Food Engineering Reviews

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 1–15 | Cite as

Conventional and Alternative Methods for Tomato Peeling

  • Cheryl Rock
  • Wade Yang
  • Renée Goodrich-Schneider
  • Hao Feng
Review Article


Peeling is one of the most important unit operations in tomato processing. Most recently, three novel tomato peeling methods were reported: infrared, ohmic heating and power ultrasound. Steam/hot water and lye peeling have been the most commercialized methods, but compared to steam peeling, lye peeling is more preferred and has gained widespread application among processors due to its association with higher product yields and better product quality. However, with the ever-tightening environmental protection laws, concerns have arisen in the recent years regarding lye usage as well as its disposal, which calls for alternative chemical-free peeling methods that can effectively peel the tomato while minimizing peeling losses and improving product quality. This review highlights the conventional methods used in tomato peeling, their efficacy and the potential applications of infrared, ohmic heating and power ultrasonics as a novel technology for tomato peeling.


Tomato Peeling Lye Infrared Ultrasound Ohmic heating 


  1. 1.
    Arthey D, Dennis C (1991) Vegetable processing. VCH Publishers Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bayindirli L (1994) Mathematical analysis of lye peeling of tomatoes. J Food Eng 23:225–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barreiro J, Caraballo V, Sandoval A (1995) Mathematical model for the chemical peeling of spherical foods. J Food Eng 25:483–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barreiro J, Sandoval A, Rivas D, Rinaldi R (2007) Application of a mathematical model for chemical peeling of peaches (Prunus persica l.) variety Amarillo Jarillo. LWT 40:574–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhaskaracharya R, Kentish S, Ashokkumar M (2009) Selected applications of ultrasonics in food processing. Food Eng Rev 1:31–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown H, Meredith F, Saldama G, Stephens T (2006) Freeze peeling improves the quality of tomatoes. J Food Sci 35(4):485–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chemat F, Huma Z, Khan M (2011) Applications of ultrasound in food technology: processing, preservation and extraction. Ultrason Sonochem 18:813–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Das DJ, Barringer SA (2005) Evaluation of processing tomatoes from two consecutive growing seasons: quality attributes, peelability and yield. J Food Process Preserv 30:20–36Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Das DJ, Barringer SA (2006) Potassium hydroxide replacement for lye (sodium hydroxide) in tomato peeling. J Food Process Preserv 30(1):15–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feng H, Yang W, Hielscher T (2008) Power ultrasound. Food Sci Technol Int 14:433–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feng H, Yang W (2011) Ultrasound processing. In: Zhang HQ, Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Balasubramaniam VM, Dunne CP, Farkas DF, Yuan JTC (eds) Nonthermal processing technologies for food. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford. doi:10.1002/9780470958360.ch10
  12. 12.
    Fellows P (2000) Food processing technology principles and practice, 2nd edn. CRC publishing, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (2011) Major food and agricultural commodities and producers. Accessed 12 Aug 2011
  14. 14.
    Garcia E, Barrett DM (2005) Peelability and yield of processing tomatoes by steam or lye. J. Food Process Preserv 30(1):3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garcia E, Barrett DM (2005) Evaluation of processing tomatoes from two consecutive growing seasons: quality attributes, peelability and yield. J Food Process Preserv 30:20–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garrote R, Silva E, Bertone R (2000) Effect of thermal treatment on steam peeled potatoes. J Food Eng 45:67–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gahler S, Otto K, Bohm V (2003) Alterations of vitamin c, total phenolics, and antioxidant capacity as affected by processing tomatoes to different products. J Agric Food Chem 51:7962–7968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    George B, Kaur C, Khurdiya DS, Kapoor HC (2004) Antioxidants in tomato (Lycopersium esculantum) as a function of genotype. Food Chem 24:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Graziani G, Pernice R, Lanzuise S, Vitaglione P, Anese M, Fogliano V (2003) Effect of peeling and heating on carotenoid content and antioxidant activity of tomato and tomato-virgin olive oil systems. Eur Food Res Technol 216:116–121Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hui Y (2004) Handbook of vegetable preservation and processing. Marcel Dekker Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hui Y (2006) Handbook of food science, technology and engineering, vol 3. CRC publishing, New yorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heuvelink E (2005) Crop production science in horticulture: tomatoes. CABI Publishing, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jones J (1999) Tomato Plant Culture: in the field, green house and home garden. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    JBT Corporation (2011) John bean technologies corporation tomato peeling system. Accessed 13 Aug 2011
  25. 25.
    Kentish S, Ashokkumar M (2011) The physical and chemical effects of ultrasound. In: Feng H, Barbosa G, Weiss J (eds) Ultrasound technologies for food and bioprocessing. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li X, Pan Z, Gokan B, Tara M, Griffith G (2009) Feasibility study of using infrared radiation heating as a sustainable tomato peeling method. University of California Davis, CA, 95616. Paper number: 095689 (American Society of Biological Engineers presentation)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McClements D (1995) Advances in the application of ultrasound in food analysis and processing. Trends Food Sci Technol 6(9):293–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Miller R, Miller R, Anderson E (2004) Audel air conditioning home and commercial, 5th edn. Wiley Publishing Ind, INGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mintz-Oron S, Mandel T, Rogachev L, Feldberg L, Lotan O, Yativ M, Wang Z, Jetter R, Venger I, Adato A, Aharoni A (2008) Gene expression and metabolism in tomato fruit surfaces. Plant Physiol 147:823–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ondra N, Ellis B (1998) Soils and Composting: the complete guide to building a healthy fertile soil. Houghton Mifflin Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Págan A, Conde J, Ibarz A, Págan J (2010) Effluent Content from albedo degradation and Kinetics at different temperatures in the enzymatic peeling of grapefruits. Food Bioprod Process 88:77–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rao MR, Choudhury B (1981) Studies on canning-qualities of tomato. Sci Hortic 14(4):299–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Richardson R (2001) Thermal technologies in food processing. Woodhead Publishing, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rock C, Yang W, Nooji J, Teixeira A, Feng H (2010) Evaluation of Roma tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum) peeling methods: conventional vs. power ultrasound. Proc Florida State Hortic Soc 123:241–245Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shi J, LeMaguer M (2000) Lycopene in tomatoes: chemical and physical properties affected by food processing. Critic Rev Food Sci Nutr 40(1):1–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Smith D (1997) Processing vegetables: science and technology. Technomic Publishing Company Inc, PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Smith J, Hui Y (2004) Food processing: principles and applications. Blackwell, IowaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Toor R, Savage G (2005) Changes in major antioxidant components of tomatoes during post-harvest storage. Food Chem 99(4):724–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Toker I, Bayindirli A (2003) Enzymatic peeling of apricots, nectarines and peaches. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und-Technologie 36(2):215–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    USDA Economic Research Service (2009) Vegetables and melons: tomatoes. Assessed 5 Nov, 2010
  41. 41.
    Walker W (1963) Ultrasonics in production processes. Ultrasonics 1(3):123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wongsa-Ngasri P (2004) Ohmic heating biomaterials: peeling and effects of rotating electric field. Ph.D. Dissertation, Ohio State University, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Yaniga B (2007) Mitigation of the tomato lye peeling process. Masters Thesis. The University of Toledo, Toledo, OhioGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cheryl Rock
    • 1
  • Wade Yang
    • 1
  • Renée Goodrich-Schneider
    • 1
  • Hao Feng
    • 2
  1. 1.Food Science and Human Nutrition DepartmentUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Food Science and Human NutritionUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations