Reducing Strawberry Waste and Losses in The Postharvest Supply Chain Via Intelligent Distribution Management

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/306921826
Reducing strawberry waste and losses in the postharvest supply

chain via intelligent distribution management
Article in Acta horticulturae · July 2016

DOI: 10.17660/ActaHortic.2016.1120.38
CITATION READS
1 837
8 authors, including:
Jeffrey K. Brecht Maria Cecilia do Nascimento Nunes

University of Florida University of South Florida
268 PUBLICATIONS 4,835 CITATIONS 99 PUBLICATIONS 1,472 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Jean-Pierre Emond Ismail Uysal

Georgia Tech Research Institute University of South Florida
88 PUBLICATIONS 1,299 CITATIONS 54 PUBLICATIONS 338 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Bio-inspired Filter Banks for Frequency Recognition of SSVEP-based Brain-computer Interfaces View project
Increasing Postharvest Quality and Safety of Florida Blueberries and Peaches by Development of Best Temperature Management
Practices View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Maria Cecilia do Nascimento Nunes on 01 June 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Downloaded from rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org on May 5, 2014
Improvement in fresh fruit and vegetable logistics

quality: berry logistics field studies
M. Cecilia do Nascimento Nunes, Mike Nicometo, Jean Pierre Emond, Ricardo
Badia Melis and Ismail Uysal
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 2014 372, 20130307, published 5 May 2014
References This article cites 45 articles, 3 of which can be accessed free

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/372/2017/201303
07.full.html#ref-list-1
Subject collections Articles on similar topics can be found in the following

collections
software (38 articles)
Email alerting service Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article - sign up
in the box at the top right-hand corner of the article or click here
To subscribe to Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A go to:

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/subscriptions
Improvement in fresh fruit

and vegetable logistics quality:
berry logistics field studies
M. Cecilia do Nascimento Nunes1 , Mike Nicometo3 ,
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Jean Pierre Emond4 , Ricardo Badia Melis2
and Ismail Uysal2
1 Department of Cell Biology, Microbiology and Molecular Biology,
Research and 2 Department of Electrical Engineering, University of South
Cite this article: do Nascimento Nunes MC, Florida, Tampa, FL 33620, USA
3 EmpowerTech Inc., Iron Mountain, MI 49801, USA
Nicometo M, Emond JP, Melis RB, Uysal I. 2014
4 Georgia Institute of Technology, Electro-Optical Systems
Improvement in fresh fruit and vegetable
logistics quality: berry logistics field studies. Laboratory, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2013.0307 Shelf life of fresh fruits and vegetables is greatly
influenced by environmental conditions. Increasing
temperature usually results in accelerated loss of
One contribution of 10 to a Theme Issue quality and shelf-life reduction, which is not physically
‘Intelligent food logistics: decrease waste and visible until too late in the supply chain to adjust
improve quality by new technologies and logistics to match shelf life. A blackberry study
advanced warehouse management’. showed that temperatures inside pallets varied
significantly and 57% of the berries arriving at the
packinghouse did not have enough remaining shelf
life for the longest supply routes. Yet, the advanced
Subject Areas: shelf-life loss was not physically visible. Some of those
software pallets would be sent on longer supply routes than
necessary, creating avoidable waste. Other studies
Keywords: showed that variable pre-cooling at the centre of
first expiring first out, temperature, pallets resulted in physically invisible uneven shelf
shelf-life prediction life. We have shown that using simple temperature
measurements much waste can be avoided using ‘first
expiring first out’. Results from our studies showed
Author for correspondence: that shelf-life prediction should not be based on a
Mike Nicometo single quality factor as, depending on the temperature
e-mail: mike@nicometo.com history, the quality attribute that limits shelf life may
vary. Finally, methods to use air temperature to predict
product temperature for highest shelf-life prediction
accuracy in the absence of individual sensors for each
monitored product have been developed. Our results
show a significant reduction of up to 98% in the root-
mean-square-error difference between the product
temperature and air temperature when advanced
estimation methods are used.
2014 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction 2
A primary objective of this paper is to highlight the social and business value of new technology,
rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

