Physiological loss in weight (PLW) was significantly increased in all the treatments with the advancement of the storage period and the increasing trends in the weight loss percentage was found maximum in the fruits with untreated as a control in each week up to the 4th week of storage period. Minimum percentage of PLW was observed in the fruits treated with wax in combination with bavistin in all the weeks during storage and the losses ranged from 3.02% in the 1st week to 9.81% in the 4th week which was statistically at par with the findings of wax 10% (3.09 to 10.18%) whereas maximum weight loss was recorded in the fruits with control (6.41% to 21.41%) during the storage (Table 1).

This minimum weight loss in the wax treated fruits might be due to retardation in the process of transpiration and respiration by closing of lenticels and stomata of the cell wall of the fruits. The losses in fruit weight and moisture content of the peel were mainly caused by fruit transpiration in which water moved out and resulted in wilted rind and a shrivelled appearance [13] . Thus, wax emulsion might have been an effective treatment to reduce weight loss by checking the stomata and lenticels of the cell wall of the fruits which reduces the rate of transpiration and respiration. [14] claimed that wax coated fruit retained better glossiness and fresh appearance being a moisture barrier. These findings were in consonance with the report of the Bhusal [15] , Bastakoti and Gautam [16] in mandarin, Chaudhary and Dhaka [17] in kinnow mandarin, Deka et al. [10] in Khasi mandarin, Ahmad et al. [18] in kinnow mandarin, Yadav et al. [9] , in kinnow mandarin, and Bhullar [19] in sweet orange who found minimum weight loss in the fruits treated with wax emulsion.

The perusal from data shown in Table 1 the decay loss increased significantly with the prolongation of storage period irrespective of the treatments. The decay loss was noticed from the first week of the storage in untreated fruits (control) and it was appeared from the second week in other treatments except bavistin. Decay loss was found significantly in the third week of the storage in all treatments. The minimum decay loss was noticed in the fruits with bavistin alone (0.7%) followed by combination of wax 10% + bavistin 0.1% (1.3%), and wax at 10% (3.6%) whereas the maximum decay loss was observed in the fruits with untreated (control) at the end of storage. The minimum decay loss in the bavistin and wax treated fruits might be due to inhibition of the moisture and microbial agent particularly. Yadav et al. [9] reported that the minimum decay loss might be due to interaction effect of wax coating as a microbial inhibitor as well as moisture inhibitor. Similar results on the decay loss were observed by Chaudhary and Dhaka [17] in kinnow mandarin, Mahajan et al. [14] in Asian Pear, Gautam et al. [20] in mango, Ahmad et al. [18] in kinnow mandarin, Bhusal [15] in mandarin, Hasan et al. [21] , Deka et al. [10] in Khasi mandarin, and Yadav et al. [9] in kinnow mandarin, who reported minimum decay loss using the wax and wax like safe fungicide during the storage.

The fruit firmness was decreased with the advancement of the storage period in all the treatments. Table 2 shows that the decreasing trend was started from the first week to the end of storage in all the treatments. At the first week, the wax at 10% in combination with bavistin at 0.1% treated fruits resulted in the more intact (4.16 kg/cm²) and the lowest was recorded in the fruits with control (3.78 kg/cm²). At the end of the storage, the firmness was observed maximum in the fruits treated with wax 10% plus bavistin 0.1% (3.08 kg/cm²) followed by wax 10% (3.03 kg/cm²) and the lowest firmness was found in the fruits with control (2.09 kg/cm²). The decline

NS: Non-significant.

NS: Non-significant.

in the firmness might be due to moisture loss from the fruits cells. The wax alone or in combination with bavistin showed the more intact (firmness) than other treatments. It might be due to wax alone or in combination with other fungicides acts as moisture and microbial inhibitor that reduces the respiration and transpiration of the fruits. Mahajan et al. [14] reported that wax coat fruits reduced the moisture loss from the surface, thus maintain cell wall integrity and tissue rigidity. Sidhu et al. [22] and Yadav et al. [9] reported that the firmness decreased with the increase in storage period.

Table 2 shows that the juice recovery percentage was decreased with time during the storage in all the treatments. Wax treated fruits recorded the maximum juice recovery percentage in all the weeks. In the first week, the higher juice percentage was obtained in the wax 10% plus bavistin 0.1% (49.56%) which was statistically at par with wax 10% (49.49%) as against control (47.26%). The trend in decrease in juice percentage during the storage was might be due to loss of moisture from the surface of the fruits. The minimum decrease in juice percentage was observed in the fruits treated with wax 10% plus bavistin 0.1% from the 1st week (49.56%) to the 4th week (43.81%) followed by wax 10% from the 1st week (49.49%) to the 4th week (43.45%) as against control from the 1st week (47.26%) to the 4^th week (34.65%). There was significant decrease in the juice percentage of untreated fruits (control) than treated fruits. The fruits treated with wax and in combination with bavistin showed low reduction in juice content during storage as compared to other chemically treated fruits and control. This might be due the fact that the wax acted as a barrier which had checked the losses of the moisture from the fruit surface. Similar results were also reported by Yadav et al. [9] in kinnow mandarin, Sonkar et al. [8] in kinnow mandarin, Sharma and Ghuman [23] in kinnow fruits, and Deka et al. [10] in khasi mandarin.

