Influence of mechanical harvest on the physical properties of processing tomato ( Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)

Data on physical properties of agro-food materials are valuable because they are needed as input to models predicting the quality and product behaviour. The correlation between laboratory test variables and the quality of tomato harvesting will contribute to develop an optimal solution for mechanisa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of food engineering 2007-05, Vol.80 (1), p.190-198
Main Authors: Arazuri, S., Jarén, C., Arana, J.I., Pérez de Ciriza, J.J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biological and medical sciences
canning industry
firmness
Food engineering
Food industries
food processing quality
food quality
Fruit and vegetable industries
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General aspects
Harvester
mechanical harvesting
Mechanization
peels
Physical properties
postharvest injuries
Quality
Solanum lycopersicum var. lycopersicum
Tomato
tomatoes
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Data on physical properties of agro-food materials are valuable because they are needed as input to models predicting the quality and product behaviour. The correlation between laboratory test variables and the quality of tomato harvesting will contribute to develop an optimal solution for mechanisation. Firmness and skin resistance are the most relevant properties in quality characterisation of the tomatoes processed in the canning industry. Most of mechanical actions affecting tomatoes are produced during harvest and transport causing a falling-off in tomato quality. In order to determine the influence of mechanical harvest, tomato varieties were mechanical harvested and evaluated in laboratory. Impact test showed loss firmness in tomato from the bottom of the trailer up to 30%. The loss of tomato skin resistance to crack was about 6%.
ISSN:0260-8774
1873-5770
DOI:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.05.008