.........................................................
focusing on reduced waste, increased quality and safety, along with increased demand and
value of fresh fruits and vegetables (FFVs). It happens too often that viable technical solutions
are not adopted by industry, whether owing to a communication disconnect between research,
technology and real-time operations, or because of a lack of confidence that new technology will
‘really’ provide a significant return on investment for business.
FFVs do not last as long as canned or frozen goods. They require specific temperature
and related storage conditions as well as very efficient distribution, because of their short
‘shelf life’. Shelf life is the period during which a fruit or vegetable maintains its desired
quality attributes. The desired quality attributes, however, depend on the grower, retailer and
consumer perceptions. It is common knowledge that to maximize shelf life there is a ‘best’
storage temperature for different FFVs. Too low a temperature causes chilling or freezing damage,
whereas higher than optimal storage temperatures reduce shelf life. Using berries as an example,
it could be stated that maximum shelf life is attained when fruits are held at 0◦ C. At 10◦ C, shelf life
is lost three times faster, which means the FFVs will have only one-third of the possible shelf life.
At 30◦ C, the FFVs will have less than 10% of their maximum shelf life. A key problem with
temperature-related advanced shelf-life loss (when compared with maximum shelf life) is that the
advanced rate of shelf-life loss is invisible, until the FFVs start to deteriorate so quickly that there
is little that can be done to deliver them to a closer market and to sell them in time for them to
be consumed. In this paper, we explore a blueberry supply chain to show that there is a 10 day
difference between the shortest and longest supply chains for those blueberries. We also illustrate
how using accelerated shelf-life loss data to manage inventory rotation by first expiring first out
(FEFO) versus first in first out (FIFO) can greatly reduce waste and improve quality.
In addition to the real-world studies and examples, we present a comprehensive summary of
shelf-life prediction factors, which are all affected by temperature, but where knowing more than
just temperature history is valuable, and why. We also look at how specialized algorithms have
been developed that use measured air temperature to estimate the temperatures within the centre
of a pallet, without needing to measure every case in the pallet. Using new technology solutions,
coupled with solid agricultural experience and shelf-life models, industry can experience a true
paradigm shift that reduces waste, increases quality and safety, increases demand and jobs, in
non-intrusive, cost-effective ways.
2. Field study
The studies in this section are based on fieldwork around berries. For the studies that monitored
berry time and temperature, the commodity used was Mexico-grown blackberries, being exported
to the USA. Other analysis and examples involve blueberries and strawberries. In the blackberry
study, it is helpful to review the most basic rules regarding shelf-life expectations and variables,
as relates to temperature. FFVs continue to respire after harvest, experiencing metabolic and other
chemical changes, which increase as the temperature increases. To obtain the maximum potential
shelf life, the berries should be cooled to 0◦ C and stored as close to 0◦ C as possible. Many berries
lose shelf life three times faster at 10◦ C, and over nine times faster at 30◦ C than they do at 10◦ C.
Because accumulated accelerated shelf-life loss is typically not ‘physically visible’ at key
inspection points, FIFO inventory and routing management assumes no advanced shelf-life
problems are present, so no adjustments to inventory rotation or routing are made. However,
if time and temperature data are available from the time of harvest, then accumulated accelerated
shelf-life loss can be calculated, and used to differentiate one pallet of fruit from another, in terms
of estimated remaining shelf life. This is valuable information, because the supply chain typically
has multiple choices for distribution, in terms of time from harvest to consumption. In some
instances, there can be over 10 days of difference between the shortest and longest supply chain
(figure 1).
supply chain logistics variation 3

blueberry export example (NW Canada to USA)
simplified overview to illustrate typical supply chain real time variation available for FEFO

.........................................................
we have 10 days difference between the shortest supply chain and the longest supply chain
supply chain process segment (typical) shortest (day) longest (day)
harvest, sort, pack, storage, ship out (could be ± 0.5 days) 1 1
truck to US brand owner warehouse 2 5
logistics segments
brand owner warehouse storage and shipping 0.5 3

