JP3569765B2 - Quality preservative for cut flowers - Google Patents

Description

【００１７】
【表２】

【００１８】
【表３】

【００１９】
表１、表２、表３から明らかなように、水挿し後の重量変化では、実施例Ａ１と比較例ａ１（１０％塩化ベンザルコニウム溶液）は１４日間約１００％を下回ることはなかった。特に実施例Ａ１は約１１０％の高い数値で推移した。しかし、比較例ｄ１（ポリオキシエチレンラウリルエーテル）は４日目以降、他の比較例はいずれも２日目以降１００％を下回った。水挿し後の吸水量変化、水挿し後の萎れ変化は、いずれも水挿し後の重量変化と同じ傾向を示した。吸水量が３０ｍｌ／１００ｇＦＷを下回る日が続くと萎れが目立った。以上の結果から、シネラリアの萎れ対策としては、水挿し前に実施例Ａ１と比較例ａ１で処理すると、２週間後もほとんど萎れが認められず、効果的であることが分かった。特に、実施例Ａ１の（ポリオキシエチレンアルキルフェニルエーテルとポリオキシエチレンアルキルエーテル）には高い効果が認められた。
【００２０】
【実施例２】
実施例１と同じ界面活性剤を水で薄めて、下記の濃度の処理試験液を得た。
Ａ２：２００ｐｐｍ
Ｂ２：１００ｐｐｍ
Ｃ２： ５０ｐｐｍ
Ｄ２： １０ｐｐｍ
【００２１】
【比較例２】
１０％塩化ベンザルコニウム溶液を下記の濃度に調整して処理比較液を得た。
ａ２：２００ｐｐｍ
ｂ２：１００ｐｍ
ｃ２： ５０ｐｐｍ
ｄ２： １０ｐｐｍ
【００２２】
【試験例２】
前記試験例１で成績のよかった実施例Ａ１と比較例ａ１について、各々濃度を実施例Ａ２、Ｂ２、Ｃ２、Ｄ２、比較例ａ２、ｂ２、ｃ２、ｄ２ように変えて、試験例１と同じ方法により水挿し前処理を行い、水挿し後の重量変化、水挿し後の吸水量変化、水挿し後の萎れ変化をみた。結果を表４、表５、表６に示す。
【００２３】
【表４】

【００２４】
【表５】

【００２５】
【表６】

【００２６】
表４、表５、表６から明らかなように、水挿し後の重量変化は、濃度５０ｐｐｍ以上では、実施例２の各試験液の方が比較例２の対応する試験液よりも重量増が大きく、その後の減少程度も小さかった。最適濃度は１００ｐｐｍであった。水挿し後の吸水変化と萎れ変化は、重量変化とほぼ同じ傾向を示した。吸水量が３０ｍｌ／１００ｇＦＷを下回ると萎れが目立った。濃度１０ｐｐｍの実施例Ｄ２と比較例ｄ２とでは、２日目から萎れが目立った。他は、２週間後若干の萎れが認められた。なお、比較例２では、茎の褐斑などの濃度障害があり、濃度が高くなるにつれてその度合いが大きくなった。以上の結果から、シネラリアの水挿し前処理剤としては、実施例２（ポリオキシエチレンアルキルフェニルエーテルとポリオキシエチレンアルキルエーテルとの混合液）であって、その濃度は１００ｐｐｍが最適であることが分かった。
【００２７】
【実施例３】
実施例１と同じ界面活性剤を水で薄めて、実施例２で好適であった濃度１００ｐｐｍの処理試験液を得た。
【００２８】
【試験例３】
前記実施例３の試験処理液を用いて、次の方法により水挿し前処理時間のみを下記のように変化させて最適処理時間をみた。セレナータブルーは２００１年３月１９日、１１時に収穫した。開花後期であった。収穫後は切り花長を３８ｃｍに調整した。他は試験例１と同じ方法により、水挿し後の重量変化、水挿し後の吸水量変化、水挿し後の萎れ変化をみた。結果を表７、表８、表９に示す。
Ａ３： １時間
Ｂ３： ３時間
Ｃ３： ６時間
Ｄ３：１２時間
Ｅ３：１６時間
Ｆ３：２４時間
ａ３： ０時間（無処理／比較例３）
【００２９】
【表７】

