Article | . 2017 Vol. 35, Issue. 1
Effects of Storage Duration on Physicochemical and Antioxidant Properties of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)



Department of Horticulture, Kangwon National University1




2017.. 89:97


PDF XML




This study explored the physicochemical and nutritional changes associated with storage duration of fresh tomatoes. Fruits of the ‘TY Megaton’ and ‘Yureka’ tomato cultivars were harvested at the pink stage and stored at 12ºC for 20 days. During storage, firmness, weight loss, skin color (Hunter L, a, b, a / b values), soluble solids content (SSC), titratable acidity (TA), pH, antioxidant contents (lycopene, ascorbic acid, and total phenolics) and antioxidant activity were evaluated. Firmness was above the minimum marketable limit and fresh weight loss was below maximum acceptable weight loss after 3 weeks of storage, and no deleterious effect on antioxidant contents or activities were observed. Significant differences in SSC, TA, and pH were seen between varieties, but not between fruits stored for different durations. In both varieties, Hunter a values increased more than five-fold after 8 days of storage; this correlated with a more than four-fold accumulation of lycopene after two weeks of storage. The antioxidant activity of tomatoes was highest at the beginning of the storage period, likely because of the effective DPPH - reducing power of ascorbic acid and total phenolics. Antioxidant activity increased after 12 days of storage because of increasing lycopene content. Hence, this study indicates that pink - stage tomatoes may be stored at 12ºC for up to 3 weeks without affecting marketability or nutritional value



1. Alban EK (1961) Harvesting and postharvest handling of greenhouse tomatoes. Ohio Agricultural Station Department of Horticulture Mimeo Serial Bulletin No. 252  

2. Alexander L, Grierson D (2002) Ethylene biosynthesis and action in tomato: a model for climacteric fruit ripening. J Exp Bot 53(377):2039-2055. doi:10.1093/jxb/erf072  

3. Anza M, Riga P, Garbisu C (2006) Effects of variety and growth season on the organoleptic and nutritional quality of hydroponically grown tomato. J Food Quality 29 (1): 16-37. doi:10.1111/j.1745-4557.2006.00053.x   

4. Arias R, Lee TC, Logendra L, Janes H (2000) Correlation of lycopene measured by HPLC with the L*, a*, b* color readings of a hydroponic tomato and the relationship of maturity with color and lycopene content. J Agr Food Chem 48:1697-1702doi:10.1021/jf990974e   

5. Batu A (2004) Determination of acceptable firmness and color values of tomatoes. J Food Eng 61(3): 471-475. doi:10.1016/S0260-8774(03)00141-9   

6. Borguini R, Torres E (2009) Tomatoes and tomato products as dietary sources of antioxidants. Food Rev Int 25: 313-325. doi:10.1080/87559120903155859   

7. Brandt S, Pé k Z, Barna E, Lugasi A, Helyes L (2006) Lycopene content and color of ripening tomatoes as affected by environmental conditions. J Sci Food Agr 86:568-572. doi:10.1002/jsfa.2390   

8. Chang CH, Lin HY, Chang CY, Liu YC (2006) Comparisons on the antioxidant properties of fresh, freeze-dried and hot-air-dried tomatoes. J Food Eng 77(3):478-485. doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.06.061   

9. Dumas Y, Dadomo M, Di Lucca G, Grolier P (2003) Effects of environmental factors and agricultural techniques on antioxidant content of tomatoes. J Sci Food Agr 83: 369-382. doi:10.1002/jsfa.1370   

10. Etminan M, Takkouche B, Caamano-Isorna F (2004) The role of tomato products and lycopene in the prevention of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13(3):340-345   

11. FAOSTAT (2013) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Cropping Database http://faostat3.fao.org/home/ index.html/. Accessed 9 June 2016   

12. Fish WW, Perkins-Veazie P, Collins JK (2002) A quantitative assay for lycopene that utilizes reduced volumes of organic solvents. J Food Compos Anal 15(3):309-317. doi:10.1006/jfca.2002.1069   

13. George B, Kaur C, Khurdiya DS, Kapoor HC (2004) Antioxidants in tomato () as a function of genotype. Food Chem 84(1):45-51. doi:10.1016/s0308-8146(03)00165-1   

14. Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Liu Y, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC (2002) A prospective study of tomato products, lycopene, and prostate cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:391-398. doi:10.1093/jnci/94.5.391   