trucking to retailer distribution centre 0.5 2
retailer distribution centre storage and transit to retail store 0.5 2
retail store storage, display and sale 0.5 2
total supply chain real time 5 15
quality and safe consumption time (at 10°C storage) 2–7+ 2
FEFO versus FIFO pallet level advantages at key decision points would be:
— US warehouse to ship to — inventory rotation at brand owner warehouse
— retail distribution centre to ship to — distribution centre inventory rotation
— retail store to ship to — retail store inventory rotation
— retail store display location — promotional pricing, mark downs, etc.
Figure 1. Many supply chains have destinations with variable distance and time. FIFO pallet-level inventory and routing is
generally based on pallet age from assumed harvest date and visible quality inspections. FEFO pallet-level inventory and
routing can be based on multiple factors, but the minimum consideration would be time and temperature history to determine
accumulated shelf-life loss between individual pallets, which is typically invisible during physical inspections until it is too late to
significantly avoid waste via remaining supply chain adjustments. Pallets with less shelf-life loss can be held in inventory longer
and sent on longer routes, when the shelf-life loss variations are known. Pallets with more shelf-life loss should be rotated faster
and sent on shorter remaining supply chains. Sending pallets out on an FIFO and visible quality inspection basis can and does
create waste, which can be avoided with time and temperature history and FEFO management. (Online version in colour.)
It is wasteful to send a pallet that has lower shelf life on a long supply chain, while
simultaneously sending a pallet with higher shelf life on a short supply chain. Where invisible
accelerated shelf-life loss can be determined, estimated pallet shelf life can be used to match each
pallet to the best inventory rotation and routing, to reduce waste, and maximize delivered quality
of the harvest. Most current cool supply chain logistic operations do monitor the temperature of
the air that pallets reside in: coolers, trailers or containers, display cases, etc.
However, the container or trailer ambient temperature can be misleading, because the
temperature ‘inside the case’ has been seen to vary significantly from the container ambient
temperature, and from one pallet to another. The FFVs may not have been properly pre-cooled,
resulting in higher core temperatures than expected. The FFVs are also creating heat from
respiration and metabolic processes. Transportation trailers or containers are not designed to
remove heat from the interior of a pallet. The circulation systems and temperature controls
monitor the general air temperature of the container or trailer. The temperature ‘inside the case’
is the temperature that determines the rate of shelf-life loss, not the ambient air of the container
or trailer.
Figure 2 shows an example of some of the different process steps involved in the food supply
chain, illustrating typical time and temperature during each stage, so that we can compare real
time with shelf-life loss time for each stage. The period of time from harvest to pre-cooling is
critical, because this is when the FFVs are at their highest temperature, and losing shelf life at
retailer DC and truck

trucking to retailer
time for consumer

4
expected ambient
expected ambient
store storage and

temperature (°C)
temperature (°F)
Mexico to USA
real time hours
shelf life hours
trucking from
storage in US
warehouse
to store
display
to eat
blackberries — Mexico export to US supply
lost
DC

.........................................................
chain segment
75.0 23.9 field - harvest and hold for pickup 2.25 23.44 4 2 2 2 2 2.00
60.0 15.6 field - trucking to packhouse 1.00 5.50 4 2 1 2 2 3.00
70.0 21.1 packhouse receiving / dock time 0.25 2.08 4 1 2 2 2 3.00
50.0 10.0 PHYSICAL INSPECTION - packhouse 4.00 12.00 4 1 1 2 2 4.00
32.0 — packhouse pre-cooling 1.75 1.75 4 1 0.5 2 2 4.50
34.0 1.1 packhouse storage 10.50 12.83 4 0.5 1 2 2 4.50
35.0 1.7 packhouse staging to ship 1.25 1.67 4 0.5 0.5 2 2 5.00
35.0 1.7 loading truck to export 1.50 2.00 4 2 2 0.5 0.5 5.00
35.0 1.7 trucking to US warehouse 95.00 126.67 4 1 1 0.5 0.5 7.00
38.0 3.3 US warehouse unloading 1.50 2.50 4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 8.00
38.0 3.3 PHYSICAL INSPECTION - US warehouse 2.00 3.33 2 2 2 2 2 4.00
34.0 1.1 US warehouse cold storage 46.00 56.22 2 2 1 2 2 5.00
37.0 2.8 US warehouse stage for shipping 0.50 0.78 2 1 2 2 2 5.00
37.0 2.8 US warehouse load truck to retail DC 0.50 0.78 2 1 1 2 2 6.00
34.0 1.1 trucking to retailer DC 48.00 58.67 2 1 0.5 2 2 6.50
36.0 2.2 PHYSICAL INSPECTION - retailer DC 12.00 17.33 2 0.5 1 2 2 6.50
33.0 0.6 trucking to retail store (FTL) 36.00 40.00 2 0.5 0.5 2 2 7.00
50.0 10.0 DC to retail store LTL — — 2 2 2 0.5 0.5 7.00
34.0 1.1 retail store receive, inspect, storage 24.00 29.33 2 1 1 0.5 0.5 9.00
44.0 6.7 retail store display and sale 24.00 56.00 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 10.00
55.0 12.8 consumer transportation home 0.50 2.13
34.0 1.1 consumer storage/consumer 47.50 58.06
total estimated days 15.00 21.38
Figure 2. Longest Mexico blackberry supply chain study with variable shorter routes and shelf life to consumer decision grid
example.
significantly accelerated rates. It is common to hear the phrase, ‘a one day delay in cut-to-cool is a
one day loss of shelf life’. Figure 2 also includes a grid showing real-time variation in harvest
to delivery. Depending on inventory rotation and routing, at expected temperatures for each
segment, consumers have between 2 and 10 days of quality.
Typical logistic operations only inspect the FFV pallets at key touch points: receiving at
the packing house dock, receiving at the US importing warehouse, receiving at the retailer
distribution centre (DC), and finally, receiving and display at the retail store. There are different
‘custodians’ of product, who have the responsibility to ensure good quality is delivered, but who
also have the competing objective of avoiding rejections, claims and quality losses. Each custody
group (e.g. grower, importer, retailer) do what they can to avoid losses. Physical inspection rules
acceptance of goods at these key touch points. This can be misleading, because accelerated shelf-
life loss is not visible until much later. The reliance ‘primarily on physical inspections only’,
coupled with the financial pressure to hide any problems, leads to significant waste later in the
food chain. The past lack of automated time and temperature data collection and processing to
empower industry to use FEFO models effectively has also led to continuation of the ineffective
physical inspection and FIFO methods used to date.
A study conducted by researchers at the University of Florida Research Center for Food
Distribution and Retailing revealed how ineffective physical inspections can be for identifying
advanced shelf-life loss, and the magnitude of waste it can cause (presented at University of
Florida Cold Chain Academy, 2009). Full truckloads of product were subjected to 4 h delays in
pre-cooling as well as no pre-cooling then sent from across the USA to a retailer for retail sale.
The study showed that, even where there was almost 92% waste, the problem only became visible
at the retail store. The problem was caused by the grower/shipper segment, but the retail store
segment would typically be blamed for these losses, because that is where the loss is first seen and
then realized. Retail buyers commonly say, ‘If it is bad, we reject it at the distribution centre’. The
retail buyers focus on avoiding out of stock situations and tend to attribute responsibility for high
5
rates of losses at the retail store to poor retail store handling and display practices. It should be
noted that the retail stores do cause significant losses due to poor handling practices in the retail

