Advertisement

Development and Evaluation of Pilot Scale Modified Atmosphere Storage and Modified Atmosphere Packaging Systems for Tomatoes

  • Sukhdev Mangaraj
  • Ajay Yadav
  • Lalit M. BalEmail author
Research Article
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

A pilot scale modified atmosphere storage (MAS) structure of 100 kg and modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) of 1 kg capacity have been designed and developed for the storage of tomatoes. A polymeric film (LDPE + LLDPE, 80 µ thickness) has been used as the lining material to act as a regulator for the transport of gases and water vapor. The retail size MA packaging study of medium-size tomatoes were taken and packed in 80 µm (LDPE + LLDPE) polymeric film (size: 25 × 22 cm2) so as to compare with the quality of MAS system. The quality analysis revealed that the parameters namely physiological loss in weight (PLW), firmness, color (L*, a*, b*), TSS, and titratable acidity were found to be 0.3%; 45.88 N; 60.23, − 3.25, 32.16; 4.3; and 0.55 of tomatoes after 21 days of storage in MAS system at ambient temperature (25 °C), respectively, which is comparable with the quality parameters at harvesting maturity and 1 kg MA package. The MAS system increased the shelf life from 7 to 21 days for tomatoes, at ambient temperature. However, the shelf life was achieved up to 35 days at 10 °C in MAS for tomatoes. Thus, developed structure is highly beneficial in retailing and transportation of tomatoes.

