EFFECT OF SURFACE COATING AND FILM PACKAGING ON THE KEEPING QUALITY OF SOLANACEOUS CROPS (Solanum muricatum Ait., Solanum quitoense Lam.)

Huyskens-Keil, Susanne; Prono-Widayat, H.; Schreiner, Monika; Peters, Peter J.

doi:10.17660/actahortic.2001.553.150

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the main problems of pepino fruit is its low organoleptic quality, which does not meet consumer standards as a result of poor handling and inadequate storage treatments (Huyskens-Keil et al, 2001;Rodríguez-Burruezo et al, 2011). Very few studies report harvest indices.…”

Section: Pepino Cropmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies that have involved storage technologies, such as film packaging, CA, and modified atmosphere (MA), have found that changes in gas concentrations improve pepino fruit storability and quality as in the case of other fruits (Kader, 2002). Huyskens-Keil et al (2001) studied the performance of edible coating (sucrose ester) and film packaging (plastic food container) on pepino fruits stored at 5 and 20°C. Although both postharvest treatments were successful, the film treatment had better effects on mass loss, prevented undesirable color changes and softening.…”

Section: Postharvest Handling and Physiological Disordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review of Pepino (Solanum muricatum Aiton) Fruit: A Quality Perspective

Contreras

González-Agüero

Defilippi

2016

horts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many attempts have been made to introduce pepinos in several countries. These efforts have involved breeding programs designed to adapt pepino plants to the respective climates and consumer preferences. However, low yields and the relatively small amount of information on the crop have played a negative role for the expansion of the pepino. Information on other features of the fruit (e.g., quality, physiology, and sensory attributes) is also scarce. Only a few studies provide useful data on pepino handling and storage potential; hence, there is not an adequate postharvest strategy to store this species. The objective of this review is to provide and discuss the available literature, with an emphasis on postharvest physiology aspects, and present 1) breeding for quality and how this has led to the development of the cultivars known today, 2) fruit physiology and quality, 3) handling and physiological disorders of pepino, and 4) highlight challenges for future research.

show abstract

Section: Pepino Cropmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Postharvest Handling and Physiological Disordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Pepino (Solanum muricatum Aiton) Fruit: A Quality Perspective

Contreras

González-Agüero

Defilippi

2016

horts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…fruit with 8% soluble solid content is considered too low sugar content by the European market) (Kola et al, 2015). In addition, other reasons were the poor handling and inadequate storage treatments (Huyskens-Keil et al, 2001;Rodríguez-Burruezo et al, 2011). Whereas in New Zealand main reasons included poor fruit set due to pollen longevity and viability (Morley-Bunker, 1983), which led to low yields of the pepino production.…”

Section: Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, little is known about other aspects of the fruit such as ripening behavior, and physiological and quality characteristics of pepino, leading to a poor selection and handling. As a result, pepino has been perceived with a low organoleptic fruit quality, which does not meet the consumer standards hindering the interest from the fruit industry and a potential opening to the export market (Lizana and Levano, 1977;Huyskens-Keil et al, 2001;Rodríguez-Burruezo et al, 2011).…”

Section: Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of physiological and quality parameters during development and ripening of pepino (Solanum muricatum Aiton) fruit

Contreras

Schwab

Mayershofer

et al. 2019

Chil. j. agric. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pepino (Solanum muricatum Aiton) fruit served as an important crop in Pre-Columbian Andean cultures. Despite the fact that pepino has been known for centuries, information about maturity indices and physiological quality parameters of its fruit is scarce. The objective was to increase our knowledge of pepino fruit physiology and maturity to improve fruit handling and storage. Pepino fruit were studied during 2015 and 2016 seasons. During 2015, developmental and maturity studies were carried out, whereas in 2016 the developmental study was repeated. Twenty-five fruit were analyzed during six developmental stages ranging from immature (stage 1) to senescent fruit (stage 6). Fruit were analyzed for soluble solid content (SSC), titratable acidity (TA), color, respiration and ethylene production, soluble sugars, organic acids, and aroma. For the maturity assay, nonsignificant differences were found between green background color (M1) and white background color (M2) in the different quality parameters, with the exception of firmness. Pepino is a non-climacteric fruit with a low ethylene production rate. Unlike foreign cultivars, Chilean pepinos have low amounts of citric acid, being the predominant acids: malic and quinic. Out of 22 volatile compounds identified in this study, the predominant aroma volatiles are 3-methyl-3-butenyl acetate and 3-methyl-2-butenyl acetate from the terpenoid pathway, and trans-2-hexenal from the lipoxygenase pathway. The quality parameters changing in a ripening-dependent manner were firmness, SSC, aroma and color. Other parameters such as TA and organic acids stayed constant throughout development. In addition to color and SSC, this study also suggests aroma as a harvest index.

show abstract

“…El lulo es considerado un frutal importante en Colombia y promisorio para la exportación a mercados internacionales, debido a su alto valor nutricional, sabor y apariencia (Huyskens-Keil et al, 2001;Tamayo et al, 2001). En Colombia, para el año 2013, se reportó un área de producción de aproximadamente 7.327 ha, con una producción de 68.748 t y un rendimiento de 9,4 t ha -1 (Agronet, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified