Hygroscopic equilibrium of peanuts

Karon, M. L.; Hillery, Barbara E.

doi:10.1007/bf02634831

Cited by 25 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Peanuts were preconditioned to moisture contents of5, 7, and 8% in rooms maintained at proper conditions to achieve the desired moisture content as described by Karon and Hillery (1949). The time for peanuts to achieve the desired moisture content levels varied from 28 to 35 days.…”

Section: Laboratory Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phosphine and Methyl Bromide Fumigation of Shelled Peanuts1

Leesch¹,

Gillenwater²,

Davis

et al. 1979

Peanut Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In laboratory studies, neither germination nor quality of peanuts was adversely affected by fumigation with phosphine, regardless ofthe dosage or the number of times the peanuts were fumigated. Sorption ofphosphine ranged from 55.3 to 71.1% and was highest for peanuts with 7% moisture content. Residues of phosphine generally increased with dosage and the number of fumigations; however, the highest residue (11.3 ppb) occurred after 3 fumigations at the highest dosage (1.12 mg/liter).Methyl bromide fumigation of peanuts in the laboratory reduced germination and quality in direct proportion to the dosage applied and the number of fumigations. Sorption ranged from 88.8% to 92.9%, was inversely proportional to the dosage, and increased with an increase in moisture content of the peanuts. Also, total bromide residues increased proportionately with the dosage and the number offumigations. Residues of >200 ppm were found on peanuts after 3 fumigations at the highest dosage tested (64 mg/liter), regardless of the moisture content, and after 3 fumigations at 48 mg/liter on peanuts of 7% moisture content.When 900-kg (I-short ton) corrugated paper bulk containers were fumigated with phosphine, the gas that penetrated the containers killed all insects exposed at the center of the peanut mass; there was no effect ofphosphine on the germination or quality of the peanuts, and residues of phosphine were well below the tolerance regardless of the dosage or the number oftimes fumigated. When the containers were fumigated with methyl bromide, the gas that penetrated the containers killed all insects exposed in the center of the mass only at the highest dosage tested (64 mg/liter); germination was reduced, quality decreased with successive fumigations, and residues increased in proportion to the dosage and the number of times fumigated. Unlike the laboratory test, bromide residues exceeded 200 ppm only after 3 fumigations at the highest dosage tested.

show abstract

Section: Laboratory Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phosphine and Methyl Bromide Fumigation of Shelled Peanuts1

Leesch¹,

Gillenwater²,

Davis

et al. 1979

Peanut Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Blue lupine seeds seem to attain equilibrium with humidity of the air more slowly than do many other seeds and grains for which results have been reported (4,9,10,11,12,15). This slower rate of absorption of moisture in the vapor phase is coupled, however, with a higher total uptake than is found in many other seeds.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…These seeds showed a slight mold growth, and their relatively high moisture content was no doubt partly attributable to a decrease in seed dry matter due to fungal metabolism or to moisture held by the fungus mycelium itself. Workers using other seeds (4,9,10,11,12,15) figure 2 (B, C) was designed to show the differences between the 6-week and 8-week storage periods in effects on seed-air moisture exchanges throughout the relative humidity range. From the preliminary studies and from these data, it was concluded that naturally dried blue lupine seed apparently requires seven to eight weeks to attain equilibrium with air of high and low relative humidities but not more than six weeks with air of intermediate humidities.…”

Section: Brewer and Butt: Blue Lupine Seedsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fluctuating humidity has been shown by BARTON (2) to be more harmful than constant humidity of comparable value in its effects on viabilities of certain seeds. McKEE and MusnL (13) also showed that blue lupine seeds take up more than twice as much water from a nearly saturated atmosphere at 350 C as at 200 C. These results are contrasted with those of KARON PLANT PHYSIOLOGY and HILERY (11) who report that the moisture in peanuts was little affected by increasing the temperature from 250 C to 350 C. They confirm numerous observations by growers and seedsmen that blue lupine seeds fluctuate greatly in moisture content during storage, which helps to explain the frequent decline in viability with subsequent heavy losses to some seed growers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hygroscopic Equilibrium and Viability of Naturally and Artificially Dried Blue Lupine Seeds

Brewer¹,

Butt²

1950

Plant Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The blue lupine (Lupinus angustifolius L.) is grown widely in the southeastern states as a winter cover and green manure crop because it yields more green matter and more harvestable seed per acre than do other soil-protecting and soil-building plants used in this region. Several problems in the production of viable blue lupine seed stock, however, have prevented the broad acceptance which this plant merits. Among these are: (1) the mechanical injury to some seeds inevitably resulting from the practice of threshing the crop from immature pods to avoid dehiscent seed losses in the field; (2) the practical difficulty of providing cool, dry storage facilities during the usually hot, humid summer storage period; and (3) the marked decline in germinability which often occurs even under apparently favorable storage conditions (7). Artificial drying and recleaning of seeds at time of harvest have reduced seed losses materially, but the shortage of seeddrying facilities and the necessity for empirical drying methods have delayed the full use of artificial curing potentialities.Blue lupine seeds mechanically dried to about 10% moisture can be safely stored at somewhat higher temperatures and humidities than can most naturally dried lupine seeds. This may be due to drying effects on seed coat permeability or on hygroscopicity of seed colloids. It is more probable, however, that most field-cured seeds are not dried to a safe storage moisture content (12% or less) and may contain even as much as 18% inoisture (13) when apparently dry enough to store.Little work on the physiology of the blue lupine seed has been reported. It often has been noted that the seed is unusually hydrophilic. Blue All of the laboratory hygroscopic equilibrium tests were run in sealed glass containers. In most cases, the seeds were suspended over the humidity control liquid in shallow screenwire baskets to permit greatest possible exposure of the seeds to the moisture of the air. In the 8-weeks storage test using sulphuric acid solutions as the humidifying agent, the seeds were simi larly suspended in wide-mouth shallow glass vials. The humidity control chambers were not opened throughout the period of storage, except for.those in the studies of moisture equilibria of artificially dried seeds. With these latter tests, it was desired to follow the moisture uptake at regular intervals, and the containers were opened weekly to permit weighings of the seeds. BREWER AND BUTT: BLUE LUPINE SEEDSMoisture percentages of these seeds at the 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-week intervals were calculated from determinations of relative increases in weight of the seeds, based on the assumption that the experimental seeds had the same initial moisture content as seed of the same original source on which moisture percentages had been determined by oven-drying. The BREWER AND BUTT: BLUE LUPINE SEEDSthat can be shown for lupine seeds by use of other methods. The moisture percentage of 37.3% for seeds held at 100%o relative humidity is somewhat higher than has been found with...

show abstract

“…5. Experimental data for water sorption in rice at different temperatures (°C) (a) Abdullah et al (2000), Banaszek and Siebenmorgen (1990), Breese (1955), Juliano (1964), Putranon et al (1979), Rangaswamy (1973) and desorption (b) Bakharev (1960), Breese (1955), Coleman and Fellows (1925), Hogan and Karon (1955), Houston (1952), Humphries and Hurst (1935), Juliano (1964), Kachru and Matthes (1976), Kameoka et al (1988), Karel et al (1955), Karon and Adams (1949), Putranon et al (1979), Rangaswamy (1973), Vemuganti (1980), and Zuritz et al (1979).…”

Section: Rice and Potatoesmentioning

confidence: 97%