Storage Methods Affect the Quality of Fruit Sugarcane

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb20190700459

Abstract

Abstract:

The changes of texture and physiological characteristics of sugarcane stored in plastic film with different thickness were studied to provide certain references for fresh-keeping of sugarcane. ‘Badila’ was used as the test material, the hardness, soluble solids (TSS), titratable acid, vitamin C, weight loss rate, stem cracking, pulp browning and mildew of sugarcane were determined in 3 storage ways, including room temperature, room temperature+ 0.02 mm plastic film and room temperature+ 0.10 mm plastic film. The results showed that the hardness, soluble solids, Vc and weight loss of sugarcane treated with room temperature+ 0.02 mm plastic film and 0.10 mm plastic film decreased slowly, titratable acid content increased slowly and the storage quality was relatively good in the first 6 weeks, then, the quality of sugarcane treated with these two ways declined rapidly; during the whole storage period, the pulp browning rate of the two treatments with plastic film was slow; and the cracking rate of the three treatments was 12.86%, 5.71% and 4.29%, respectively, at 12 weeks’ storage, but no mildew and bud germination were found. In conclusion, plastic film storage can delay the aging process of sugarcane at lower room temperature, but the thickness of the plastic film has little effect on the comprehensive quality of storage.

Key words: fruit sugarcane, storage, weightlessness rate, mildew, comprehensive quality

CLC Number:

S566.1

Lu Guilong, Qiu Xiaoyu, Lian Yuzhen. Storage Methods Affect the Quality of Fruit Sugarcane[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(22): 123-128.

