## 3 Results and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline
**Storage** & **Treatment** & **0 ds** & **8 ds** & **15 ds** & **23 ds** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Room temperature} & NPs Cu & 109.10 \(\pm\) 1.60 ab & 123.28 \(\pm\) 2.54 b & 37.78 \(\pm\) 3.00 bc & not done \\  & NaCl & 113.34 \(\pm\) 2.54 a & 106.56 \(\pm\) 2.57 c & 20.00 \(\pm\) 3.67 g & not done \\  & NPs Cu + NaCl & 81.38 \(\pm\) 2.54 c & 142.96 \(\pm\) 3.86 a & 32.91 \(\pm\) 0.97 cd & not done \\  & T0 & 107.83 \(\pm\) 3.00 b & 100.21 \(\pm\) 3.88 d & 37.99 \(\pm\) 2.64 b & not done \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Refrigeration} & NPs Cu & not done & 118.42 \(\pm\) 2.23 b & 27.41 \(\pm\) 2.91 ef & 86.88 \(\pm\) 1.94 b \\  & NaCl & not done & 118.63 \(\pm\) 1.60 b & 23.39 \(\pm\) 2.64 f g & 94.71 \(\pm\) 1.90 a \\ \cline{1-1}  & NPs Cu + NaCl & not done & 138.73 \(\pm\) 1.32 a & 29.74 \(\pm\) 3.83 d & 79.26 \(\pm\) 3.61 c \\ \cline{1-1}  & not done & 105.51 \(\pm\) 3.81 c & 109.53 \(\pm\) 2.64 a & 82.01 \(\pm\) 2.77 bc \\ \hline \end{tabular} ds: days of storage. NPs Cu: plants without stress and with application Cu nanoparticles to 250 mg L\({}^{-1}\). NaCl: plants with stress by NaCl and with application Cu nanoparticles at 250 mg L\({}^{-1}\). T0: absolute control without application of Cu nanoparticles and without stress by NaCl. Each value is expressed as mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (\(n\) = 3). Different letters by column indicate statistical differences between treatments according to [PERSON]’s least significant difference test (\(p\)\(\leq\) 0.05).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Flavonoid content (milligrams equivalent of quercetin per 100 g dry weight) in tomato fruits at different storage times at room temperature (24 \(\pm\) 1 \({}^{\circ}\)C) and refrigeration (4 \(\pm\) 1 \({}^{\circ}\)C and relative humidity of 80%). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline
**Storage** & **Treatment** & **0 ds** & **8 ds** & **15 ds** & **23 ds** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Room temperature} & NPs Cu & 5.20 \(\pm\) 0.02 b & 8.09 \(\pm\) 0.03 c & 9.11 \(\pm\) 0.01 b & not done \\  & NaCl & 3.87 \(\pm\) 0.02 d & 7.73 \(\pm\) 0.03 d & 9.99 \(\pm\) 0.03 a & not done \\  & NPs Cu + NaCl & 4.68 \(\pm\) 0.02 c & 8.36 \(\pm\) 0.01 b & 8.00 \(\pm\) 0.01 c & not done \\  & T0 & 5.24 \(\pm\) 0.01 a & 8.84 \(\pm\) 0.02 a & 5.54 \(\pm\) 0.02 g & not done \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Refrigation} & NPs Cu & not done & 6.92 \(\pm\) 0.02 e & 4.59 \(\pm\) 0.03 h & 6.97 \(\pm\) 0.03 c \\  & NaCl & not done & 3.73 \(\pm\) 0.02 h & 5.99 \(\pm\) 0.02 e & 7.02 \(\pm\) 0.02 b \\  & NPs Cu + NaCl & not done & 4.07 \(\pm\) 0.01 g & 5.68 \(\pm\) 0.01 f & 6.71 \(\pm\) 0.03 d \\ \cline{1-1}  & T0 & not done & 6.04 \(\pm\) 0.02 f & 7.00 \(\pm\) 0.02 d & 7.07 \(\pm\) 0.01 a \\ \hline \end{tabular} ds: days of storage. NPs Cu: plants without stress and with application Cu nanoparticles to 250 mg L\({}^{-1}\). NaCl: plants with stress by NaCl. NPs Cu + NaCl: plants with stress by NaCl and with application Cu nanoparticles at 250 mg L\({}^{-1}\). T0: absolute control without application of Cu nanoparticles and without stress by NaCl. Each value is expressed as mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (\(n\) = 3). Different letters by column indicate statistical differences between treatments according to [PERSON]’s least significant difference test (\(p\)\(\leq\) 0.05).  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Lycopene content (milligrams per 100 g fresh weight) in tomato fruits at different storage times at room temperature (24 \(\pm\) 1 \({}^{\circ}\)C) and refrigeration (4 \(\pm\) 1 \({}^{\circ}\)C and relative humidity of 80%). After storage for eight days, the fruits of all treatments at room temperature showed a significant increase in the lycopene content compared to the evaluation at the time of harvest. This is probably due to the natural process of fruit ripening [35]. In addition, the fruits of the treatments under refrigeration had lower contents of lycopene compared to the fruits stored at room temperature.