Keywords

MAS MAP Shelf life Tomatoes Storage Quality parameters Packaging film 

References

  1. 1.
    Ait-Oubahou A (1999) Modified atmosphere packaging of tomato fruit. In: Gerasopoulos D (ed) Post harvest losses of perishable horticultural products in the Mediterranean region. Chania, CIHEAM, 42, 103–113Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alexander L, Grierson D (2002) Ethylene biosynthesis and action in tomato: a model for climacteric fruit ripening. J Exp Bot 53:2039–2055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ali B (2004) Determination of acceptable firmness and colour values of tomatoes. J Food Eng 61:471–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arazuri S, Jaren C, Arana JI, Perez de Ciriza JJ (2007) Influence of mechanical harvest on the physical properties of processing tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). J Food Eng 80:190–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Babitha B, Kiranmayi P (2010) Effect of storage conditions on the post harvest quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Res J Agric Sci 1:409–411Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ben-Yehoshua S, Burg SP, Young R (1985) Resistance of citrus fruit to mass transport of water vapor and other gases. Plant Physiol 79(4):1048–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhattarai DR, Gautam DM (2006) Effect of harvesting method and calcium on post harvest physiology of tomato. Nepal Agric Res J 7:37–41Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bhowmik SR, Pan JC (1992) Shelf life of mature green tomatoes stored in controlled atmosphere and high humidity. J Food Sci 57:948–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buntong B, Srilaong V, Wasusri T, Kanlayanarat S, Acedo AL Jr (2013) Reducing postharvest losses of tomato in traditional and modern supply chains in Cambodia. Int Food Res J 20:233–238Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cameron AC, Patterson BD, Talasila PC, Joles DW (1993) Modeling the risk in modified atmosphere packaging: a case for sense-and-respond packaging. In: Proceedings of the sixth international controlled atmosphere research conference, Ithaca, NY, pp 95–112Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Das MN, Giri NC (1986) Design and analysis of experiments, 2nd edn. New Age International (P) Ltd, ChennaizbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    FAO, Food and Agriculture Organisation (2011) Global food losses and food waste: extent, causes and prevention. Study conducted for the International Congress SAVE FOOD! http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e.pdf. Accessed Oct 2014
  13. 13.
    Fonseca SC, Oliveira FAR, Brecht JK (2002) Modeling respiration rate of fresh fruits and vegetables for modified atmosphere packages: a review paper. J Food Eng 52:99–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giovanelli G, Paradiso A (2002) Stability of dried and intermediate moisture tomato pulp during storage. J Agric Food Chem 50:7277–7281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giovannucci E (2002) A review of epidemiologic studies of tomatoes, lycopene, and prostate cancer. Exp Biol Med 227:852–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gonzalez-Buesa J, Ferrer-Mairal A, Oria R, Salvador ML (2009) A mathematical model for packaging with microperforated films of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables. J Food Eng 95:158–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goodenough PW, Thomas TH (1980) Comparative physiology of field-grown tomatoes during ripening on the plant or retarded ripening in controlled atmospheres. Ann Appl Biol 94:445–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    HLPE (2014) Sustainable fisheries and aquaculture for food security and nutrition. A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security. RomeGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jha SN, Vishwakarma RK, Ahmad T, Rai A, Dixit AK (2015) Assessment of quantitative harvest and post-harvest losses of major crops/commodities in India. Technical ReportGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kadam SS, Deshpande SS (1995) Lychee. In: Salunkhe DD, Kadam SS (eds) Handbook of fruit science and technology. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 435–443Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kader AA (1986) Biochemical and biophysical basis for effects of controlled and modified atmospheres on fruits and vegetables. Food Technol 40:99–104Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kader AA (2005) Increasing food availability by reducing postharvest losses of fresh produce. Act Hort 682:2169–2176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Karki DB (2004) Effect of harvesting states on the quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill CV. Avinash-2, hybrid). Tribhuvan Univ J 25:143–147Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kays SJ (1991) Metabolic processes in harvested products respiration. Post Harvest Physiology of Perishable Plant Products. Van Nostrand Reinhold Publication, New York, pp 47–56Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lakakul R, Beaudry RM, Hernandez RJ (1999) Modelling respiration of apple slices in modified atmosphere packages. J Food Sci 64:105–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee DS, Hagger PE, Lee J, Yam KL (1991) Model for fresh produce respiration in modified atmosphere based on principles of enzyme kinetics. J Food Sci 56:1580–1585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li Z, Li P, Liu J (2011) Physical and mechanical properties of tomato fruits as related to robot’s harvesting. J Food Eng 103:170–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mahajan PV, Oliveira FAR, Montanez JC, Frias J (2007) Development of user-friendly software for design of modified atmosphere packaging for fresh and fresh-cut produce. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 8:84–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Majidi H, Minaei S, Almassi M, Mostofi Y (2014) Tomato quality in controlled atmosphere storage, modified atmosphere packaging and cold storage. J Food Sci Technol 51:2155–2161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mangaraj S, Agrawal S, Gandhi AP (2005) Studies on physico-chemical changes in selected fruits during storage. Beverage Food World 32:72–75Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mangaraj S, Goswami TK (2009) Determination of maturity indices of fruits based on physico-chemical properties. Ind Food Pack 63:67–79Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mangaraj S, Goswami TK (2011) Measurement and modelling of respiration rates of guava (cv. Baruipur) for modified atmosphere packaging. Int J Food Prop 14:609–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mangaraj S, Goswami TK (2011) Modelling of respiration rates of litchi fruit under aerobic condition. Food Bioprocess Technol 4:272–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mangaraj S, Goswami TK, Giri SK, Chandra P (2013) Development and evaluation of MA packages employing lamination technique for royal delicious apple. Emir J Food Agric 25:358–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mangaraj S, Goswami TK, Giri SK, Joshy CG (2014) Design and development of a modified atmosphere packaging system for guava (cv. Baruipur). J Food Sci Technol 51:2925–2946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mangaraj S, Goswami TK, Mahajan PV (2009) Application of plastic films in modified atmosphere packaging of fruits and vegetables—a review. Food Eng Rev 1:133–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mangaraj S, Goswami TK, Tripathi MK, Giri SK (2013) Neural network modelling of respiration rates of litchi. Octa J Biosci 1:32–43Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mangaraj S, Singh KP (2011) Optimization of machine parameters for milling of pigeon pea using RSM. Food Bioprocess Technol 4:762–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mangaraj S, Singh R, Singh SP (2006) Studies on measurement and analysis of colors of fruits during storage. Ind Food Pack 60:133–140Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Moneruzzaman KM, Hossain ABMS, Sani W, Saifuddin M (2008) Effect of stages of maturity and ripening conditions on the biochemical characteristics of tomato. Am J Biochem Biotechnol 4:336–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Moretti CL, Sargent SA, Huber DJ (1999) Delayed ripening does not alleviate symptoms of internal bruising in tomato fruit. Proc Fla State Hort Soc 112:169–171Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Nakhasi S, Schlimme D, Solomos T (1991) Storage potential of tomatoes harvested at the breaker stage using modified atmosphere packaging. J Food Sci 56:55–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Nanda SK, Vishwakarma Bhthla HVL, Rai A, Chandra P (2012) Harvest and post harvest losses of major crops and livestock produce in India. AICRP on PHT (ICAR), CIPHET, Ludhiana, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nasrin TAA, Molla MM, Hossaen MA, Alam MS, Yasmin L (2008) Effect of postharvest treatments on shelf life and quality of tomato. Bangl J Agril Res 33:579–585Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Olsmats C, Wallteg B (2009) Packaging is the answer to world hunger. World Packaging Organisation (WPO) and International Packaging Press Organisation (IPPO). http://www.worldpackaging.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm
  46. 46.
    Parsons CS, Anderson RE, Penney RW (1970) Storage of mature-green tomatoes in controlled atmospheres. J Am Soc Hort Sci 95:791–794Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Piskunov N (1981) Differential and integral calculus. Mir Publishers, Moscow, pp 142–146Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rai DR, Paul S (2007) Transient state in-pack respiration rates of mushroom under modified atmosphere packaging based on enzyme kinetics. Biosyst Eng 98:319–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ranganna S (1995) Manual of analysis of fruit and vegetable products, 2nd edn. Tata Mc-Graw-Hill Pub. Com. Ltd., New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Renu R, Chidanand DV (2013) Effect of modified atmosphere storage conditions on biochemical parameters of bell peppers. Int J Agric Food Sci Technol 4:915–922Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Rocculi P, Del Nobile MA, Romani S, Baiano A, Rosa MD (2006) Use of a simple mathematical model to evaluate dipping and MAP effects on aerobic respiration of minimally processed apples. J Food Eng 76:334–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Sabir FK, Agar IT (2011) Effects of 1-methylcyclopropene and modified atmosphere packing on postharvest life and quality in tomatoes. J Food Qual 34:111–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Saltveit ME (1997) A summary of CA and MA requirements and recommendations for harvested vegetables. In: Paper presented at the 7th international controlled atmosphere research conferenceGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sammi S, Masud T (2007) Effect of different packaging systems on storage life and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentumvar, Rio grande) during ripening stages. Int J Food Saf 9:37–44Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Smock R (1979) Controlled atmosphere storage of fruits. Hort Rev 1:301–336Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Talasila PC, Chau KV, Brecht JK (1992) Effects of gas concentrations and temperature on O2 consumption of strawberries. Trans ASAE 35:221–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Tariq I, Rodrigues FAS, Mahajan PV, Kerry JP (2009) Mathematical modeling of the influence of temperature and gas composition on the respiration rate of shredded carrots. J Food Eng 91:325–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tijskens LMM, Evelo RG (1994) Modelling colour of tomatoes during postharvest storage. Postharvest Biol Technol 4:85–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Torrieri E, Cavella S, Masi P (2007) Modelling the respiration rate of fresh-cut Annurca apples to develop modified atmosphere packaging. Int J Food Sci Technol 46:1–10Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Wills R, McGlasson B, Graham D, Joyce D (1998) Postharvest. An introduction to the physiology and handling of fruit, vegetables and ornamentals, CAB International. Wallingford OxonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Institute of Packaging 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agro Produce Processing DivisionCentral Institute of Agricultural EngineeringBhopalIndia
  2. 2.Post Harvest Process and Food Engineering, College of AgricultureJawaharlal Nehru Agricultural UniversityTikamgarhIndia

Personalised recommendations