【００３０】
【表８】

【００３１】
【表９】

【００３２】
開花後期であるため、ハモグリバエや老化により、切り花の品質の揃いが不十分であったが、次のことが認められた。すなわち、表７、表８、表９から明らかなように、水挿し後の重量変化では、無処理の比較例ａ３が４日目以降、輸送シミュレーション直後（水挿し直前）の重量を下回った。実施例３の各試験区では実質的に大きな差はなかったが、Ａ１（処理時間１時間）が最も高い数値を示した。水挿し後の吸水量変化及び水挿し後の萎れ変化は、ほぼ重量変化と同じ傾向を示した。以上の結果から、シネラリアの実施例３（ポリオキシエチレンアルキルフェニルエーテルとポリオキシエチレンアルキルエーテルとの混合液、１００ｐｐｍ）では、水挿し前処理の処理時間（１〜２４時間以内）の長短による差は認められず、いずれの時間でも十分な効果があることが分かった。
【００３３】
【実施例４】
実施例１と同じ界面活性剤を水で薄めて、実施例２で好適であった濃度１００ｐｐｍの処理試験液を得た。
【００３４】
【試験例４】
前記実施例４の試験処理液を用いて、次の方法により輸送シミュレーションのみを下記のように変化させて最適時間をみた。セレナータブルーは２００１年３月１９日、１６時に収穫した。開花後期であった。収穫後、切り花長を３５ｃｍに調整した。他は試験例１と同じ方法により、水挿し後の重量変化、水挿し後の吸水量変化、水挿し後の萎れ変化をみた。結果を表１０、表１１、表１２に示す。
Ａ４：１２時間
Ｂ４：２４時間
Ｃ４：４８時間
Ｄ４：７２時間
ａ４： ０時間（前処理直後／比較例４）
【００３５】
【表１０】

【００３６】
【表１１】

【００３７】
【表１２】

【００３８】
開花後期であるため、ハモグリバエや老化により、切り花の品質の揃いが不十分であったが、次のことが認められた。すなわち、表１０、表１１、表１２から明らかなように、輸送時間が長くなるほど水挿し当初の重量増加は大きかったが、最終的に１００を下回る日は、実施例４及び比較例４の各試験区ともほぼ同じであった。水挿し後の吸水量変化及び水挿し後の萎れ変化は、ほぼ重量変化と同じ傾向を示した。以上の結果から、実施例４による水挿し前処理を行えば、輸送時間が長くなっても水揚げは優れており、遠距離輸送に十分対応できることが分かった。
【００３９】
【実施例５】
実施例１と同じ界面活性剤を水で薄めて、実施例２で好適であった濃度１００ｐｐｍの処理試験液を得た。
【００４０】
【試験例５】
前記実施例４の試験処理液を用いて、次の方法により前処理までの時間のみを下記のように変化させて最適時間をみた。セレナータブルーは２００１年３月３１日、１０時からおおむね２時間毎に収穫した。開花終期であった。収穫後切り花長を４５ｃｍに調整し、水を切ったまま放置した。その後１７時にいっせいに前処理を行った。他は試験例１と同じ方法により、水挿し後の重量変化、水挿し後の吸水量変化、水挿し後の萎れ変化をみた。結果を表１３、表１４、表１５に示す。
Ａ５：１時間
Ｂ５：３時間
Ｃ５：５時間
Ｄ５：７時間
ａ５： ０時間（採花直後／比較例４）
【００４１】
【表１３】