Figures/Tables 7

References 27

[1]	吴多广, 谢静, 王勤南, 等. 中国甘蔗生产发展趋势分析[J]. 广东农业科学, 2017,44(7):154-160.
[2]	肖祎, 吕达, 陈道德. 我国果蔗研究新进展[J]. 中国糖料, 2018,40(1):62-67.
[3]	赵秀勉, 徐玮, 张海红. 变质甘蔗中毒病原菌节菱孢霉菌及其毒素国内研究进展[J]. 河北医科大学学报, 1995(3):183-184.
[4]	Sole D, Henriod R, Diczbalis Y, et al. Modified atmosphere packaging effects on the postharvest quality of papaya fruit[J]. Acta Horticulturae, 2016,43:119-124.
[5]	路贵龙, 张新富, 郑博文, 等. 冰温和保鲜袋贮藏对冬枣质构及生理特性的影响[J]. 现代食品科技, 2014,30(8):219-224.
[6]	韦强. 不同厚度薄膜包装对双孢菇采后生理生化的影响[J]. 蔬菜, 2017(8):60-62.
[7]	茅林春, 刘卫晓. 甘蔗采后生理变化及其保鲜技术的研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2000,33(5):41-45.
[8]	郑宏海, 张瑞翔, 费鸣毅, 等. 薄膜气调法在果蔗贮藏保鲜中的应用初探[J]. 亚热带农业研究, 2006,2(1):74-76.
[9]	Özkaya O, Yildrim D, Dunda Ö, et al. Effects of 1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) and modified atmosphere packaging on postharvest storage quality of nectarine fruit[J]. Scientia Horticulturae, 2016,198(1):454-461. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2015.12.016 URL
[10]	路贵龙, 代安国, 土旦吉热, 等. 采前套袋及气调袋贮藏对拉萨‘新红星’苹果品质的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2018,27(6):839-845.
[11]	Li J, Song W, Margaret B, et al. Effect of modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) on the quality of sea buckthorn berry fruits during postharvest storage[J]. Journal of Food Quality, 2014,38(1):13-20. doi: 10.1111/jfq.2015.38.issue-1 URL
[12]	Romphophak T, Siriphanich J, Promdang S, et al. Effect of modified atmosphere storage on the shelf life of banana ‘Sucrier’[J]. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 2015,79(4):659-663.
[13]	Mendoza R, Castellanos D A, Garcia J C, et al. Ethylene production, respiration and gas exchange modelling in modified atmosphere packaging for banana fruits[J]. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 2016,51(3):777-788.
[14]	张贤亮, 王巧静, 卜龙飞, 等. 果蔗产品超长期复合保鲜技术研究[J]. 甘蔗糖业, 2015(6):38-44.
[15]	康孟利, 凌建刚, 沈均波, 等. 即食果蔗加工工艺及货架期研究[J]. 北方园艺, 2013(18):131-133.
[16]	范雨航, 李少华, 许青莲, 等. 气调保鲜对采后柠檬贮藏品质的影响[J]. 食品工业科技, 2017(5):324-328.
[17]	Techavuthiporn C, Boonyaritthongchai P. Effect of prestorage short-term Anoxia treatment and modified atmosphere packaging on the physical and chemical changes of green asparagus[J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2016,117:64-70. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2016.01.016 URL
[18]	董玉玲. 气调包装对鲜切马铃薯货架期品质的影响[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学, 2014: 6-8.
[19]	Beiay Z A, Caleb O J, Opara U L. Modelling approaches for designing and evaluating the performance of modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) systems for fresh produce: a review[J]. Food Packaging and Shelf Life, 2016,10:1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.fpsl.2016.08.001 URL
[20]	Caleb O J, Opara U L, Witthuhn C R. Modified Atmosphere Packaging of Pomegranate Fruit and Arils: A Review[J]. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 2012,5(1):15-30. doi: 10.1007/s11947-011-0525-7 URL
[21]	吴忠红, 杜鹃, 潘俨气, 等. 气调处理对骏枣贮藏品质的影响[J]. 食品工业科技, 2015(22):339-343.
[22]	钱卉苹, 王亮, 韩艳文, 等. 气调贮藏对早酥梨果实品质的影响[J]. 保鲜与加工, 2016(2):22-26.
[23]	敖静, 张昭其, 黄雪梅. 不同薄膜自发气调包装对西兰花的保鲜效果[J]. 广东农业科学, 2015,42(2):77-81.
[24]	周晓媛, 蔡佑星, 邓靖, 等. 果蔬保鲜膜的保鲜机理与研究进展[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2008,29(11):148-152.
[25]	敖静, 黄雪梅, 张昭其. 蔬菜气调贮藏保鲜技术研究进展[J]. 保鲜与加工, 2015,15(5):72-76.
[26]	黄晓清. 拉萨最高和最低气温的气候变化特征[J]. 气象, 2000,26(3):47-50.
[27]	陈明媚. 鲜切果蔗生理生化特性及贮藏保鲜技术研究[D]. 桂林:广西师范大学, 2005.

时间	处理/名称	褐变	褶皱	开裂率/%	霉变	芽点萌动情况
贮藏0周	CK	—	—	—	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏2周	CK	—	—	—	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏4周	CK	轻微	—	—	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏6周	CK	中度	轻微	2.86	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏8周	CK	中度	中度	7.14	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	轻度	轻微	2.86	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	轻度	轻微	1.43	—	—
贮藏10周	CK	严重	严重	10	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	中度	轻微	4.29	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	中度	轻微	2.86	—	—
贮藏12周	CK	严重	严重	12.86	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	严重	轻微	5.71	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	严重	轻微	4.29	—	—

时间	处理/名称	褐变	褶皱	开裂率/%	霉变	芽点萌动情况
贮藏0周	CK	—	—	—	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏2周	CK	—	—	—	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏4周	CK	轻微	—	—	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏6周	CK	中度	轻微	2.86	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	—	—	—	—	—
贮藏8周	CK	中度	中度	7.14	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	轻度	轻微	2.86	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	轻度	轻微	1.43	—	—
贮藏10周	CK	严重	严重	10	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	中度	轻微	4.29	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	中度	轻微	2.86	—	—
贮藏12周	CK	严重	严重	12.86	—	—
	0.02 mm塑膜	严重	轻微	5.71	—	—
	0.10 mm塑膜	严重	轻微	4.29	—	—