Abstract
In the intensive tomato production under covers, the soilless cultivation dominates. The objective of this study was to assess some quality traits of cherry tomato and middle fruit size tomato, concerning their chemical composition and sensory attributes as well as their correlation to growing medium and harvest time. Cherry tomato (Dasher F1 and Organza F1) and middle fruit size tomato (Admiro F1 and DRW 7594 F1) cultivars were grown in the years 2008–2009 in the greenhouse with controlled climate and drip fertilizing system, in three different growing media. Organic media – coconut fiber and wood fiber were compared to rockwool, commonly used as a standard horticultural medium. The quality traits that mostly differentiated tomato fruits were the cultivar, harvest time and to the lesser degree the medium quality. Tomatoes harvested in July had a higher sugar content and received a higher sensory evaluation than those harvested in September.
The sugars to acids ratio was the highest in fruits grown on coconut fiber. These fruits also obtained higher notes of particular determinants of sensory analysis, especially tomato flavor. The highest quality in respect to the content of the investigated chemical components and sensory evaluation was observed in fruits of Dasher F1 and Admiro F1 cultivars. A significant correlation between the content of chemical quality attributes of tomato fruit with such determinants of sensory evaluation as skin firmness, tomato and sweet taste was revealed. Sugar in fruits was positively correlated with the overall tomato assessment. Firmness and sweet taste were significantly correlated with organic acids and soluble solids contents.
References
Arena E., Fallico C.M., Lanza E., Lombardo E., Maccarone E., 2003. Chemical characterization of cherry tomato cultivated on different substrates. Proc. 6th IS on Protected Cult. Acta Hort., 614, 705–709.
Auerswald H., Schwarz D., Kornelson C., Krumbein A., Brückner B., 1999. Sensory analysis, sugar and acid content of tomato at different EC values of the nutrient solution. Sci. Hortic., 82, 227–242.
Fanasca S., Martino A., Heuvelink E., Stanghellini C., 2007. Effect of electrical conductivity, fruit pruning, and truss position on quality in greenhouse tomato fruit. J. Hort. Sci. Biotechnol. 82, 488–494.
Gajc-Wolska J., Skąpski H., Szymczak J.A., 2000. Chemical and sensory characteristic of the fruits of eight cultivars of field grown tomato. Eucarpia Tomato’2000, XIV Meeting of the Eucarpia Tomato Working Group. Warsaw, August 20–24. Acta Physiol. Plant., 3, 369–373.
Gäredal L., Lundegärdh B., 1997. A test system with limited beds for evaluation of growing methods, applied to ecologically cultivated greenhouse tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Biol. Agric. Hortic., 14, 291–301.
Gundersen V., McCall D., Bechmann I.E., 2001. Comparison of major and trace element concentrations in Danish greenhouse tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum cv Aromata F1) cultivated in different substrates. J. Agric. Food Chem. 49, 3808–3815.
Gruda, N. and W.H. Schnitzler, 2004. Suitability of wood fiber substrates for production of vegetable transplants. II. The effect of wood fiber substrates and their volume weights on the growth of tomato transplants. Sci. Hortic., 100, 333–340. DOI:10.1016/j.scienta.2003.09.004
Haglund A., Johansson L., Gäredal L., Dlouhy J., 1997. Sensory quality of tomatoes cultivated with ecological fertilizing systems. Swedish J. of Agric. Res., 27, 135–145.
Halmann E., Kobryń J., 2003. Yield and quality of cherry tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum var. cerasiforme) cultivated on rockwool and cocofibre. Proc. 6th IS on Protected Cult. Acta Hort., 614, 693–697.
Hernández Suárez M., Rodríguez Rodríguez E., Díaz Romero C., 2007. Mineral and trace element concentrations in cultivars of tomatoes. Food Chem., 104 (2), 489–499.
DOI:10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.11.072.
Hernández Suárez M., Rodríguez Rodríguez E., Díaz Romero C., 2008.Chemical composition of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) from tenerife, the Canary Islands. Food Chem., 106, 1046–1056. DOI:10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.07.025.
Hobson G.E., Bedford L., 1989. The composition of cherry tomatoes and its relation to consumer acceptability. J. Hortic. Sci. 64, 321–329.
Jensen M.H., 1999. Hydroponic worldwide. Acta Hortic., 481, 819–729.
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.
Magkos F., Arvaniti F., Zampelas A., 2003. Organic food: nutritious food or food for thought? A review of the evidence. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutur. 54, 357–371.
Thybo A.K., Bechmann I.E., Brandt K., 2005. Integration of sensory and objective measurements of tomato quality: Quantitative assessment of the effect of harvest data as compared with growth medium (soil vesus rockwool), EC, variety, and maturity. J. Sci. Food Agric., 85, 2289–2296.
Thybo A.K., Edelenbos M., Christensen L.P., Sorensen J.N., Thorup-Kristensen K., 2006. Effect of organic growing systems on sensory quality and chemical composition of tomatoes. LWT 39, 835–843. DOI:10.1016/j.lwt.2005.09.010.
Toor R.K., Savage G.P., 2005. Antioxidant activity in different fraction of tomatoes. Food Rese. Int. 38, 487–494. DOI:10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.08.049.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
