4.7 Article

Sensory and analytical characteristics of a novel hybrid muskmelon fruit intended for the fresh-cut industry

期刊

POSTHARVEST BIOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 51, 期 3, 页码 327-333

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2008.09.008

关键词

Cucumis melo; Aromatic volatiles; Ascorbic acid; beta-Carotene; Firmness; Quality; Surface color; Soluble solids content

资金

  1. USDA-Agricultural Research Service [1275-43440-001-00D, 6204-43000-014-00D]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel hybrid muskmelon has been bred specifically for use by the fresh-cut industry in winter. Quality characteristics of fresh-cut pieces from the hybrid were compared to those of its inbred parental lines and to those of a commercial netted muskmelon (cantaloupe) and a non-netted muskmelon (honeydew) fruit available in winter. Pieces from hybrid and female line fruit had higher soluble solids content (SSC) and firmness, and lower aromatic volatile concentrations compared to those from the male line fruit. Pieces from hybrid fruit also had higher SSC (>3%) and were firmer (>5 N) than commercial fruit available during the winter, and had twice the aromatic volatile concentration of commercial honeydew and a more intense orange hue than commercial muskmelon, Consumers rated the flavor, texture, sweetness and overall eating quality of the hybrid higher than its inbred parents and winter-available honeydew and as well as or better than winter-available muskmelon. Hybrid fruit stored 5 weeks at 1 C under modified atmospheric conditions, then fresh-cut and stored 14 din air at 5 C maintained good quality (firmness m 51 N, SSC > 12%, beta-carotene and ascorbic acid concentrations = 18 and 182 mg kg(-1), respectively), and showed no signs of tissue translucency or surface pitting despite microbial populations >11 log(10) kg(-1). The results indicate that the novel hybrid muskmelon is a promising new melon type for fresh-cut processing and marketing, at least during the winter season. Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据