.........................................................
store, but it is a negative incentive for them to do everything right and still suffer from, and be
blamed for, losses that actually arise from previously invisible advanced shelf-life losses, which
they inherit from the supply chain. The retail store should not be held accountable for these losses.
The industry cannot fix what is broken, if it does not know what is broken.
In the first phase of the Mexico blackberry field study, over 200 pallets received from growers
were monitored for time and temperature. Temperature data loggers were placed in each flat
(case) of berries at the time of harvest (where the berries were placed in clamshells and flats).
The temperature and time were recorded through normal operations, where the berries were
kept in a covered area in the field, then picked up and transported to a central packing house
receiving dock. They were received at the dock, and then placed into a cooler area for inspection,
prior to ‘pre-cooling’. The time and temperature data were read while in the inspection cooler
area, and shelf-life loss was calculated based on the accumulated time and temperature, using a
simple curve, based on commonly accepted temperature-related accelerated shelf-life loss rates.
Over 99% of the product passed physical inspection and was placed in the supply chain, to be
managed on an FIFO basis. However, 57% of the product did not have enough shelf life for the
longest logistic path it may be sent through. A basic analysis of matching estimated remaining
shelf life to different available logistic cycles reduced the amount of product at risk of waste from
temperature-related advanced shelf-life loss from 57 to 1%.
An additional, avoidable logistics problem was revealed. Small growers commonly harvested
at slower rates of harvest, and travelled longer distances from the pack house, using a variety
of non-refrigerated vehicles, resulting in less than full pallet quantities of flats with more than
anticipated shelf-life loss. Where small grower quantities (less than a pallet) were received, the
flats of berries were aggregated on full pallets of product, resulting in pallets with considerable
variation of shelf life within one pallet, owing to variable source cut to cool delays. Combining
cases with similar shelf life can improve shelf-life FEFO operations, reducing waste.
The second phase of the Mexico blackberry study was focused on monitoring each pallet
during trucking to the brand owner’s California warehouse, which was scheduled to take
4 days of transit. Because it became evident in the first phase (cut to cool segment) that the
air temperature inside of the cases on a pallet tended to be warmer than the storage air the
pallets resided in, the transportation monitoring used one temperature data logger per pallet,
where the temperature logger was placed inside one of the cases on the pallet. One or two
additional temperature monitors were used to monitor the ambient air temperature of the
refrigerated trailers in which the product was transported in. The temperature monitors used
were battery-assisted radio-frequency identification (RFID) temperature tags, so that the data
could be retrieved automatically upon receiving at the US warehouse. The data showed that there
was a significant difference between each pallet, between the pallet temperatures and the trailer
temperatures (figure 3). The temperature variation and advanced shelf-life loss were generally
invisible to the physical receiving inspections. Some variation between pallets was expected, but
the consistent wide variation of ‘inside the case’ temperatures was surprising.
Further analysis of processes led to the conclusion that pallets were not being adequately
pre-cooled. Pre-cooling for the blackberries was by forcing air through the cases of blackberries
with high-capacity fans, in typical design pre-cooler rooms. Here, the primary way to remove
the residual field heat from the cases in the centre of the pallet is to force cool air through
the cases for a period long enough to reduce the pulp temperature of the fruit to the desired
temperature. Generally, operations run the pre-coolers for a specific period of time with a final
testing of product pulp temperature of outside (accessible) cases of product. Measuring the
temperature of product in the centre of some pallets confirmed that not all pallets were completely
cooled. The incomplete pre-cooling process for some pallets resulted in higher temperatures
throughout the remainder of the supply chain process for those pallets, even where storage and
transportation air temperatures are properly maintained throughout the remainder of the supply
47.0
refrigerated truck trailer transportation of blackberries from Mexico to California — total transportation time was 4+ days 6
46.0

