## Results and Discussion  
### Physical Chemical Parameters and Colour Measurement  
The deterioration of 50% of fruits occurred after 6 months in PdP and after 1 month in CIL tomatoes. The chemical-physical parameters measured before and after storage are reported in Table 1. In particular, the pH values were significantly (\(p<0.05\)) different between PdP and CIL, ranging from 4.13 to 4.45 for CIL1 and PdP6, respectively. For Piennolo tomatoes the pH values are not significantly different during storage, while for CIL the pH decreases (\(p<0.05\)) after 1 month of storage and this is the lowest pH value that has been detected. Regarding the total soluble solids (TSS), the levels of this parameter significantly increased after storage for both varieties. The lowest and highest TSS values were found in CIL0 and CIL1 with (i.e., 6.3 and 8.5 \({}^{\circ}\)Brix, respectively). The TSS parameter for PdP was higher than 6.5 \({}^{\circ}\)Brix, as requested by PDO regulation. Particularly, it raised from 6.9 to 7.9 \({}^{\circ}\)Brix during the storage. The analysis outcomes concerning the dry matter evidenced quite close parameters for PdP0 and CIL0 (i.e., 7.2 and 7.7, respectively) at the beginning of the storage period, while for PdP6 and CIL1, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample** & **pH** & **TSS (\({}^{\circ}\)Brix)** & **DM (\%)** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Reducing** \\ **Sugars (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Sodium** \\ **Chloride (\%)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Titratable Acidity** \\ **(\%Citric Acid)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline PdP 0 & 4.36 \({}^{\text{a.b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.04 & 6.9 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \(\pm\) 0.1 & 7.20 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \(\pm\) 0.19 & 2.89 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \(\pm\) 0.07 & 0.18 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.01 & 0.53 \({}^{\text{a.b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.01 \\ PdP 6 & 4.45 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 0.01 & 7.9 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.1 & 8.40 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.34 & 2.00 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 0.11 & 0.20 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.02 & 0.50 \({}^{\text{a.b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.04 \\ CIL 0 & 4.29 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.01 & 6.3 \({}^{\text{d}}\) \(\pm\) 0.1 & 7.71 \({}^{\text{b.c}}\) \(\pm\) 0.38 & 3.77 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.16 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.04 & 0.43 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \(\pm\) 0.05 \\ CIL 1 & 4.13 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \(\pm\) 0.06 & 8.5 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 0.1 & 9.55 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 0.12 & 4.12 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 0.05 & 0.41 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 0.04 & 0.57 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 0.03 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} a–c different letters in the same column correspond to significant differences (\(p<0.05\)).  
\end{table} 
Table 1: pH, total soluble solids (TSS), dry matter (DM), reducing sugar, sodium chloride and titratable acidity (mean \(\pm\) standard deviation) detected in tomato samples. the percentage values of dry matter were 8.4 and 9.55 respectively. The levels of dry matter significantly increased during storage by approximatively 1.2% and 2.0% in PdP6 and CIL1, respectively, and despite what was expected, the loss of moisture was remarkably larger in CIL after 1 month than in PdP after 6 months of storage. The relative contents of reducing sugars such as fructose and glucose have a very important impact on the sweetness perception, and the two varieties analysed, PdP and CIL, revealed considerably different levels (i.e., 2.89 and 3.77%, respectively). Additionally, during storage the levels of this parameter increased in CIL. The sodium chloride (NaCl) content in tomatoes is another parameter related to organoleptic characteristics, and the two varieties did not show significantly different values for fresh tomatoes. During storage the two types of cherry tomatoes behaved differently and in particular NaCl slightly increases in PdP6 (0.18% vs. 0.20%), while in CIL1, the relative amount of NaCl becomes approximatively 2.5 times larger (0.16% vs. 0.41%). The last parameter analysed was the titratable acidity.