Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of variety on the quality of tomato stored under ambient conditions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Food Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three processing and six fresh market tomato varieties harvested at “mature green” stage were evaluated for changes in quality. The total soluble solid, titratable acidity, sugar-acid ratio, pH, ascorbic acid content, colour and firmness were assessed. The storage room air temperature and relative humidity varied from 15.4○C to 16.2○C and 34.8% to 52.4%, respectively. At harvest, Marglobe Improved had better chemical quality characteristics compared with the other five fresh market varieties while towards the end of the storage period, chemical quality characteristics were maintained better in Fetane. The highest pH and sugar/acid ratio were obtained in Metadel compared with all other varieties throughout the storage period. Among the processing tomato variety, Roma VF had better chemical quality than other two processing varieties. Melkashola had the highest total soluble solid content in the group. Although the processing varieties ripened earlier than fresh market ones, they were notably firmer with better quality. The processing types were better in their chemical quality than fresh market genotypes. The fresh table tomato varieties had higher sugar-acid ratio and vitamin C. Marglobe Improved and Metadel could be selected in favor of higher nutritional quality whereas Fetane could be considered for maintenance of better overall quality characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AOAC (1990) Official methods of analysis the 15th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourne MC (1977) Postharvest food losses—the neglected dimension in increasing the world food supply. Cornell Univ Int Agric Mimeogr 53:20–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Brecht JK, Bisogni L, Mungek HM (1976) Effect of fruit position, stage of ripeness and growth habit on chemical composition of fresh tomatoes. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 41:945–948

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell AD, Huysamer M, Statz HU, Greve LC, Labavitch JM (1990) Comparison of ripening processes in intact tomato fruit and excised pericarp disc. Plant Physiol 94:1582–1589

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Castro LR, Vigneault C, Charles MT, Cortez LA (2005) Effect of cooling delay and cold-chain breakage on ‘Santa Clara’ tomato. J Food Agric Environ 3:49–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer MD, Oberholzer JA, Combrink NJ (2001) The effect of supplementation of root zone dissolved inorganic carbon on fruit yield and quality of tomatoes (cv ‘Daniela’) grown with salinity. Sci Hort 89:269–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalal KB, Salunkhe DK, Boe AA, Olson LE (1965) Certain physiological and biochemical changes in the developing tomato fruit. J Food Sci 30:504–508

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davies JN, Hobson GE (1971) In: Hulme AC (ed) The biochemistry of fruit and their products. The tomato, vol. 2. Acad, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies J, Hobson GE (1981) The constituents of tomato fruit—the influence of environment, nutrition and genotype. CRC Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 15(3):205–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Emery GC, Munger HM (1970) Effects of inherited differences in growth habit on fruit size and soluble solids in tomato. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 95:410–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Eskin NAM (2000) Quality and preservation of vegetables. CRC press, Inc, Boca Raton, Florida 33451:53–67

  • FAO (1979) Recommended practices for the prevention of mycotoxins in food, feed, and their products. Food Agric Organ UN Rome Italy 51:35–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia E, Barrett DM (2006) Evaluation of processing tomatoes from two consecutive growing seasons: quality attributes peelability and yield. J Food Proces Preserv 30:20–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George B, Kaur C, Khurdiya DS, Kapoor HC (2004) Antioxidants in tomato (Lycopersium esculentum Mill.) as a function of genotype. Food Chem 84:45–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Getinet H, Seyoum TW, Woldetsadik K (2008) The effect of cultivar, maturity stage and storage environment on quality of tomatoes. J Food Eng 87(4):467–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giordano I, Lahoz E, Amato AD, Pentangelo A, Sozzi A (1994) Varieties choice of processing tomato in Southern Italy. Acta Hort 376:117–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Giovanelli G, Lavelli V, Peri C, Nobili S (1999) Variation in ripening. J Sci Food Agric 79:1583–1588

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Giovannucci E (1999) Tomatoes, tomato-based products, lycopene and cancer—review of the epidemiologic literature. J Nat Cancer Inst 91(4):317–331

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hardenburg RE, AE Warada, CV Wang (1986) The commercial storage of fruits, vegetables, florist and nursery stocks, agriculture. Handbook No 66, USDA Washington DC

  • Kundan K, Pathak KA, Rohit S, Rinku B (2011) Effect of storage temperature on physico-chemical and sensory attributes of purple passion fruit (Passiflora edulis Sims). J Food Sci Technol. doi:10.1007/s13197-010-0189-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambeth VN, Stratenand EF, Fields ML (1966) Fruit quality attributes of 250 foreign and domestic tomato accessions. Ree Bull Mon Agric Exp Sta Univ Mossuri No. 908

  • Lana MM, Tijskens LMM, Van Kooten O (2005) Effects of storage temperature and fruit ripening on firmness of fresh cut tomatoes. The Netherands. Posth Biol Technol 35:87–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langlois D, Etievant PX, Pierron P, Jorrot A (1996) Sensory and instrumental characterization of commercial tomato varieties. Z Lebensm Unters Forsch 203:534–540

