Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
ASPTA Baner

Vol. 12 No. 1-2 (2013)

Artykuły

The textural properties changes of selected pears varietes due to storage

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24326/aspta.2013.1-2.1
Submitted: October 8, 2020
Published: 2013-06-30

Abstract

The aim of this work was to evaluate textural properties of selected pear varieties before and after an eight-week in refrigerator storage. This work included describing of firmness, hardness, cohesiveness of flesh and force at skin puncture as well as spectrum of these properties changes after storage period. It was proved that during the storage period occurs a statistically significant decrease of parameters, excluding flesh cohesiveness, characterizing texture of examined pear varieties. The range of this changes is different for individual parameters and depends on pear varieties properties. Before and after storage Lukasówka variety had the highest flesh firmness and hardness, the work of penetration and force at skin puncture while the lowest parameter of analyzed values had Generał variety.

References

  1. Bourne M.C., 2002. Food texture and viscosity. Academic Press, New York, 416.
  2. De Belie N., Hallett I.C., Harker R., De Baerdemaeker J., 2000. Influence of ripening and turgor on the tensile properties of pears: a microscopic study of cellular and tissue changes. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 125(3), 350–356.
  3. DeEll J.R., Slingerland K., 2012. Recommendation for harvest and storage of pears. FactSheet, Order 12-041, 1–8. http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/12-041.htm
  4. Eccher Zerbini P., 2002. The quality of pear fruit. Acta Hort. 596, 805–810.
  5. Harker F.R., Redgwell R.J., Hallet I.C., Murray S.H., 1997. Texture of fresh fruits. Hort. Rev. 20, 121–224.
  6. Hoehn E., Gasser F., Guggenbühl B., Künsch U., 2003. Efficacy of instrumental measurements for determination of minimum requirements of firmness, soluble solids, and acidity of varieties in comparison to consumer expectations. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 27, 27–37. http://www.sadinfo.pl/artykuly-2011/12011/152-jakich-jablek-i-gruszek-szukaja-polacy.html
  7. Johnson D.S., Luton M.T., 1996. Maturity indices to predict optimum harvest date for the storage of Conference pears in the UK. In: Determination and prediction of optimum harvest date of apples and pears. COST 94: The postharvest treatment of fruit and vegetables, de Jager A., Johnson D., Hoehn E. (eds), 133–147.
  8. Lange E., Ostrowski W., 1992. Przechowalnictwo owoców. PWRiL, Warszawa, 301.
  9. Ma S.S., Chen P.M., 2003. Storage disorder and ripening behaviour of ‘Doyenne du Comice’ pears in relation to storage conditions. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 28, 281–294.
  10. Makosz E., 2011. Wielkość zbiorów, potrzeby i opłacalność produkcji jabłek, gruszek, wiśni i czereśni. XXXI Międzynarodowe Seminarium Sadownicze, Tow. Rozwoju Sadów Karłowych, Limanowa 4–5 marca.
  11. Nadulski R., Wróblewska-Barwińska K., Strzałkowska K., 2012. Doświadczalna charakterystyka właściwości teksturalnych wybranych odmian gruszek. Inżynieria Roln. 3(138), 165–173.
  12. Paull R.E., 1999. Effect of temperature and relative humidity on fresh commodity quality. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 15, 263–277.
  13. Pawłowicz B., 2001. Kontrolowana atmosfera, sposób na jakość jabłek. Chłodnictwo 4, 38–42.
  14. Recommendations of an EEC Working Group., 1985. Measurement of the quality of apples. Luxemburg, Office of Official Publications of the European Communites, Catalouge number: CD-NK-85-006-EN-C.
  15. Richardson D.G., Kupferman E., 1997. Controlled atmosphere storage of pears. Postharvest Horticulture. In Proc. Seventh International Controlled Atmosphere Research Conference, Vol. 2, Davis: Univ. Calif. Postharv. Hort. Ser. 31–35.
  16. Rozporządzenia Komisji (WE) Nr 1619/2001 z dnia 6 sierpnia 2001 r. – Jabłka i gruszki.
  17. Rozporządzenie Komisji (WE) nr 46/2003 – zmiany do Rozporządzenia Komisji (WE) Nr 1619/2001 z dnia 6 sierpnia 2001 r. – Jabłka i gruszki.
  18. Skrzyński J., 1999. Wpływ warunków KA i ULO na zachowanie jakości przechowywanych jabłek odmiany Jonagold i Rubin. Zesz. Nauk. AR im. H. Kołłątaja w Krakowie, 351(66), 251–257.
  19. StatSoft, Inc. 2003. STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 6. www.statsoft.com.
  20. Surmacka-Szczesniak A., 2002. Texture is a sensory property. Food Qual. Prefer. 13, 215–225.
  21. Wang J., 2003. Anisotropic relaxation properties of pear. Biosys. Eng. 85(1), 59–63.
  22. Wawrzyńczak A., Rutkowski K.P., Kruczyńska D.E., 2008. Jakość owoców wybranych odmian gruszy w zależności od temperatury przechowywania. Zesz. Nauk. Inst. Sadow. Kwiac. 16, 153–162.
  23. Wawrzyńczak A., Rutkowski K.P., Kruczyńska D.E., 2006. Changes in fruit quality in pears during CA storage. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res. 14 (suppl. 2), 77–84.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.