4.7 Article

Effect of prolonged cold storage on the sensory quality of peach and nectarine

Journal

POSTHARVEST BIOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 95, Issue -, Pages 7-12

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2014.03.001

Keywords

Compression strength; Cold storage; Sensory quality; Durofel

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To maintain peach and nectarine quality after harvest, low temperature storage is used. Low temperatures induce physiological disorders in peach, but the effect of cold storage on the sensory quality of the fruit before it is damaged by chilling injury syndrome remains unclear. To evaluate the cold storage effect on the sensory quality two peach cultivars ('Royal Glory' and 'Elegant Lady') and two nectarines ('Ruby Diamond' and 'Venus') were harvested at a standardized firmness level and subjected to quality evaluations and sensory analysis at harvest and after storage at 0 C for 35 d. For both time points, a supplementary ripening followed such that homogeneous flesh firmness and suitability for consumption was achieved. The fruit segregation through the Durofel firmness (DF), evaluated using a non-destructively method (Durofel device), allowed the formation of a uniform group of fruit in terms of flesh firmness (FF), showing scores between 45.1 and 55.9 N. The average FF in fruit ripened immediately after harvest was 22.9 N and 25.6 N in fruit ripened after cold storage for 35 d. The acceptability of fruit is highly correlated with aroma, sweetness, juiciness, texture and flavor. Only the acid taste parameter had no significant correlation with acceptability or with the other parameters evaluated. It is possible to conclude that the sensory quality and acceptability of peach and nectarine are characteristic of each cultivar and change, depending on the time elapsed after harvest. In general, it was confirmed that nectarine cultivars have a more consistent quality than peach cultivars. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available