Potato Research

, Volume 59, Issue 1, pp 21–34 | Cite as

Yield, Tuber Quality and Weight Losses During Storage of Ten Potato Cultivars Grown at Three Sites in Serbia

  • Zoran Broćić
  • Željko Dolijanović
  • Dobrivoje Poštić
  • Drago Milošević
  • Jasna Savić
Article
  • 258 Downloads

Abstract

Ten potato cultivars were grown at three sites in Serbia (Sombor, Čačak and Guča) in 2001 and 2002 to examine their yield and post-harvest changes during long-term storage at 3–4 °C without controlled air humidity. In the post-harvest study, tuber dry matter (DM) concentration, starch concentration in the DM and weight loss were assessed at harvest, after 2 months and after 7 months of storage. The highest yields were obtained at Čačak where large tubers were formed, while random variations were recorded within cultivars. Results showed that all cultivars gave good yields; all cultivars also produced tubers with DM concentration >19%, except for the cultivars Jaerla and Condor. Cultivars with higher tuber DM concentration maintained it >19% after 7 months of storage. The consistent increase in tuber DM concentration during storage suggested that relative losses of water caused by transpiration were higher than the relative losses of DM caused by respiration. The effect of site on the initial concentration of starch in the DM was not significant, whereas the starch concentration decreased over the whole storage period. Late cultivars had the highest starch concentration in the tuber DM. Frisia, Red Star and Agria showed consistent low weight loss during storage.

Keywords

Dry matter concentration Potato cultivar Starch content Storage Weight loss Yield 

References

  1. Asmamaw Y, Tekalign T, Workneh TS (2010) Specific gravity, dry matter concentration, pH, and crisp-making potential of Ethiopian potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) cultivars as influenced by growing environment and length of storage under ambient conditions. Potato Res 53:95–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biemelt S, Hajirezaei M, Hentschen E, Sonnewald U (2000) Comparative analysis of abscisic content and starch degradation during storage of tubers harvested of different potato varieties. Potato Res 43:371–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borah MN, Milthorpe FL (1959) The growth of the potato plant. Report on Nottingham University School of Agriculture for 1959. pp. 41–45Google Scholar
  4. Broćić Z, Stefanović D (2012) Potato. Production, economy and market. University of Belgrade, Faculty of Agriculture, Belgrade, In SerbianGoogle Scholar
  5. Burton WG (1989) The potato, 3rd edn. Longman Scientific & Technical, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Burton WG, Van Es A, Hartmans KJ (1992) The physics and physiology of storage. In: Harris PM (ed) The potato crop, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 608–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chourasia MK, Goswami TK (2001) Losses of potatoes in cold storage vis-á-vis types, mechanism and influential factors. J Food Sci Tech Mys 38:301–313Google Scholar
  8. Cunnington AC (2007) Developments in potato storage in Great Britain. Potato Res 51:403–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dogras C, Siomos A, Psomahelis C (1991) Sugar content and dry matter in potatoes stored under fluctuating temperatures in non-refrigerated stores in Greece. Potato Res 34:389–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Driskill E, Knowles L, Knowles N (2007) Temperature-induced changes in potato processing quality during storage are modulated by tuber maturity. Am J Potato Res 84:367–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eldredge EP, Holmes ZA, Mosley AR, Shock CC, Stieber TD (1996) Effects of transitory water stress on potato tuber stem-end reducing sugar and fry colour. Am Potato J 73:517–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. FAOSTAT (2011)Google Scholar
  13. Firman D (2008) Factors affecting tuber numbers per stem leading to improved seed rate recommendations. Improved seed rate recommendations—Potato Council research project R269. AHDB and Cambridge University FarmGoogle Scholar
  14. Haase T, Schüler C, Haase NU, Heß J (2007) Suitability of organic potatoes for industrial processing: effect of agronomical measures on selected quality parameters at harvest and after storage. Potato Res 50:115–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haverkort A, Anisimov B (2007) Potato Production and Innovative Technologies. Wageningen Academic PublishersGoogle Scholar
  16. Ilin Ž, Đurovka M, Marković V, Sabadoš V (2000) Agrobiološke osnove za uspešnu proizvodnju krompira. Arhiv za poljoprivredne nauke 61:101–115, In SerbianGoogle Scholar
  17. Joiner S, Mackey A (1962) Weight loss, specific gravity and mealiness during storage of Russet Burbank potatoes. Amer Potato J 39:320–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kaaber L, Bråthen E, Martinsen B, Shomer I (2001) The effect of storage conditions on chemical content on raw potatoes and texture of cooked potatoes. Potato Res 44:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kolbe H, Stephan-Beckmann S (1997) Development, growth and chemical composition of the potato crop (Solanum tuberosum L.). II. Tuber and the whole plant. Potato Res 40:135–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kumar D, Singh BP, Kumar P (2004) An overview of the factors affecting sugar concentration of potatoes. Ann Appl Biol 145:247–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leszczynski W (1989) Potato starch processing. In: Lisinska G, Leszczynski W (eds) Potato science and technology. Elsevier, London, pp 281–348Google Scholar
  22. Lommen WJM (1993) Post-harvest characteristics of potato minitubers with different fresh weights and from different harvests. II. Losses during storage. Potato Res 36:273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miller RA, Harrington JD, Kuhn GC (1975) Effect of variety and harvest date on tuber sugars and chip colour. Am Potato J 52:379–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mitchell GA (1990) Methods of starch analysis. Starch-Starke 42:131–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Poštić D, Momirović N, Broćić Z, Dolijanović Z, Aleksić G (2012) The evaluation of biological viability of potato seed tubers grown at different altitudes. Afr J Agric Res 70:3073–3080Google Scholar
  26. Pritchard MK, Adam LR (1992) Preconditioning and storage of chemically immature russet Burbank and shepody potatoes. Am Potato J 69:805–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rivero RC, Rodríguez RE, Romero DC (2003) Effects of current storage conditions on nutrient retention in several varieties of potatoes from Tenerife. Food Chem 80:445–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schippers PA (1992) Biological characteristics of the potato in relationship to storage. In: Cargill BF (ed) The potato storage. Michigan State University, East Lansing, pp 47–62Google Scholar
  29. Smith O (1987) Effect of cultural and environmental conditions on potato for processing. In: Talburt WF, Smith O (eds) Potato processing. Van Nostrand Reinhoki Company Inc, New York, pp 73–148Google Scholar
  30. Stanley R, Jewell S (1989) The influence of source and rate of potassium fertilizer on the quality of potatoes for french fry production. Potato Res 32:439–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Struik P, Geertsema J, Custers C (1989) Effects of shoot, root and stolon temperature on the development of the potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) plant. III. Development of tubers. Potato Res 32:151–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Van Es A, Hartmans KJ (1987) Starch and sugars during tuberization, storage and sprouting. In: Rastovski A, Van Es A (eds) Storage of potatoes. Pudoc, Wageningen, pp 114–132Google Scholar
  33. Wustman R, Struik C (2007) The canon of potato science: 35. Seed and ware potato storage. Potato Res 50:351–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association for Potato Research 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zoran Broćić
    • 1
  • Željko Dolijanović
    • 1
  • Dobrivoje Poštić
    • 2
  • Drago Milošević
    • 3
  • Jasna Savić
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of BelgradeBelgradeSerbia
  2. 2.Institute for Plant Protection and EnvironmentBelgradeSerbia
  3. 3.Faculty of Agronomy-ČačakUniversity of KragujevacČačakSerbia

Personalised recommendations