【００４２】
【表１４】

【００４３】
【表１５】

【００４４】
開花終期であるため、ハモグリバエや老化により、切り花の品質の揃いが不十分であったが、次のことが認められた。すなわち、表１３、表１４、表１５から明らかなように、水挿し後の重量変化では、すべての試験区で、輸送シミュレーション直後（水挿し直前）の重量を下回るのは、水挿し後、８日から９日目であった。水挿し後の吸水量の変化では、採花後前処理までの時間経過による吸水量の変化にはほとんど差はなかった。水挿し後の萎れ変化では、ほぼ９日目以降にすべての試験区で萎れが目だってきた。以上の結果から、水挿し前処理までの許容時間は、採花後７時間までであれば、その効果に差がないことが分かった。
【００４５】
【実施例６】
実施例１と同じように、ポリオキシエチレンアルキルフェニルエーテルとポリオキシエチレンアルキルエーテルを１：１の割合で混合し、水で薄めて最終的に濃度が１００ｐｐｍになるように処理試験液Ａ１を調製した。
【００４６】
【比較例６】
下記の試験区で試験した。
Ａ６：実施例６
ａ６：ショ糖１０％溶液
ｂ６：水（無処理）
【００４７】
【試験例６】
実施例６及び各比較例６につき、スターチスの切花鮮度保持試験として、水挿し後の重量変化、水挿し後の萎れ変化を次の方法により測定した。スターチス（品種名フラッシュピンク）を２００１年４月１１日に収穫した。開花終期であった。採花後、実験室で切り花長を７０ｃｍに調整し、１区４本供試した。水挿し前処理時間は１６時間、輸送シミュレーションを５℃、２４時間とした。シミュレーションでは、新聞紙で覆い放置した。シミュレーション終了後、茎元を１ｃｍ水切りし、１０００ｍｌのトールビーカーに６００ｍｌの水道水を入れて水揚げした。実験室内の室温で保管し、水は毎日換えた。結果を表１６、表１７、表に示す。
【表１６】

