Advertisement

Study on the efficiency of ethylene scavengers on the maintenance of postharvest quality of tomato fruit

  • Saeideh Mansourbahmani
  • Behzad GhareyazieEmail author
  • Vahid Zarinnia
  • Sepideh Kalatejari
  • Reza Salehi Mohammadi
Original Paper

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to achieve the best level of each ethylene scavenger and evaluate the effect of selected levels of treatments on some quality traits of tomato during storage. Tomato fruits were subjected to four levels of treatments: palladium-promoted nano zeolite, KMnO4-promoted nano zeolite, 1-MCP, CaCl2, salicylic acid (SA) and UV-C. The sampling was done at 0, 7th, 14th, 21st, 28th and 35th days of cold storage. The results showed that palladium-promoted nano zeolite 5%, KMnO4-promoted nano zeolite 20%, 1-MCP 30 ppm, CaCl2 2%, SA 1% and UV-C 15 min levels had the most ethylene scavenging function. Effectiveness of the treatments in ethylene scavenging was in the order: palladium > KMnO4 > 1-MCP > SA = CaCl2 > UV-C. The palladium-promoted nano zeolite 5% had more positive effects on phenol content, polygalacturonase activity, lycopene content, fruit firmness and weight loss, and UV-C 15 min had effect on decay severity as compared to the other treatments. Overall, palladium-promoted nano zeolite 5% could be considered not only as favorable tool in tomato shelf life extension but also in preservation of quality characteristics of tomato fruits during storage. Moreover, the UV-C 15 min treatment could be an effective method for reducing decay severity and maintaining postharvest quality of tomato fruits.

Keywords

Ethylene scavenger Fruit quality Palladium Tomato 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran, for funding this research.