15. Helyes L, Pé k Z, Lugasi A (2006) Tomato fruit quality and content depend on stage of maturity. HortScience 41:1400-1401   

16. Kim HS, Jung JY, Kim HK, Ku KM, Suh JK, Park YM, Kang YH (2011) Influences of meteorological conditions of harvest time on watersoluble vitamin contents and quality attributes of oriental melon. J Bio-Environ Control 20(4):290-296   

17. Lenucci MS, Cadinu D, Taurino M, Piro G, Dalessandro G (2006) Antioxidant composition in cherry and high-pigment tomato cultivars. J Agr Food Chem 54:2606-2613. doi:10.1021/jf052920c   

18. Madhavi DL, Salunke DL (1998) Tomato. In Handbook of vegetable science and technology: production, storage and processing. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp.171-201   

19. Maul F, Sargent SA, Sims CA, Baldwin EA, Balaban MO, Huber DJ (2000) Tomato flavor and aroma quality as affected by storage temperature. J Food Sci 69(8): S310-S318. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2000.tb10270.x   

20. McGuire RG (1992) Reporting of objective color measurements. HortScience 27:1254-1255   

21. Mostofi YO, Toivonen PM (2006) Effects of storage conditions and 1-methylcyclopropene on some qualitative characteristics of tomato fruits. Int J Agric Biol 8:93-96   

22. Nunes MCN (2008) Color atlas of postharvest quality of fruits and vegetables. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 239-243. doi:10.1002/9780813802947   

23.  Opiyo AM, Ying TJ (2005) The effects of 1‐methylcyclopropene treatment on the shelf life and quality of cherry tomato ( var. ) fruit. Int J Food Sci Tech 40(6): 665-673. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2005.00977.x   

24. Park CY, Kim YJ, Shin Y (2016) Effects of an ethylene absorbent and 1-methylcyclopropene on tomato quality and antioxidant contents during storage. Hortic Environ Biote 57(1):38-45. doi:10.1007/s13580-016-0130-9   

25. Pataro G, Sinik M, Capitoli MM, Donsì G, Ferrari G (2015) The influence of post-harvest UV-C and pulsed light treatments on quality and antioxidant properties of tomato fruits during storage. Innov Food Sci Emerg 30:103-111. doi:10.1016/j.ifset.2015.06.003   

26. Rai GK, Kumar R, Singh AK, Rai PK, Rai M, Chaturvedi AK, Rai AB (2012) Changes in antioxidant and phytochemical properties of tomato ( mill.) under ambient condition. Pak J Bot 44(2):667-670   

27. Rao AV, Rao LG (2007) Carotenoids and human health. Pharmacol Res 55(3):207-216. doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2007.01.012   

28. Roberts PK, Sargent SA, Fox AJ (2002) Effect of storage temperature on ripening and postharvest quality of grape and mini-pear tomatoes. Proceedings of Florida State Horticulture Society 115:80-84   

29. Sahlin E, Savage GP, Lister CE (2004) Investigation of the antioxidant properties of tomatoes after processing. J Food Compos Anal 17(5):635-647. doi:10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10.003   

30. Sharma S, Mahajan R, Bajaj KL (1996) Biochemical evaluation of some tomato varieties. Veg Sci 23(1): 42-47   

31. Shewfelt RL, Thai CN, Davis JW (1988) Prediction of changes in color of tomatoes during ripening at different constant temperatures. J Food Sci 53:1433-1437. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.1988.tb09293.x   

32. Simonne AH, Behe BK Marshall MM (2006) Consumers prefer low-priced and high-lycopene-content fresh-market tomatoes. HortTechnology 16(4):674-681   

33. Toor RK, Savage GP (2005) Antioxidant activity in different fractions of tomatoes. Food Res Int 38(5):487-494. doi:10.1016/ j.foodres.2004.10.016   

34. Toor RK, Savage GP (2006) Changes in major antioxidant components of tomatoes during post-harvest storage. Food Chem 99:724- 727. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.08.049   

35. USDA (1991) United States Standards for Grades of Fresh Tomatoes. USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service, Washington, DC, USA   

36. Wills RBH, Ku VVV (2002) Use of 1-MCP to extend the time to ripen of green tomatoes and postharvest life of ripe tomatoes. Postharvest Biol Technol 26:85-90. doi:10.1016/S0925-5214(01)00201-0