【００４８】
【表１７】

【００４９】
表１６から明らかなように、水挿し後の重量変化では、比較例ａ６（ショ糖１０％）では７日目以降、ｂ６（水／無処理区）は３日以降、輸送シュミレーション直後（水挿し直前）の重量（１００）を下回った。これに対して、実施例Ａ６区は一週間後も１００を下回ることはなかった。一方、水挿し後の萎れ変化では、比較例ａ６（ショ糖１０％）では２日目以降、ｂ６（水／無処理区）は１日以降萎れが始まった。これに対して、実施例Ａ６区は一週間目でも萎れはみられなかった。これまでスターチスに品質保持剤を使用する試みはなされてないが、本発明のポリオキシエチレンアルキルフェニルエーテルとポリオキシエチレンアルキルエーテル混合液を用いることにより、高い鮮度保持効果が認められた。特にスターチスの茎の翼葉は収穫後すぐに柔らかくなるが、この混合液を使用することによって、長期間にわたって硬く維持することができた。
【００５０】
【発明の効果】
本発明の切り花の前処理用品質保持剤は、以上の実施例及び比較例の試験結果からも明らかなように、既存の各種切り花の品質保持剤に比べて格段の効果があり、次のような実用上の利点を有する。
（１）これまで切り花に適さなかった切ると水挿し後水揚げが悪く、萎れやすいいシネラリアのごとき鉢物や、枝ものも切り花として出荷できる。
（２）水挿し前処理専用の処理剤として、収穫後７時間以内に処理すると、輸送時間が長くなっても、水挿し後も長期にわたり切り花が萎れ難い。
（３）処理液濃度は１００ｐｐｍ程度で、水挿し前処理時間は１〜２４時間ではほとんど差がなく、処理作業は簡単で能率的である。
（４）出荷前に１回処理するだけで、その後の吸水性もすぐれているので、出荷後、小売店、消費者段階で新たに他の品質保持剤を添加する必要がなく、省力的で低コストである。[0001]
TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a quality preservative for cut flowers, particularly to a preservation quality preservative for pre-cut flowers, which is suitable for treating flowers with poor landing that are easily withered after harvest as cut flowers.
[0002]
[Prior art]
The preservatives for cut flowers are pretreatment agents that are processed by the producer before harvesting after harvesting, and posttreatment agents that are continuously processed by retailers or end consumers in the distribution process, and flowering promotion that does not belong to any of them Treatment agents such as agents. Conventionally, as a quality preservative of these cut flowers, an ethylene inhibitor such as STS, a plant growth regulator such as gibberellin, a sugar nutrient such as sucrose, and a bactericide for preventing spoilage of water are known. It is also common to use these quality preservatives of cut flowers in combination with various surfactants in order to improve the absorbability. (JP-A-2000-169302, JP-A-2000-103701, JP-A-9-249501, etc.).
[0003]
[Problems to be solved by the invention]
For flowers that are susceptible to ethylene damage, ethylene inhibitors are effective as a pretreatment agent, but for other flowers that are withered after watering, some of the flowers are mainly drained, treated with hot water, and the use of fungicides is complicated. So far, there has been no suitable quality preservative, for example, because of its poor durability. In addition, depending on the varieties, existing methods have no effect and cannot be used as cut flowers. For example, cineraria is immediately withered when cut, and the quality retention of the cut flowers with the quality preservative as described above is insufficient, and although there is a great demand for cut flowers, it has usually only been shipped as pots. For cut flowers, selection of varieties and strains with a long life is the mainstream, and it took time and was not successful. Acacia, butterflies and the like are also known as flowers that are particularly poorly landed, such as Cinellaria.
[0004]
In view of the current situation as described above, the present inventors have searched mainly for surfactants, such as various surfactants, neutral detergents, and benzalkonium chloride. It has been found that only a combination of activators has a specifically excellent quality maintaining effect, and the present invention has been achieved.
[0005]
The present invention is based on the above knowledge, and provides a quality preserving agent for pre-shipment treatment of cut flowers that effectively retains the quality of poorly landed flowers that are easily cut off and wilted easily, which were conventionally only available as pots. It is an object.
[0006]
[Means for Solving the Problems]
The quality preserving agent for pre-shipment treatment of cut flowers of the present invention, which has achieved the above object, is characterized by containing polyoxyethylene alkylphenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether as main components.
[0007]
BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION
Both polyoxyethylene alkyl phenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether, which are the main components of the preservation quality preserving agent for cut flowers of the present invention, are known as nonionic surfactants. These nonionic surfactants have heretofore been used as a quality preservative for cut flowers in order to improve the water absorption of other quality preservatives, but according to the findings of the present inventors, Only the combination of the above two is effective as a main agent of a preservative quality preservative for pre-treated flowers that are easily wilted when cut and have poor landing.
[0008]
The mixing ratio of polyoxyethylene alkyl phenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether in the flower quality preservative is preferably in the range of about 1: 0.1 to 1:10. The concentration at the time of use cannot be specified unequivocally because it differs depending on the type, quantity, use environment (temperature, humidity), etc. of the flowers, but about 50 to 200 ppm is preferred, and 100 ppm is optimal. If it is less than 50 ppm, it is difficult to obtain the desired effect, and if it exceeds 200 ppm, an increase in the effect cannot be expected. The treatment is performed before shipment within 7 hours after harvesting the cut flowers, and there is almost no difference if the treatment time is within 24 hours.
[0009]
The quality-preserving action of the cut flower quality preservative of the present invention can be presumed to be based on the general action of a surfactant that weakens the surface tension of water, increases water absorption, and improves shelf life. It is not always clear why only the combination of ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether is specifically superior. In any case, when pre-treated with the quality preservative of cut flowers of the present invention, as is clear from the results of the following Examples and Test Examples, the post-harvest processing time is 1 to 24 hours, and the dry transportation period is 3 days. If it is within the range, the subsequent water absorption is also excellent, and it is not enough to perform the post-treatment again.
[0010]
It is desirable that the quality preservative of cut flowers of the present invention is basically supported on a liquid carrier and provided. The liquid carrier can be a solution, suspension, or emulsion. In special cases, it can be formulated as a solid carrier into sheets, granules, tablets and the like.
[0011]
Water, alcohol, ketone, and the like can be used as a formulation auxiliary used for the liquid carrier. As the solid carrier, zeolite, bentonite, diatomaceous earth or the like is used. As the formulation auxiliary, water, alcohol, ketone and the like are appropriately selected and used according to the purpose of the formulation.
[0012]
The application of the quality preservative of cut flowers of the present invention is desirably many cut flowers which are hardly susceptible to ethylene damage, potted plants, flower beds for flowers, branches, etc., which have a marketability as cut flowers but are easily used and cannot be used. In particular, cineraria, acacia, buttercup, statice, chrysanthemum and the like are preferable.
[0013]
Embodiment 1
Polyoxyethylene alkylphenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether were mixed at a ratio of 1: 1 and diluted with water to prepare a treatment test solution A1 so that the concentration finally became 100 ppm.
[0014]
[Comparative Example 1]
Comparative liquids of the following types and concentrations were prepared.
a1: 10% benzalkonium chloride solution 100 ppm
b1: 100 ppm of polyoxyethylene hexitane fatty acid ester
c1: 100 ppm of sodium lauryl sulfate
d1: polyoxyethylene lauryl ether 100 ppm
e1: ethyl alcohol 100ppm
f1: water
[Test Example 1]
For Example 1 and Comparative Examples 1, the change in weight after water insertion, the change in water absorption after water insertion, and the change in wilting after water insertion were measured by the following methods. First, Cineralaria (variety name: Serenata Blue) was harvested at 15:30 on March 5, 2001. It was the peak of flowering. After flower collection, the cut flower length was adjusted to 35 cm in the laboratory, and three cells were tested per section. The test solution of Example 1 and each comparative solution of Comparative Example 1 were treated for 16 hours as a pre-watering treatment. Thereafter, a transport simulation was performed in a dry manner at 5 ° C. for 24 hours. For the simulation, 4.5 kg of peppers for shipping peppers were used, and six sections in two sections were covered together with newsprint and sealed. After completion of the simulation, the stem was drained by 1 cm, and 600 ml of tap water was put into a 1000 ml tall beaker and watered. Stored at room temperature in the laboratory, water was changed daily. The results are shown in Tables 1, 2 and 3.
[0016]
[Table 1]

