Comparison of Ethylene Sensitivity of Three Tomato Cultivars From Different Tomato Types and Effects of Ethylene on Postharvest Performance

Abstract

The aim of study was to investigate ethylene sensitivity of different types of tomatoes and the effects of ethylene on their postharvest performance. For that purpose, beefsteak, heirloom and cluster types of tomato fruit were harvested at the breaker maturity stage and divided into two groups one of which was treated with 150 μL L−1 ethylene and the other was untreated for comparison. Ethylene treated and untreated fruit were stored at 12 °C and 90+5% relative humidity for 35 days and subsamples removed every 7 days for postharvest quality analysis. After each removal time, fruit were kept at 20 °C for 3 days in order to determine shelf life performance. Ethylene treatment lead to increase respiration rate, ethylene production, weight loss but decreased fruit firmness in all tested tomato cultivars. Minimum ethylene production and respiration rate occurred in untreated beefsteak tomatoes. At the end of cold storage and shelf life period, the highest L* values and fruit firmness were recorded for control beefsteak tomatoes. The conclusion drawn from this experiment was that the cluster type of tomatoes was more sensitive, while beefsteak type of tomatoes was found to be less sensitive to ethylene treatment as they had the highest and lowest amount of ethylene productions respectively. Untreated beefsteak tomatoes exhibited maximal postharvest quality compared to other treatments after 35 days cold storage and shelf life.

Keywords

• cold storage
• ethylene
• Quality
• respiration rate
• shelf life
• Tomatoes

References

1. References Akbudak B, Akbudak N, Seniz V & Eris A (2007). Sequential treatments of hot water and modified atmosphere packaging in cherry tomatoes. Journal of Food Quality 30(6): 896-910
2. Baldwin E A (2004). Ethylene and postharvest commodities. HortScience 39(7): 1538-1540.
3. Boe A A & Salunkhe D K (1967). Ripening tomatoes: Ethylene, oxygen, and light treatments. Economic Botany 21(4): 312-319
4. Camelo A F L & Gomez P A (2004). Comparison of color indexes for tomato ripening. Horticultura Brasileira 22(3): 534-537
5. Cantwell M (2010). Optimum Procedures for Ripening Tomatoes. In: Fruit Ripening and Ethylene Management, J.T. Thompson and C. Crisosto (eds.), UC Postharvest Horticulture Series 9: 106-116
6. Chomchalow S, El Assi N M, Sargent S A & Brecht J K (2002). Fruit maturity and timing of ethylene treatment affect storage performance of green tomatoes at chilling and nonchilling temperatures. HortTechnology 12(1): 104-114
7. Cheng T S & Shewfelt R L (1988). Effect of chilling exposure of tomatoes during subsequent ripening. Journal of Food Science 53(4): 1160-1162
8. Dávila-Avi˜na J E J, Villa-Rodríguez J, Cruz-Valenzuela R, Rodríguez-Armenta M, Espino-Díaz M, Ayala-Zavala J F, Olivas-Orozco G I, Heredia B & González- Aguilar G (2011). Effect of edible coatings, storage time and maturity stage on overall quality of tomato fruit. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6(1): 162–171

9. De Wild H P J, Balk P A, Fernandes E C A & Peppelenbos H W (2005). The action site of carbon dioxide in relation to inhibition of ethylene production in tomato fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology 36 (3):272-280
10. Dhall R K & Singh P (2013). Effect of ethephon and ethylene gas on ripening and quality of tomato (Solanum Lycopersicum L.) during cold storage. Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences 3 (6): 1-7
11. Dong L, Zhou H W, Sonego L, Lers A & Lurie S (2001). Ethylene involvement in the cold storage disorder of ‘Flavortop’ nectarine. Postharvest Biology and Technology 23(2): 105-115
12. Elmi F, Pradas I, Tosetti R, Cools K & Terry LA (2017). Effect of ethylene on postharvest strawberry fruit tissue biochemistry. Acta Horticulturae 1156: 667-672
13. Erturk YE & Cirka M (2015). Production and marketing of tomatoes in Turkey and North East Anadolu region. Yuzuncu Yıl University Journal of Agricultural Sciences 25(1): 84-97 (Original article in Turkish)
14. Fagundes C, Moraes K, Perez-Gago MB, Palou L, Maraschin M & Monteiro AR (2015). Effect of active modified atmosphere and cold storage on the postharvest quality of cherry tomatoes. Postharvest Biology and Technology 109:73-81
15. FAOSTAT (2016). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved in February, 20, 2016 from http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC
16. Geeson J D, Browne K M & Guaraldi F (1986). The effects of ethylene concentration in controlled atmosphere storage of tomatoes. Annals of Applied Biology 108(3): 605-610
17. Guilen F, Castillo S, Zapata P J, Martinez-Romero D, Serrano M & Valero D (2007). Efficacy of 1-MCP treatment in tomato fruit 1. Duration and concentration of 1-MCP treatment to gain an effective delay of postharvest ripening. Postharvest Biology and Technology 43(1): 23-27
18. Gonzalez-Aguilar G A, Ayala-Zavala J F, De la Rosa L A & Alvarez-Parrilla E (2010). Fruit and vegetable phytochemicals: Chemistry, nutritional value and stability. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford
19. Jan I & Rab A (2012). Influence of storage duration on physico-chemical changes in fruit of apple cultivars. The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences 22(3): 708-714
20. Kapotis G, Passam H C, Akoumianakis K & Olympios C M (2004). Storage of tomatoes in low oxygen atmospheres inhibits ethylene action and polygalacturonase activity. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology 51(1): 112-115
21. Karacali I (1990). Storage and marketing of horticultural products. Ege University, Faculty of Agriculture, Bornova/İzmir
22. Maharaj R, Arul J & Nadeau P (1999). Effect of photochemical treatment in the preservation of fresh tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum cv. Capello) by delaying senescence. Postharvest Biology and Technology 15 (1): 13-23
23. Mcguire R G (1992). Reporting of objective colour measurements. HortScience 27(12): 1254-1255
24. Mohammed M, Wilson L A & Gomes P I (1999). Postharvest sensory and physiochemical attributes of processing and non-processing tomato cultivars. Journal of Food Quality 22(2): 167-182
25. Nagata M, Mori H, Tabei Y, Sato T, Hirai M & Imaseki H (1995). Modification of tomato fruit ripening by transformation with sense or antisense chimeric 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate synthase genes. Acta Horticulturae 394: 213-218
26. Nyalala S P O & Wainwright H (1998). The shelf life of tomato cultivars at different storage temperatures. Tropical Science 38: 151-154
27. Prasanna V, Prabha T N & Tharanathan R N (2007). Fruit ripening phenomena-An overview. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 47(1): 1-19
28. Sammi S & Masud T (2007). Effect of different packaging systems on storage life and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum var. Rio grande) during different ripening stages. Internet Journal of Food Safety 9: 37-44
29. Tigist M, Workneh T S & Woldetsadik K (2011). Effects of variety on the quality of tomato stored under ambient conditions. Journal of Food Science and Technology 50(3): 477-486
30. Wills R, Mcglasson B, Graham D & Joyce D (1998). An introduction to the physiology and handling of fruit, vegetables and ornamentals. UNSW press, New South Wales