POSTHARVEST QUALITY AND CURING TIME OF AGGREGATUM ONION (CO-5) SUBJECTED TO DIFFERENT CURING METHODS

J.A. NIVEDIDA¹, S. GANAPATHY²*, Z.J. KENNEDY³, C. INDURANI⁴, V.M. DURAISWAMY^5
1Department of Food Process Engineering, Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, India
²Department of Food Process Engineering, Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, India
³Post harvest Technology Centre, Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, India
⁴Department of Floriculture & Landscaping, Horticultural College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Trichy, 620027, India
⁵Department of Agricultural Machinery Research Centre, Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
* Corresponding Author : ganapathy.s@tnau.ac.in

Received : 02-05-2019     Accepted : 12-05-2019     Published : 15-05-2019
Volume : 11     Issue : 9       Pages : 8408 - 8411
Int J Agr Sci 11.9 (2019):8408-8411

Keywords : Aggregatum onion, Curing method, Ambient air, Physical and chemical properties
Academic Editor : Dr V Arun Prasath, Kapil Kumar Sharma
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Agricultural Engineering College & Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003, Tamil Nadu, India.
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

The harvested Aggregatum onion bulbs (CO-5) were cured by field curing, shade curing and artificial curing at three velocities of the blower (2, 4 and 6ms-1). The objective of the study is to use the developed artificial curing system as an alternative method during unfavorable weather conditions. The curing time and quality parameters like geometrical properties, PLM%, pyruvic acid, total soluble solids and redness (a*) value were studied. Among all the methods, the curing was faster in artificial curing (6ms-1) whereas shade curing took maximum time for complete curing. The PLM%, pyruvic acid, TSS and the color value were found to increase significantly during curing. The PLM% was found to be minimum for artificial curing-6ms-1 (16.3%).The redness value was higher for shade curing and lower for field curing. The curing of bulb was faster with artificial curing (6ms-1) and therefore it is recommended for curing onion bulbs.

1. Anonymous (1989) International standards ISO/DIS 1673.
2. Financial express report (2017).
3. Bahnasawy A.H., El-Haddad Z.A., El-Ansary M.Y. and Sorour H.M. (2004) Journal of Food Engineering, 62, 255–261.
4. Banuu Priya E. P., Esther Magdalene Sharon M., Sinja V. R. J. and Alice R.P.S. (2015) International Journal of Agricultural Science and Research, 5(5), 323-332.
5. Cardoso D. S. C. P., Pereira A. M., Correia T.D. and Finger F.L. (2016) Rev. Ceres, Viçosa, 63(6), 822-828.
6. David E.K. and William M.R. (1997) HortScience, 32(7), 1260-1263.
7. Kaveri G. (2014) Optimization of storage parameters for shelf life enhancement of CO 4 onion bulbs (Allium cepa L. var. aggregatum Don.), Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Food and Agricultural Process Engineering, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.
8. Maia M.C.C., Pedrosa J.F., Torres filho J., Negreiros M.Z de. and BezerraNeto F. (2000) Horticultura Brasileira, 18,61-64.
9. Maw B.W., Hung Y.C., Tollner E.W., Smittle D.A. and Mullinix B.G. (1996) Transactions of the ASAE, 39 (2), 633-637.
10. Maw B.W. and Mullinix B.G. (2005) Postharvest Biology and Technology, 35, 223–227.
11. Matson W. E., Mansour N. S. and Richardson D. G. (1985) Onion Storage - Guidelines for Commercial Growers (No. PNW 277), OSU Pacific Northwest Extension Program, 1-16.
12. Sandeep S.R. and Sinija V.R. (2014) International Journal of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology, 4 (4), 150-156.
13. Sanguansri P. and Gould I.V. (1990) Onion: artificial curing system and objective quality evaluation, Proceedings of Agricultural Engineering Conference, Toowoomba Australia, 11-14 November, 90(13),333-337.
14. Schroeder B.K., Humann J.L. and Du Toit L.J. (2012) Plant Dis, 96(10),1548-1555
15. Takahama U. and Hirota S. (2000) Plant Cell Physiology, 41,1021-1029.
16. Yoo K.S., Pike L.M. and Hamilton B.K. (1995) Hort. Science, 30(6), 1306.