Ripening Recovery and Sensory Quality of Pink Tomatoes Stored in Controlled Atmosphere at Chilling or Nonchilling Temperatures to Extend Shelf Life

in HortScience

Harvesting before ripening initiation (i.e., mature green) may negatively affect the flavor of fresh tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum) even though the ripening process off the vine is physiologically the same as that on the plant. Low temperature storage at or below the putative chilling injury (CI) threshold can also have detrimental effects on fresh tomato flavor regardless of the developmental stage of the fruit at harvest, but sensitivity to CI declines with ripening. Controlled atmospheres (CA) using reduced oxygen and elevated carbon dioxide partial pressures can extend the shelf life (SL) of tomatoes while possibly minimizing the negative effects of low temperatures. In this study, we explored the possibility that a combination of temperature and CA could be used to achieve similar SL for pink-harvested tomatoes as has been found in other studies with green-harvested fruit while avoiding the negative effects of CI on sensory quality. Consumer panels were given samples of pink-harvested tomatoes after they had reached the red ripeness stage in terms of surface hue following storage for 7 days in air or CA at 7.5, 15, or 20 °C followed by 2–7 days ripening in air at 20 °C. Exposing pink tomatoes to 7.5 °C before ripening to the full-red stage at 20 °C negatively affected fruit sensory quality, holding fruit constantly at 20 °C until they reached the full-red stage resulted in better quality for one taste panel, whereas there was no difference in another taste panel. The time to reach the full-red stage was extended by CA. Sensory quality of air- and CA-stored fruit was similar at the nonchilling temperatures of 15 and 20 °C. Pink stage tomato fruit stored in CA at 7.5 °C for 7 days did not attain full red color within the subsequent 7 days in air at 20 °C.

Contributor Notes

This research was supported by Specialty Crops Research Initiative Grant 2009-51181-05783 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

The paper is a portion of a doctoral dissertation submitted by Angelos I. Deltsidis in fulfilling the University of Florida degree requirement.

Current address: International Postharvest Specialist, Department of Plant Sciences, University of California Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616.

Corresponding author. E-mail:

Article Sections

Article Figures

  • View in gallery

    Tomato wedges in sealed plastic cups being filled and labeled for the taste panel (photo courtesy of author).

Article References

AuerswaldH.1999Sensory analysis and instrumental measurements of short-term stored tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)Postharvest Biol. Technol.15323334

AutioW.R.BramlageW.J.1986Chilling sensitivity of tomato fruit in relation to ripening and senescenceJ. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.111201204

BabithaK.C.2006Physiological basis of extending postharvest shelf life in tomato. Univ. Agr. Sci. Dharwad

BaiJ.BaldwinE.A.ImahoriY.KostenyukI.BurnsJ.BrechtJ.K.2011Chilling and heating may regulate C6 volatile aroma production by different mechanisms in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) fruitPostharvest Biol. Technol.60111120

BaldwinE.A.ScottJ.W.ShewmakerC.K.SchuchW.2000Flavor trivia and tomato aroma: Biochemistry and possible mechanisms for control of important aroma componentsHortScience3510131022

BartoshukL.M.DuffyV.B.FastK.GreenB.G.PrutkinJ.SnyderD.J.2003Labeled scales (e.g., category, Likert, VAS) and invalid across-group comparisons: What we have learned from genetic variation in tasteFood Qual. Prefer.14125138

BartoshukL.M.DuffyV.B.GreenB.G.HoffmanH.J.KoC.W.LucchinaL.A.MarksL.E.SnyderD.J.WeiffenbachJ.M.2004Valid across-group comparisons with labeled scales: The gLMS versus magnitude matchingPhysiol. Behav.82109114

BartoshukL.M.FastK.SnyderD.J.SnyderJ.2011Differences in our sensory worlds: Invalid comparisons with labeled scales differences invalid comparisons in our with sensory labeled scalesPsychol. Sci.14122125