TSS is one of the major indicators to judge the quality of the mandarin fruits. As shown in Table 3, TSS increased with the increasing period of storage in all the treatments and the increasing trend was higher in untreated fruits (control) than the treated fruits with different chemicals. Untreated (control) fruits showed the maximum TSS content during the storage and ranged from the 1st week (10.92˚ Brix) to the 4th week (12.88˚ Brix) and minimum TSS was recorded in the fruits treated with wax 10% from the 1st week (10.35˚ Brix) to the 4th week (11.51˚ Brix) which was at par with wax 10% in combination with bavistin 0.1% from the 1st week (10.39˚ Brix) to the 4th week (11.65˚ Brix). The trend showed that wax treated fruits was significantly superior because of the gradual increment in the TSS change whereas in control, it was increased at faster pace.

The faster TSS increment in the untreated fruits might be due to faster metabolic activities through respiration and transpiration than in treated fruits with different chemicals. Jholgiker and Reddy [24] claimed that the gradual increment in TSS of fruits treated with coating material may be justified by the twin role of coating material, acting as a physical barrier for transpiration losses and creating a modified atmosphere resulting in building of internal CO₂ and depletion of O₂. Similar results were noticed by Sidhu et al. [22] in pear; Deka et al. [10] ,

NS: Non-significant.

Ladaniya et al. [25] in Nagpur mandarin; and Mahajan et al. [14] in pear.

The data presented in Table 3 revealed that the results pertaining to the effect of different levels of treatments to the titrable acidity (TA) was significant at the end of the storage of mandarin. The TA significantly decreased with the advancement of the storage period. The decreasing trend of acidity during the storage period was probably due to utilization of acid in tricarboxylic acid cycle in respiration process. The TA was recorded maximum in the fruits treated with wax 10% plus bavistin 0.1% (0.73%) at par with wax 10% (0.69%) as against control (0.53%) at the end of the storage. The higher acidity in the wax treated fruits might be due to lesser utilization of the acids in the respiration process during the storage whereas untreated fruits had minimum acids was might be due to faster utilization of the acids in the respiration process during storage. The results are in line with the findings reported by Sonkar et al. [8] in kinnow mandarin, Jholgiker and Reddy [24] in Annona, Sidhu et al. [22] in pear, and Deka et al. [10] in khasi mandarin.

A perusal from the data presented in Table 4 pertaining the effect of treatments to the vitamin C was found significant and decreasing with the advancement of the storage period in all the treatments. The maximum vitamin C was recorded in the fruits treated with wax 10% in combination with 0.1% bavistin (33.26 mg/100ml) which is statistically at par with wax 10% (32.85 mg/100ml) as against control (29.28 mg/100ml) in the first week. Likewise, vitamin C wax maximum in the fruits treated with wax 10% plus bavistin 0.1% (24.65 mg/100ml) which was statistically at par with wax 10% (24.16 mg/100ml) as against of control (18.86 mg/100ml). The decreasing trend in the vitamin C was probably due to degradation of the ascorbic acid during the storage. Lee and Kader [26] suggested that loss of vitamin C is caused by leaching in surrounding water and thermal breakdown. The retention of the vitamin C in the wax treated fruits might be due to less degradation of the ascorbic acid in the storage. These findings were supported with findings of Sonkar et al. [8] in kinnow mandarin, Deka et al. [10] in Khasi mandarin, Ladaniya et al. [25] in Nagpur mandarin, Ahmad et al. [18] in kinnow mandarin who reported that wax treated fruits retained the maximum vitamin C content.

The fruits treated with different chemicals were evaluated in respect of palatability and the rating was found decreasing trend during the storage. Table 4 shows that Mandarin flavour quality is often rapidly lost after fruits are picked or commercially packed. The highest rating (4.56) was recorded in the fruits treated with wax 10% alone and in combination with bavistin which was statistically at par with the other chemically treated fruits as against of control (4.22) in the 1st week. However, rating was found maximum in the fruits treated with wax 10% plus bavistin 0.1% (3.48) which was statistically at par with wax 10% (3.46) as against of control (2.43). The

NS: Non-significant.

treated fruits had showed the good appearance, sweet taste and desirable flavour and acceptable position during the storage. Among the treatments, only wax 10% plus bavistin 0.1% (3.48) followed by wax 10% (3.46) had showed the acceptable position. The lowest rating was recorded in the fruits with control (2.43) which is below of the acceptable position. The decrease in the palatability with time was might be due to ascribed to certain bio-chemical changes in the fruits.

Chemically treated fruits had acceptable colour, glossy appearance, sweet taste, and good flavour that might be due to the fact that chemical treatments acts a barrier to the moisture loss and rapid respiration and transpiration loss. Control fruits had higher rate of metabolic activities with respiration and transpiration, thus dislike by the people. Orange-like flavour decreased not as a consequence of an increment in the ethanol content, but because of other, minimal chemical changes that took place during storage [27] . From the above facts it can be concluded that waxed fruits had fresh, glossy external which is highly acceptable in the market up to the 4^th week of storage and fruits without treatments observed as dull and shrivelled appearance and those could not acceptable up to the 2^nd week. The findings were in corroboration with the findings of Sindhu et al. [22] in pear, Choudhary and Dhaka [17] in kinnow mandarin, Mahajan et al. [14] in pear, Karibasappa and Gupta [28] in khasi mandarin, Singhrot et al. [29] in lemon who reported that palatability was decreased with time during the storage.