## 3 Results and Discussion
### Microbiological Analysis
#### 3.3.2 Molds and Yeasts  
Figure 5 shows the effect of the CS + RGEO coatings on the growth of fungi and yeasts on the surface of cape gooseberries during the days of storage.  
Significant reduction (\(p<0.05\)) in the Log CFU/g is observed in the cape gooseberries coated concerning the control. The antifungal activity of CS + RGEO delayed the growth of molds and yeasts during storage. Still, it did not inhibit the growth, because after three days, all the case gooseberries allow fungal and yeast growth (_Botrytis cinerea_, _Cladosporium sp_, and some species of _Fusarium_ and _Penicillium_), probably due to the nature of these fungi [65]. After twelve days of storage, the growth for  
Figure 4: Aerobic mesophylls count for the treatments applied to cape gooseberry. The superscript letter (a–d) refers to the significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between each treatment.  
T4 and T5 was lower than 3 log CFU/g. However, uncoated fruits had 4 Log CFU/g, which demonstrates a control effect on the growth of fungi on the case gooseberry surface.  
Significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between days and treatments concerning the growth of molds and yeasts at a confidence level of 95% were observed.  
The initial count in control cap gooseberries was 2.6 Log UFC/g up to 4.1 Log UFC/g, higher compared to cap goats treated with CS + RGEO that obtained values between 2.9 and 3.2 Log UFC/g. Previously, it has been demonstrated that chitosan-based coatings are effective in inhibiting cell growth in plums, both when plums were inoculated pre-coating as well as post-coating. Therefore, coatings may be useful in reducing microbial growth regardless of when infection occurred [66].  
On the other hand, the sensory analysis allows measuring the quality of the fruit, knowing the acceptance of the products by the consumer. Sensory aspects may include appearance, color, flavor, and texture, which probably remains the most required attribute strongly affecting consumer decision to purchase the product [12]. The results of the sensory analysis represented in a hedonic curve, as seen in Figure 6.  
Figure 6 shows the overall acceptability of attributes by days of storage. The treatments that showed lower effects on sensory characteristics were T1 and T2. In contrast, treatments T3, T4, and T5 were affected in the flavor and aroma attributes by a bitter and robust flavor caused by the essential oil, presenting significant differences in each treatment (\(p<0.05\)). However, in the texture and flavor attributes, there were no significant differences after the storage days, which indicates that the characteristics were preserved between days 0 and 6. It can be determined that the treatments with higher acceptability in the sensory tests were T1 and T2, while low acceptability were treatments with RGEO content. Despite the enormous potential of essential oils, some authors have reported changes in the organoleptic properties of foods when these oils are used, due to their intense aroma and toxicity problems [14]. Based on the sensorial analysis, we recommend the use of T3 (CS + RGEO 0.5%) for cap gooseberries protection, which does not affect consumer acceptance drastically but prevents physical-chemical and microbiological decay of fruits.  
Figure 5: Mold and yeasts count for the treatments applied to cape gooseberry. The superscript letter (a–d) refers to the significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between each treatment.