[0017]
[Table 2]

[0018]
[Table 3]

[0019]
As is clear from Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3, in the weight change after water insertion, Example A1 and Comparative Example a1 (10% benzalkonium chloride solution) did not fall below about 100% for 14 days. . In particular, Example A1 showed a high value of about 110%. However, Comparative Example d1 (polyoxyethylene lauryl ether) was less than 100% after the fourth day, and all other Comparative Examples were less than 100% after the second day. The change in water absorption after water insertion and the change in withering after water insertion both showed the same tendency as the change in weight after water insertion. Withdrawal was noticeable when the day when the amount of water absorption was less than 30 ml / 100 gFW continued. From the above results, it was found that when treated with Example A1 and Comparative Example a1 before watering, as a countermeasure against wilt of cineralia, wilt was hardly observed even after 2 weeks, and thus it was effective. In particular, a high effect was recognized in Example A1 (polyoxyethylene alkylphenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether).
[0020]
Embodiment 2
The same surfactant as in Example 1 was diluted with water to obtain a treatment test solution having the following concentration.
A2: 200 ppm
B2: 100 ppm
C2: 50 ppm
D2: 10 ppm
[0021]
[Comparative Example 2]
A 10% benzalkonium chloride solution was adjusted to the following concentration to obtain a treated comparative solution.
a2: 200 ppm
b2: 100 pm
c2: 50 ppm
d2: 10 ppm
[0022]
[Test Example 2]
The same method as in Test Example 1 except that the concentrations of Example A1 and Comparative Example a1 that performed well in Test Example 1 were changed to Examples A2, B2, C2, and D2, and Comparative Examples a2, b2, c2, and d2. Pre-treatment was performed, and changes in weight after water insertion, changes in water absorption after water insertion, and changes in withering after water insertion were observed. The results are shown in Tables 4, 5, and 6.
[0023]
[Table 4]

[0024]
[Table 5]

[0025]
[Table 6]

