36	0.09
5	2.22	2.66	96.42	0.83	0.69	0.04	1.16	0.28
6	1.67	2	98.42	0.79	0.63	0.13	0.98	0.52
7	0.64	0.77	99.19	0.63	0.39	0.34	0.73	0.81
8	0.47	0.56	99.76	0.57	0.32	0.57	0.66	0.81
9	0.2	0.24	100	0.41	0.17	0.83	0.49	0.83