CarrariF.FernieA.R.2006Metabolic regulation underlying tomato fruit developmentJ. Expt. Bot.5718831897

ChomchalowS.El AssiN.M.SargentS.A.BrechtJ.K.2002Fruit maturity and timing of ethylene treatment affect storage performance of green tomatoes at chilling and nonchilling temperaturesHortTechnology12104114

DeltsidisA.I.PliakoniE.D.BaldwinE.A.BaiJ.PlottoA.BrechtJ.K.2015Tomato flavor changes at chilling and non-chilling temperatures as influenced by controlled atmospheresActa Hort.1071703710

FernqvistF.HunterE.2012Who’s to blame for tasteless tomatoes? The effect of tomato chilling on consumers’ taste perceptionsEur. J. Hort. Sci.77193198

FloresF.B.Martínez-MadridM.C.Ben AmorM.PechJ.C.LatchéA.RomojaroF.2004Modified atmosphere packaging confers additional chilling tolerance on ethylene-inhibited cantaloupe Charentais melon fruitEur. Food Res. Technol.219614619

HobsonG.E.1987Low-temperature injury and the storage of ripening tomatoesHortScience655562

HongJ.H.GrossK.C.2001Maintaining quality of fresh-cut tomato slices through modified atmosphere packaging and low temperature storageJ. Food Sci.66960965

KaderA.A.1980Prevention of ripening in fruits by use of controlled atmospheresFood Technol.

KaderA.A.1986Effects of postharvest handling procedures on tomato qualityActa Hort.190209221

MaulF.SargentS.A.HuberD.J.BalabanM.O.LuzuriagaD.A.BaldwinE.A.1997Non-destructive quality screening of tomato fruit using “electronic nose” technologyProc. Florida State Hort. Soc.110188194

MaulF.SargentS.A.SimsC.A.BaldwinE.A.BalabanM.O.HuberD.J.2000Tomato flavor and aroma quality as affected by storage temperatureJ. Food Sci.6512281237

MutariA.DebbieR.2011The effects of postharvest handling and storage temperature on the quality and shelf of tomatoJ. Food Sci.5446452

PaullR.E.1999Effect of temperature and relative humidity on fresh commodity qualityPostharvest Biol. Technol.15263277

PesisE.AharoniD.AharonZ.Ben-ArieR.AharoniN.FuchsY.2000Modified atmosphere and modified humidity packaging alleviates chilling injury symptoms in mango fruitPostharvest Biol. Technol.1993101

PlottoA.BaldwinE.A.GoodnerK.NarcisoJ.2007Sensory evaluation quality of tomato “Florida”47: Effect of maturity storage temperature and 1-MCP. American Society of Horticulture Science Meeting. p. 1018–1019

TiemanD.BlissP.McIntyreL.M.Blandon-UbedaA.BiesD.OdabasiA.Z.RodríguezG.R.Van Der KnaapE.TaylorM.G.GouletC.MageroyM.H.SnyderD.J.ColquhounT.MoskowitzH.ClarkD.G.SimsC.BartoshukL.KleeH.J.2012The chemical interactions underlying tomato flavor preferencesCurr. Biol.2210351039

TiemanD.ZhuG.ResendeM.F.R.LinT.NguyenC.BiesD.RamblaJ.L.BeltranK.S.O.TaylorM.ZhangB.IkedaH.LiuZ.FisherJ.ZemachI.MonforteA.ZamirD.GranellA.KirstM.HuangS.KleeH.2017A chemical genetic roadmap to improved tomato flavorScience355391394

USDA1991United States standards for grades of fresh tomatoes. U.S. Dept. Agr./AMS Washington DC

WangC.Y.QiL.1997Modified atmosphere packaging alleviates chilling injury in cucumbersPostharvest Biol. Technol.10195200

Article Information

Google Scholar

Related Content

Article Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 61 61 24
Full Text Views 58 58 10
PDF Downloads 12 12 2