## 3 Results
When applying the Fun+Cin+Eug combination, butyl acetate exhibited its highest concentration at 79.1 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\). Lastly, ethyl octanoate exhibited its maximum concentration at 715.7 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) in the Fun+Thy+Cin+Eug combination. Notably, ethyl 3-hydroxybutyrate showed consistent concentrations of 173.4 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) across multiple treatment combinations. Table 3 presents the concentration of various C6 compounds and alcohols in the harvested apples after they underwent different treatments to combat _B. cinerea_. Notably, the highest concentrations of hexanal were observed in the Fun+Cin and Fun+Cin+Eug groups, both reporting 6.2 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\). Hexanal concentrations ranged from 4.7 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) in the CT group to a high of 6.2 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) in the Fun+Cin+Eug group. For the three isomers of hexanal, the variations were as follows: (Z)-3-hexenal concentrations were highest in the Fun+Thy+Eug group (2.3 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\)) and lowest in the Fun+Thy+Cin+Eug group (1.4 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\)). Hexanol concentrations peaked at 3.5 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) for the Fun+Cin+Eug group and were at their lowest for the Fun+Thy+Cin+Eug group (2.7 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\)). (E)-2-hexenal showed minimal variation across all treatments, maintaining concentrations around the range of 1.9 to 2.4 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\). Among the alcohols, 2-heptanol maintained relatively stable concentrations across all treatments, roughly averaging 0.5 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\). 1-octen-3-ol exhibited its highest concentration in the Fun+Thy+Eug group with 2.5 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) and the lowest in several groups at 0.6 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\). Interestingly, 2-ethyl hexanol showed significant variation, with its highest concentration in the Fun+Thy+Eug group (2.3 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\)) and the lowest in the Fun+Eug group (1.1 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\)). Heptonal ranged from 6.1 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) (CT group) to a high of 6.5 \(\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro\text{g}}\) L\({}^{-1}\) in the Fun+Thy+Cin group. Octanol, benzyl alcohol, nonanol, and phenylethyll alcohol also showed varied concentrations across the different treatments, with notable peaks in specific groups. The analysis of volatile compounds in the harvested apples following various treatments yielded notable findings (Table 4). The statistical analysis revealed no significant difference (\(p\)-value = 0.3171) among the treatments for this compound. The highest concentrations were observed in the \"Fun+Thy+Eug\" and \"Fun+Thy+Cin\" treatments. For hexanoic acid, the concentrations showed a range from 0.1 to 0.2 among the different treatments. Importantly, a statistically significant difference was noted, with a \(p\)-value of 0.0055, indicating the influence of the treatments on the levels of hexanoic acid. In contrast, 2-hexenoic acid exhibited more consistent concentrations, hovering around 0.2 across all treatments. Moving on to octanoic acid, the concentrations exhibited a wider variation,ranging from 0.6 to 3.7. In the case of 3-methylbutanal, the concentrations varied from 0.8 to 6.4, with the highest concentration observed in the \"CT\" treatment. The differences among the treatments were highly significant (\(p\)-value \(<\) 0.0001*). Similar trends were observed for the other aldehydes within this category. Notably, the \"Fun+Thy+Eug\" treatment yielded the highest concentration.