4.7 Article

Industrial Processing Affects Product Yield and Quality of Diced Tomato

期刊

AGRICULTURE-BASEL
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/agriculture11030230

关键词

Solanum lycopersicum L.; round-prismatic fruit genotypes; field and processed production; color; sugars; polyphenols; rutin; naringenin; lycopene

类别

资金

  1. seed company H.M. Clause
  2. seed company Syngenta Italia
  3. seed company United Genetics Italia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The research in Southern Italy evaluated the effects of industrial processing on yield and quality of four tomato hybrids grown organically and aimed at dicing, with MAX 14111 and HMX 4228 showing the highest values. Improved tomato genotypes targeted at dicing show promising results in both field and processing phases.
The tomato industry has been searching for new genotypes with improved fruit production, both in the field and industrially processed, together with high-quality performance under sustainable management conditions. This research was carried out in Southern Italy with the aim of assessing the effects of industrial processing on the yield and quality of four tomato hybrids grown according to organic farming methods and addressed at dicing. MAX 14111 and HMX 4228 showed the highest values of field and processing yield as well as reduced sugars and fructose. MAX 14111 had the highest values of total solids and soluble solids, titratable acidity, fiber, energetic value, polyphenols, and also rutin, though not significantly different from Impact. HMX 4228 performed best in terms of sugar ratio, color and naringenin. Concerning the diced products, the sensorial qualities of the four hybrids differed significantly. Total polyphenols, naringenin and rutin in the tomato fruits were higher in the processed than in the raw product. The appreciable fruit yield and quality resulting from both field and processing phase represent a promising perspective for identifying improved tomato genotypes addressed at dicing.

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