References

  1. 1.
    D.M. Beckles, Factors affecting the postharvest soluble solids and sugar content of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) fruit. Postharvest Biol.Technol. 63, 129–140 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Arab, S. Steck, Lycopene and cardiovascular disease. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 71, 1691–1695 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    H.D. Sesso, S. Liu, J.M. Gaziano, J.E. Buring, Dietary lycopene, tomato-based food products and cardiovascular disease in women. J. Nutr. 133, 2336–2341 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. Giovannucci, Lycopene and prostate cancer risk. Methodological considerations in the epidemiologic literature. Pure Appl. Chem. 74, 1427–1434 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. Giovannucci, A review of epidemiologic studies of tomatoes, lycopene, and prostate cancer. Exp. Biol. Med. 227, 852–859 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    W.C. Willett, Fruits, vegetables, and cancer prevention: turmoil in the produce section. J. Natl. Cancer. Inst. 102, 510–511 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Javanmardi, C. Kubota, Variation of lycopene, antioxidant activity, total soluble solids and weight loss of tomato during postharvest storage. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 41, 151–155 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    F. Guillén, S. Castillo, P.J. Zapata, D. Martínez-Romero, M. Serrano, D. Valero, Efficacy of 1-MCP treatment in tomato fruit: 1. Duration and concentration of 1-MCP treatment to gain an effective delay of postharvest ripening. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 43, 23–27 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R.B.H. Wills, M.A. Warton, D.M.D.N. Mussa, L.P. Chew, Ripening of climacteric fruits initiated at low ethylene levels. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 41, 89–92 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Suslow, M. Cantwell, Tomato: recommendations for maintaining postharvest quality. Produce Facts. http://ucanr.edu/sites/postharvest/pfvegetable/Tomato/ (Postharvest Technology Research & Information Center, Davis, 2009)
  11. 11.
    J. Conte, A. El Blidi, L. Rigal, L. Torres, Ethylene removal in fruit storage rooms: a catalytic oxidation reactor at low temperature. J. Food Eng 15, 313–329 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Abe, A.E. Watada, Ethylene absorbent to maintain quality of lightly processed fruits and vegetables. J. Food Sci. 56, 1589–1592 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. Bailén, F. Guillén, S. Castillo, P.J. Zapata, M. Serrano, D. Valero, D. Martínez-Romero, Use of a palladium catalyst to improve the capacity of activated carbon to absorb ethylene, and its effect on tomato ripening. Span. J. Agric. Res. 5, 579–586 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S.M. Blankenship, J.M. Dole, 1-Methylcyclopropene: a review. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 28, 1–25 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. Bu, Y. Yu, G. Aisikaer, T. Ying, Postharvest UV-C irradiation inhibits the production of ethylene and the activity of cell wall-degrading enzymes during softening of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 86, 337–345 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Sammi, T. Masud, Effect of different packaging systems on storage life and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum var. Rio Grande) during different ripening stages. Internet J. Food Saf. 9, 37–44 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Emadpour, B. Ghareyazie, Y.R. Kalaj, M.E.N. Bouzari, Effect of the potassium permanganate coated zeolite nanoparticles on the quality characteristic and shelf life of peach and nectarine. J. Agric. Technol. 11, 1263–1273 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Auerbach, K. Carrado, P. Dutta, Hand book of Zeolite Science and Technology (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2003) p. 1204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    F. Khosravi, M. Khosravi, E. Pourseyedi, Effect of nano zeolite and potassium permanganate on shelf life and quality of cut apple. Int. J. Life Sci. 9, 55–60 (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L.A. Terry, T. Ilkenhans, S. Poulston, L. Rowsell, A.W.J. Smith, Development of new palladium-promoted ethylene scavenger. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 45, 214–220 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    D. Valero, D. Martínez-Romero, J.M. Valverde, F. Guillén, M. Serrano, Quality improvement and extension of shelf life by 1-methylcyclopropene in plum as affected by ripening stage at harvest. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 4, 339–348 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    V.L. Singleton, J.A. Rossi, Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 16, 144–158 (1965)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    M.V. Eberhardt, C.Y. Lee, R.H. Liu, Nutrition: antioxidant activity of fresh apples. Nature 405, 903–904 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    H.S. Lee, G.A. Coates, Measurement of total vitamin C activity in citrus products by HPLC: a review. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 22, 2367–2387 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    B. Krebbers, A.M. Matser, S.W. Hoogerwerf, R. Moezelaar, M.M.M. Tomassen, R.W. van den Berg, Combined high-pressure and thermal treatments for processing of tomato puree: evaluation of microbial inactivation and quality parameters. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 4, 377–385 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. Batu, Determination of acceptable firmness and colour values of tomatoes. J. Food Eng. 61, 471–475 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    D. Marquenie, C.W. Michiels, J.F. Van Impe, E. Schrevens, B.N. Nicolaı̈, Pulsed white light in combination with UV-C and heat to reduce storage rot of strawberry. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 28, 455–461 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    C.Y. Park, Y.J. Kim, Y. Shin, Effects of an ethylene absorbent and 1-methylcyclopropene on tomato quality and antioxidant contents during storage. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol. 57, 38–45 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    A. Vallverdú-Queralt, S. Arranz, A. Medina-Remón, I. Casals-Ribes, R.M. Lamuela-Raventós, Changes in phenolic content of tomato products during storage. J. Agric. Food Chem. 59, 9358–9365 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    R.K. Toor, G.P. Savage, Changes in major antioxidant components of tomatoes during post-harvest storage. Food Chem. 99, 724–727 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    S.K. Lee, A.A. Kader, Preharvest and postharvest factors influencing vitamin C content of horticultural crops. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 20, 207–220 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    C.B. Watkins, 1-Methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) based technologies for storage and shelf life extension. Int. J. Postharvest Technol. Innov. 1, 62–68 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    M.J. Ahrens, D.J. Huber, Physiology and firmness determination of ripening tomato fruit. Physiol. Plant. 78, 8–14 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    S. Ketsa, T. Daengkanit, Firmness and activities of polygalacturonase, pectinesterase, β-galactosidase and cellulase in ripening durian harvested at different stages of maturity. Sci. Hortic. 80, 181–188 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Y. Mostofi, P.M.A. Toivonen, H. Lessani, M. Babalar, C. Lu, Effects of 1-methylcyclopropene on ripening of greenhouse tomatoes at three storage temperatures. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 27, 285–292 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    M. Cliff, S. Lok, C. Lu, P.M.A. Toivonen, Effect of 1-methylcyclopropene on the sensory, visual, and analytical quality of greenhouse tomatoes. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 53, 11–15 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    K.A. Thompson, M.R. Marshall, C.A. Sims, C.I. Wei, S.A. Sargent, J.W. Scott, Cultivar, maturity, and heat treatment on lycopene content in tomatoes. J. Food Sci. 65, 791–795 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    F. Guillén, S. Castillo, P.J. Zapata, D. Martínez-Romero, D. Valero, M. Serrano, Efficacy of 1-MCP treatment in tomato fruit: 2. Effect of cultivar and ripening stage at harvest. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 42, 235–242 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    G.A. González-Aguilar, C.Y. Wang, J.G. Buta, D.T. Krizek, Use of UV-C irradiation to prevent decay and maintain postharvest quality of ripe ‘Tommy Atkins’ mangoes. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 36, 767–773 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    A.R. Vicente, C. Pineda, L. Lemoine, P.M. Civello, G.A. Martinez, A.R. Chaves, UV-C treatments reduce decay, retain quality and alleviate chilling injury in pepper. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 35, 69–78 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    M. Erkan, S.Y. Wang, C.Y. Wang, Effect of UV treatment on antioxidant capacity, antioxidant enzyme activity and decay in strawberry fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 48, 163–171 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Saeideh Mansourbahmani
    • 1
  • Behzad Ghareyazie
    • 2
    Email author
  • Vahid Zarinnia
    • 1
  • Sepideh Kalatejari
    • 1
  • Reza Salehi Mohammadi
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Horticultural Sciences, Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Agriculture Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran (ABRII)/Agricultural ResearchEducation and Extension Organization (AREEO)KarajIran
  3. 3.Department of Horticultural SciencesUniversity of TehranKarajIran

Personalised recommendations