[0026]
As is clear from Tables 4, 5, and 6, the weight change after water insertion shows that at a concentration of 50 ppm or more, each test solution of Example 2 increased in weight more than the corresponding test solution of Comparative Example 2. It was large, and the degree of decrease thereafter was small. The optimum concentration was 100 ppm. Changes in water absorption and withering after water insertion showed almost the same tendency as changes in weight. When the water absorption was less than 30 ml / 100 gFW, withering was noticeable. In Example D2 at a concentration of 10 ppm and Comparative Example d2, withering was noticeable from the second day. Others showed some withering after 2 weeks. In Comparative Example 2, there was a concentration disturbance such as brown spots on the stem, and the degree of the disturbance was higher as the concentration was higher. From the above results, Example 2 (a mixture of polyoxyethylene alkyl phenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether) was used as a pre-treatment agent for watering cineralia, and the optimum concentration was 100 ppm. Do you get it.
[0027]
Embodiment 3
The same surfactant as in Example 1 was diluted with water to obtain a treated test solution having a concentration of 100 ppm suitable in Example 2.
[0028]
[Test Example 3]
Using the test treatment solution of Example 3, the optimum treatment time was determined by changing only the pre-watering treatment time as follows by the following method. Serenata Blue was harvested at 11:00 on March 19, 2001. It was late flowering. After the harvest, the cut flower length was adjusted to 38 cm. Otherwise, the same method as in Test Example 1 was used to observe changes in weight after water insertion, changes in water absorption after water insertion, and changes in withering after water insertion. The results are shown in Tables 7, 8 and 9.
A3: 1 hour B3: 3 hours C3: 6 hours D3: 12 hours E3: 16 hours F3: 24 hours a3: 0 hours (no treatment / Comparative Example 3)
[0029]
[Table 7]

[0030]
[Table 8]

[0031]
[Table 9]

[0032]
Because of the late flowering stage, the uniformity of the quality of cut flowers was insufficient due to leaf flies and senescence, but the following was observed. That is, as is clear from Tables 7, 8, and 9, in the weight change after water insertion, the untreated comparative example a3 was less than the weight immediately after the transportation simulation (immediately before water insertion) after the fourth day. Although there was no substantial difference between the test plots in Example 3, A1 (1 hour treatment time) showed the highest value. The change in water absorption after water insertion and the change in withering after water insertion showed almost the same tendency as the change in weight. From the above results, in Example 3 of Cinellalia (mixed liquid of polyoxyethylene alkyl phenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether, 100 ppm), the difference in the treatment time (within 1 to 24 hours) of the pre-watering treatment was different. Was not recognized, and it was found that any time was sufficient.
[0033]
Embodiment 4
The same surfactant as in Example 1 was diluted with water to obtain a treated test solution having a concentration of 100 ppm suitable in Example 2.
[0034]
[Test Example 4]
Using the test solution of Example 4, the optimum time was determined by changing only the transport simulation as follows by the following method. Serenata Blue was harvested on March 19, 2001 at 16:00. It was late flowering. After harvest, the cut flower length was adjusted to 35 cm. Otherwise, the same method as in Test Example 1 was used to observe changes in weight after water insertion, changes in water absorption after water insertion, and changes in withering after water insertion. The results are shown in Tables 10, 11 and 12.
A4: 12 hours B4: 24 hours C4: 48 hours D4: 72 hours a4: 0 hours (immediately after pretreatment / Comparative Example 4)
[0035]
[Table 10]

[0036]
[Table 11]

[0037]
[Table 12]

[0038]
Because of the late flowering stage, the uniformity of the quality of cut flowers was insufficient due to leaf flies and senescence, but the following was observed. That is, as is clear from Tables 10, 11, and 12, the longer the transport time, the greater the weight increase at the time of water insertion, but on the day when the water weight finally drops below 100, each of Example 4 and Comparative Example 4 It was almost the same in the test plot. The change in water absorption after water insertion and the change in withering after water insertion showed almost the same tendency as the change in weight. From the above results, it was found that if the pre-watering treatment according to Example 4 was performed, the landing was excellent even when the transport time was long, and it was possible to sufficiently cope with long-distance transport.
[0039]
Embodiment 5
The same surfactant as in Example 1 was diluted with water to obtain a treated test solution having a concentration of 100 ppm suitable in Example 2.
[0040]
[Test Example 5]
Using the test treatment liquid of Example 4, only the time until the pretreatment was changed as follows by the following method to determine the optimum time. Serenata Blue was harvested approximately every two hours from 10:00 on March 31, 2001. It was the last stage of flowering. After the harvest, the cut flower length was adjusted to 45 cm, and the cut water was left without water. Thereafter, pretreatment was performed at 17:00. Otherwise, the same method as in Test Example 1 was used to observe changes in weight after water insertion, changes in water absorption after water insertion, and changes in withering after water insertion. The results are shown in Tables 13, 14 and 15.
A5: 1 hour B5: 3 hours C5: 5 hours D5: 7 hours a5: 0 hours (immediately after flowering / Comparative Example 4)
[0041]
[Table 13]