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leonardi C, Ambrosino P, Esposito F, Fogliano V (2000) Antioxidant activity and carotenoid and tomatine contents in different typologies of fresh consumption tomatoes. J Agric Food Chem 48:4723–4727

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lurie S, Klein J (1990) Heat treatment on ripening apples: differential affect on physiology and biochemistry. Plant Physiol 78:181–186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed M, Wilson LA, Gomes PL (1999) Postharvest sensory and physiochemical attributes of processing and non-processing tomato cultivar. J Food Qual 22:167–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moraru C, Logendra L, Lee T, Janes H (2004) Characteristics of 10 processing tomato cultivars grown hydroponically for the NASA advanced life support (ALS) program. USA. J Food Compos Anal 17:141–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nath A, Bidyut CD, Akath S, Patel RK, Paul D, Misra LK, Ojha H (2011) Extension of shelf life of pear fruits using different packaging materials. J Food Sci Technol. doi:10.1007/s13197-011-0305-4

    Google Scholar 

  • Pairin H, Edgar C IV (2008) A Lexicon for texture and flavor characteristics of fresh and processed tomatoes. J Sens Stud 23(5):583–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulson K, Stevens MA (1974) Relationships among titratable acidity, pH and buffer composition of tomato fruits. J Food Sci 39:254–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramakrishnan K, Narayanan P, Vasudevan V, Muthukumaran G, Antony U (2010) Nutrient composition of cultivated stevia leaves and the infl uence of polyphenols and plant pigments on sensory and antioxidant properties of leaf extracts. J Food Sci Technol 47(1):27–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez A, Leoni S, Bussieres P, Dadomo M, Christou M, Macua IJ, Cornillon P (1994) The influence of water and nitrogen levels on the quality of the processing tomato grown in the European Union countries. Acta Hort 376:275–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahlin E, Savage GP, Lister CE (2004) Investigation of the antioxi­dant properties of tomatoes after processing. J Food Comp Anal 17:635–647

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salunkhe DK, Jadhav SJ, Yu MH (1974) Quality and nutritional composition of tomato fruit as influenced by certain biochemical and physiological changes. Qualitasplantarum 24:85–113

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salunkhe DK, Bolin HR, Reddy NR (1991) Storage, processing, and nutritional quality of fruits and vegetables, 2nd edition. Fresh fruits and vegetables. library of congress cataloging-in-data. CRC Press Boca Raton Floride USA

  • Seyoum TW, Osthoff G, Steyn MS, Engelbrecht GM, Pretorius JC (2009) The effect of preharvest treatment, disinfection and storage environment on quality of carrots. J Food Pereser Process. doi:10.1111/j.1745-4549.00468.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens MA (1972) Relationships between components contributing to quality variation among tomato lines. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 97:70–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan CS (2006) Storage conditions for fresh fruit and vegetables. Farmnote No 28/88. Department of Agriculture and Food WA

  • Taylor IB (1986) Biosystematics of the tomato. In: Atherton IG, Rudich J (eds) The tomato crop: A scientific basis for improvement. Chapman and Hill, New York, pp 1–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Tefera A, Seyoum TW, Woldetsadik K (2007) Effect of disinfection, packaging, and storage environment on the shelf life of mango. J Bio Syst Eng 96(2):1537–1550

    Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell P, Degrazia J, Chiesa A (2001) Effect of nitrogen fertilization and plant population during growth on lettuce (lactuca sativa L.) postharvest quality. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Postharvest Science. Acta Hort 553(1):67–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Toor RK, Savage GP (2006) Changes in major antioxidant components of tomatoes during post-harvest storage. J Food Chem 99:724–727

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vijay P, Rakesh P, Girish CS (2010a) Ripening of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Part I: 1-methylcyclopropene mediated delay at higher storage temperature. J Food Sci Technol 47(5):519–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vijay P, Rakesh P, Girish CS (2010b) Ripening of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Part II: Regulation by its stem scar region. J Food Sci Technol 47(5):527–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waskar DP, Khedlar RM, Garande VK (1999) Effect of post harvest treatment on shelf life and quality of pomegranate in evaporative cooling chamber and ambient conditions. J Food Sci Technol 2:114–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Watada AE, Aulenbach BB, Worthington JK (1976) Vitamin A and C in ripe tomatoes as affected by stage of ripeness at harvest and supplementary ethylene. J Food Sci 41:856–858

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Willcox JK, Catignani GL, Lazarus S (2003) Tomatoes and cardiovascular health. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 43:1–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Young TE, Juvik JA, Sullivan JG (1993) Accumulation of the components of total solids in ripening fruits of tomato. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 118:286–292

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Bioresources Engineering and Environmental Hydrology, Faculty of Engineering, University of Kwa-Zulu Natal, Private Bag X0l, Pietermaritzburg, Scottsville, 3209, South Africa

    M. Tigist, Tilahun Seyoum Workneh & Kebede Woldetsadik

Authors
  1. M. Tigist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tilahun Seyoum Workneh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kebede Woldetsadik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tilahun Seyoum Workneh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tigist, M., Workneh, T.S. & Woldetsadik, K. Effects of variety on the quality of tomato stored under ambient conditions. J Food Sci Technol 50, 477–486 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0378-0

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0378-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation