Bazı Domates Çeşitlerinin Doğal ve Yapay Koşullarda Taşımaya Uygunluklarının Saptanması Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Öz

Bu çalışmada, 1986 yılı ilkbahar döneminde, Menemen-Ege Bölge Zirai Araştırma Enstitüsü seralarında yetiştirilen ve pembe olumda hasat edilen Lucy, Amfora, Monza, Dario, Rocco, Vivia, Noria, E-11032, E-12757, E-9693, E-8449, GH-25, GH-31 ve IVR-22 hibrit domates çeşitlerinin doğal ve yapay koşullarda yapılan testlerle taşımaya duyarlıkları incelenmiştir. Doğal taşıma 400 km uzaklıktaki İzmir-Yalova arasında kamyonetle yapılırken, yapay koşullarda taşımada düşürme, yatay çarpma ve titreşim testleri uygulanmış, farklı ambalaj tiplerinin taşımaya etkisi incelenmiştir. Bu testler sonunda doğal taşımada Lucy, E-9693, E-12757 ve GH-25 çeşitleri daha dayanıklı çeşitler olurken, yapay koşullarda uzun mesafeli taşıma için Rocco, Dario, GH-25 ve E-9693 çeşitleri en dayanıklı çeşitler olarak bulunmuştur. Her iki testte de GH-25 ve E-9693 çeşitleri taşımaya en dayanıklı çeşitler olarak saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Domates
• Doğal
• Yapay
• Taşıma

Determination of the Suitability of Some Tomatoes Varieties for Transport Under Natural and Simulative Conditions

Abstract

This study was conducted for determination of sensitivity of transport of Lucy, Amfora, Monza, Doria, Rocco, Vivia, Noria, E-11032, E-12757, E-9693, E-8449, GH-25, GH-31 and IVR-22 tomato hybrid varieties grown in Spring season and harvested at pink maturity at Menemen, Ege Regional Agricultural Research Institute. Natural transport was done by 1700 kg. capacity, D-1230 type International marked pick-up between the İzmir and Yalova, which is 400 km in distance. Simulated frequency, and amplitude value. Effect of different packaging types on fruit damage and quality during transport was also investigated. It was observed that Lucy, E-9693, E-12757 and GH-25 tomato varieties more resistant to transport in this distance, and Rocco, Dario, GH-25, and E-9693 varieties more resistant to long distance transport.

Keywords

• Tomato
• Natural
• Artificial
• Transport

Kaynakça

1. Anonim, 1983. Türkiye İkinci Meyve ve Sebze Projesi, Meyve ve Sebze Alt Sektörü Ana Planı ve Sektör Etütleri Cilt 1, Başbakanlık DPT. Ankara.
2. Düzgüneş, O., 1963. Bilimsel Araştırmalarda İstatistik Prensip ve Metotları. Ege Üniversitesi Matbaası, İzmir.
3. Halsey, L.H., R.K. Showalter, 1953. How does Tomato Maturity Affect Market Quality? Proc. Assoc. of Southern Agric. Workers, pp:134-135.
4. Halsey, L.H., L.P. McColloch, A.H. Spurlock, R.K. Showalter, 1955. Containers for Shipping Florida Tomatoes. Flo Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 560.
5. Marks, J.D., R. Bemlohr, J.E. Vamer, 1957. Esterification on Phosphate in Ripening Fruit. Plant Physiol. 32:259-262.
6. Maxie, E.C., N.F. Sommer, F.G. Mitchell, 1967, The Postharvest Scientist’s View of Some Problems in Perishable Handling. Proc. Fruit and Veg. Perishable Hand. Conf. 5-9. ABD.
7. McColloch, L.P., 1958. Better Quality Tomatoes Through Temperature Control and Careful Handling. Proc. 12. Nat. Conf. on Hand. Perishable Agric. Comm. ABD.
8. McColloch, L.P., 1962. Bruising Injury of Tomatoes USDA Marketing Res. Rep. No:513.

9. Mitchell, F.G., N.F. Sommer, 1967. Developments in Fruit Packaging. Proc. Fruit and Veg. Perishable Handling, pp:25-28, ABD.
10. Monrea, G.E., M. O’Brien, 1983. Postharvest Functions in: Principles and Practices for Harvesting, Handling Fruits and Nuts (Ed. M. O’Brien, B.F. Cargill, R.B. Fridley) pp:636. The AVI Publishing Comp. Inc. Connecticut.
11. Morris, L, 1954. Field and Transit Chilling of Fall Grown Tomatoes. Proc. Conf. on Transportation of perishables California Univ.
12. New, J.H., 1983. Reports on Visits to Turkey to Review the Packaging of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables TDRI Rep. No. 1170 (A).
13. New, J.H., F.J. Proctor, V.J. Hewitt, 1978. Packaging of Horticultural Produce for Export. Tropic Sci. 20(1):21-34.
14. O’Brien, M., L.L. Claypool, J. Leonard, 1963. Effect of Mechanical Vibration on Fruit Damage During Transportation with Special Reference to Cling Peaches. Food. Tech. 17(12): 106-109.
15. O’Brien, M., J.J. Gaffney, 1983. Postharvest Handling and Transport Operations. In: Principles and Practices for Harvesting, Handling Fruits and Nuts. (Ed: M. O’Brien, B.F. Carpill, R.B. Fridley) pp:636. The AVI Publishing Com. Inc. Connecticut.
16. Radulescu, I., O. Iordachescu, M. Dobreanu, I. Marin, I. Groza, 1982. Maintaining the Quality of Greenhause Tomatoes Destined for Export. Legumelarsi Fructelor, 13:91-100.
17. Randhava, K.S., M.S. Saimbhi, A.K. Gupta, 1987. Transit Losses and Quality of Tomatoes in Long. Distance Transport. Hort. Abst. 57(4):2461.
18. Redit, W.H., 1969. Protection of Rail Shipments of Fruits and Vegetables. USDA Handbook No:195, pp:98.
19. Sommer, N.F., F.G. Mitchell, R. Guillou, D.A. Luvisi, 1960. Fresh Fruit Temperatures and Transit Injury. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 76:156-162.
20. Yigit, V., E. Ertekin, 1984. Türkiye Karayolu Soğuk Taşımacılığı Üzerinde Bir Anket Çalışması. TÜBİTAK, MBEAE, Yayın No: 87. Gebze.