[0042]
[Table 14]

[0043]
[Table 15]

[0044]
Since the flowering was in its final stage, the uniformity of the quality of cut flowers was insufficient due to leaf flies and senescence, but the following was observed. That is, as is clear from Tables 13, 14 and 15, in the weight change after the water insertion, the weight that was lower than the weight immediately after the transport simulation (just before the water insertion) in all the test plots was 8% after the water insertion. It was the ninth day from the day. In the change in water absorption after watering, there was almost no difference in the change in water absorption over time from flowering to pretreatment. With respect to the change in wilting after water insertion, wilting became noticeable in all the test plots after about day 9. From the above results, it was found that there was no difference in the effect of the permissible time until the pre-watering treatment up to 7 hours after flowering.
[0045]
Embodiment 6
As in Example 1, polyoxyethylene alkylphenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether were mixed at a ratio of 1: 1 and diluted with water to prepare a treatment test solution A1 so that the concentration finally became 100 ppm. did.
[0046]
[Comparative Example 6]
The test was performed in the following test plots.
A6: Example 6
a6: 10% sucrose solution b6: water (untreated)
[0047]
[Test Example 6]
With respect to Example 6 and Comparative Example 6, as a test for maintaining cut flower freshness of statice, changes in weight after water insertion and changes in wilting after water insertion were measured by the following methods. Statice (variety name Flash Pink) was harvested on April 11, 2001. It was the last stage of flowering. After the flower collection, the cut flower length was adjusted to 70 cm in the laboratory, and four test pieces per section were used. The pre-watering treatment time was 16 hours, and the transport simulation was performed at 5 ° C. for 24 hours. In the simulation, we left it covered with newspaper. After completion of the simulation, the stem was drained by 1 cm, and 600 ml of tap water was put into a 1000 ml tall beaker and landed. Stored at room temperature in the laboratory, water was changed daily. The results are shown in Table 16, Table 17, and Table.
[Table 16]

[0048]
[Table 17]

[0049]
As is clear from Table 16, in the weight change after water insertion, in Comparative Example a6 (10% sucrose), after day 7, b6 (water / untreated section) after 3 days, immediately after the transport simulation (water insertion) Immediately before) (100). In contrast, in Example A6, the value did not fall below 100 even after one week. On the other hand, with respect to the change of wilting after water insertion, withdrawal of the comparative example a6 (sucrose 10%) started from the second day and b6 (water / untreated section) started from the first day. In contrast, in Example A6, no wilting was observed even in the first week. Although no attempt has been made to use a quality preservative in starch, a high freshness preserving effect has been observed by using the mixed liquid of polyoxyethylene alkylphenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether of the present invention. In particular, the wings of the stems of the starch become soft immediately after harvesting, but by using this mixture, they could be kept hard for a long period of time.
[0050]
【The invention's effect】
As is clear from the test results of the above Examples and Comparative Examples, the preservative quality preservative for cut flowers of the present invention has a remarkable effect as compared with existing quality preservatives of various cut flowers, as follows. Practical advantages.
(1) If cut before, it is not suitable for cut flowers. Pots, such as cineraria, which are poorly landed after watering and tend to wither, can be shipped as cut flowers.
(2) When treated within 7 hours after harvest as a treatment agent exclusively for pre-watering treatment, cut flowers are unlikely to wither for a long time after watering, even if the transport time is long.
(3) The treatment liquid concentration is about 100 ppm, and the pre-watering treatment time is hardly different between 1 and 24 hours, and the treatment operation is simple and efficient.
(4) Only one treatment before shipment and excellent water absorption after that, so there is no need to add another quality preservative at the retail and consumer stages after shipment, saving labor. Low cost.

Claims (1)

A preserving quality preservative for cut flowers, comprising polyoxyethylene alkylphenyl ether and polyoxyethylene alkyl ether as main components.