Post Cosecha Uvas
-
Upload
auroramalagamontoya -
Category
Documents
-
view
25 -
download
3
description
Transcript of Post Cosecha Uvas
Postharvest research and its contribution to export inIsrael: grape production as a model
Dr Amnon Lichter
Department of Postharvest ScienceARO, The Volcani Center
The significance of postharvest research to export andlocal markets
In general the cost of production after harvest is about 50% of the total cost.
Therefore investment in proper postharvest practice is essential to minimize losses.
The presence of infrastructure for postharvest researchensures that problems and modifications can be handled and performed in a professional manner.
Local markets can be negative or positive drivers of quality
The Table grape model
The investment in labor to prepare vineyards for high quality grape production is estimated at 30% of annual cost.
Strong local market and presence of strong local producer derives quality to high standards.
Maintenance of high quality in local markets persuades importers to buy fruit from farmers with good practice.
If there is one standard for local markets and export companies – export can be done upon demand at any time during the season.
In the case of table grapes there are 2 major exportwindows.1. Early production in May when fruit from South Africa and Chile is no longer available2. A “mountain” of grapes in the middle of the season makes export very economical.
In addition – local storage extends the season by 3-4 month and there is minor export of fruit from local storage
For Table grapes – export serves as a buffer for the local market.
The Avocado/Pepper model
Export is a major driver of quality. The overall production ismuch larger than local market demands.The local markets serves as a buffer for the export and as a source of sale of low grade produce.
Example what can be done for tomato
Tomato model
Medium export due to competition – export is reserved to“niche” produce such as cluster tomato (this niche developed over the last 10 years to 0.5 M tons in EU market).
In tomato fluctuations in production make export less profitable. Cold stress causes attenuation of supply > rise in fruit price in the local market > decline in profitability to export tomato.
Col
or (h
)Fi
rmne
ss (g
r/mm
)290
280
270
260
Rotem
250
240
230
50
46
42
38
Control MCP Control MCP
15.1.07 22.1.07
Rotem
34
30Control MCP Control MCP
15.1.07 22.1.07
Semi commercial experiment with 1-MCP to delayripening and extend the season in cherry tomato
Deca
y (%
)
100
80
60
40
20
0
Orange 12C
a a
a a
a
b
b b b
b
b b
Cheek Severe
Cheek Initial
Stem end Severe
Stem end Initial
C 300 600 C 300 600 C 300 600 C 300 600
1 2 3 4
Experiments in avocadoand apples with 1-MCP to delay ripening, reduce decay and storagedisorders
1-MCP Control
Postharvest research: the Israeli model
Structure of the department of postharvest science
Root vegetables
Fruit
Herbs
Vegetables 4
3
2
1
0
Phytopathology
Transgenics
Fresh cut
Flowers
•In large (and rich) countries postharvest science is
scattered
•In small countries (especially isolated countries) it
makes sense to bring together all the postharvest
scientists.
•This can produce competition among them but also fast
dissemination of knowledge across the board.
•The key is to build a successful structure is to minimize
overlap and build synergistic interactions
•It is also important to keep tight connections with the
industry, the farmers and the consumers.
Lessons from the Israeli export system
The situation in the past• One big company• One medium company• Three small companies
The big company had:A network of growers and product managers Logistic and R&D department sShips and a network of branches in Europe
Investment in new knowledge and support of research was highResearchers had an address to address problems Standard quality was maintained at high level
Competition was low and wastage was high Large investments failed to deliverKeeping the entire network was costly
The situation today
•The big company did not make it.•The medium company became big•The smaller exporters kept there share or became smaller•More than a hundreds of small companies joined the race
•Competition became very high•R&D was broken down•A lot of knowledge was lost•The standards became low•Incidents of low quality export reflected on all the companies•The association between Israel as a label of quality deteriorated.
Achievements in grape production and export in Israel
•Advancing ripening•Delaying ripening•Improving grape quality•Study of factors affecting sensitivity to decay•Improving current storage methods•Development of alternative storage technologies
Application of ABA to advance ripening: the extreme case
Control 400 / 800 ppm S-ABA
Dist
ribut
ion
of fr
uit c
olor
(%)
Ethrel facilitates reduction in the amount of ABA
31.0
7.9
28.4 30.7
62.7
73.2
61.1
74.3
58.7
Dark
Medium
Light
Green
17.89.9
18.8
10.6
Control S-ABA S-ABA Ethrel E+S
200 400 0.05% 200+0.05%
Advancing production of Flame Seedless - Jordan ValleyControl Ethrel X 2 S-ABA 600 ppm
Delaying maturation of Thompson Seedless with the cytokinin CPPU
Multiplex3 – portable autofluoresence instrument to measure fruit quality in the vineyard
FLR
(FER
_RU
V; S
FR)
FLR
(NBI
; FER
_RG)
5 2.0
4 1.5
3 1.0
2 0.5
11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0.0
SFR_G SFR_R FER_RUV FER_RG NBI_G NBI_R
SFR_
R
The effect of CPPU on chlorophyll level in Thompson Seedless grapes
2.9
2.7
2.5
2.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
Control
2ppm 1st
4ppm 1st
2ppm 2nd
4ppm 2nd
1.5
Delay of maturation of Thompson Seedless grapes with CPPU
Rachis Browning after storage
After Harvest After Storage
1 2 3 4 5
Image analysis
Rach
is In
dex
Brow
ning
(Br-
50)
Comparison of subjective and objective measurements
Thompson5
2 d 4 d 7 d 11 d
4
1.0
0.8
Thompson
2 d 4 d
3 0.6
0.4
20.2
1VPD
RH T
0.06 0.07 0.41 0.68
95 97 67 70
10 20 11 19
0.0
VPD
RH T
0.06 0.07 0.41 0.68
95 97 67 70
10 20 11 19
BR-5
0
The effect of packaging on rachis quality in 4 table grape cultivars
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
Control a Packaging a
a
b b b
aa
0.2
0.1
0.0A B C D
Cultivars
2- למ נט•ם SO2 ש חרור
DR-O VL9-5d VL3
SO2
ppm
Prolonging storage of grapes by improved control of SO2 release
• י
120
100
80
60
40
20
00 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
ימים
XF PE
Dec
ay (%
)C
O2
(%)
Combination of sanitation and modified atmosphere for improved storage of grapes
25
20
45 d15
10
5
010 15 20 25 30 35 Control Ethanol
40 a a
30
20
b 10
c 0
45 d+3
b b
cMA MA+EtOH
Specific liners with control of excess RH
EFControl
Air-phase control of decay during storage
Air-phase control of fungal development
0 h 1h 3 h
0 h 6 h
6 h 12 h 24 h1h 12 h
h 24 h
T0=0 T0=24 h
The question: who do we work for…
The Abubaker familyChad
1.23 $ a week
The Malander family Germany
500 $ a week
The truth is probably in the middle