.........................................................
45.0
44.0
each of the other lines represents the temperatures of individual pallets, as recorded
by temperature loggers placed ‘inside the case’ of one case of berries on each pallet
43.0
42.0
41.0
temperature (°F)
40.0
39.0
38.0
37.0
36.0
35.0
34.0
33.0
bold line represents
trailer standard temperature logger = ambient trailer air
32.0
Figure 3. Variation between the temperature ‘inside the case’ of one case on individual pallets, and the difference with the
general ambient air temperature of the refrigerated trailer. The variation between individual pallets and ambient air was
consistent on all loads. (Online version in colour.)
chain. The only opportunity to remove heat from the centre of the pallet is during pre-cooling,
where air is forced through the centre of the pallet. It was concluded that the incomplete pre-
cooling was caused by a combination of package design (air flow) and the placement of the pallet
in the pre-cooler, but primarily because different pallets were received with different residual
field temperatures to start with. To determine whether technology could be used to optimize
and improve pre-cooling, a testing and operational system was developed to measure supply
air temperature entering each pallet and return air temperature exiting each pallet. The overall
supply and return air temperatures in the pre-cooler were also measured (figure 4). This provides
better pre-cooling control and more effective pre-cooling management tools that improve shelf
life overall. This also provides energy savings where pre-cooling is complete before anticipated
(earlier day, cooler day harvest cycles, etc.).
FFVs in the food supply chain will always have variations in shelf life, starting at the cut-to-
cool segment. Analysis of using advanced shelf-life loss data to match estimated remaining shelf
life to available logistic routes shows huge benefit. An additional 24 h of pallet transportation
time, at 1.7◦ C, adds 1.00 days of real time and 1.33 days of shelf-life loss, resulting in three
of 20 logistics routes being unsuitable due to the additional loss of shelf life, when compared
with the ideal logistics plan (figure 5). Pallets with 8 h of cut-to-cool delay, at 23.9◦ C, added
0.33 days of real time and 3.47 days of shelf-life loss, resulting in 11 of 20 logistics routes being
unsuitable owing to the additional loss of shelf life, when compared with the ideal logistics plan
(figure 6). New systems are being developed to integrate automated time and temperature data
with existing inventory and routing systems. In figure 7, the left six columns illustrate typical
FIFO management. All products passed physical inspection and were treated equally in terms
of remaining shelf life. However, with accumulated time and temperature data, the inventory is
handled quite differently, avoiding waste, as illustrated by the four columns on the right—which
60 min 12/06/12 18:29

7
cooler supply air 31.5 F

.........................................................
pallet 1 pallet 3 pallet 5
31.8 F 31.4 F 32.4 F
— — —
— — —
— — —
— — —
— — —
— — —
36.0 F 34.0 F 35.7 F
cooler
33.4 F cooler loading
34.4 F return air door
return
34.7 F 34.5 F 35.0 F

— — —
— — —
— — —
— — —
— — —
— — —
31.8 F 30.9 F 32.1 F
pallet 2 pallet 4 pallet 6
cooler supply air 32.0 F
Figure 4. RFID temperature data loggers monitoring supply and return air for each pallet, as well as general pre-cooler supply
and return, show individual pallet cooling variations in real time (with permission of ProWare Services LLC and Franwell Inc.)
(Online version in colour.)
also give special handling alerts. The data shown in the above discussion focus on the grower and
brand owner custody segments. There are other studies that show retailer operational benefits of
using FEFO versus FIFO. It is clear that problems occur within the retailer DC, transport and store
operations. Yet, where accumulated shelf-life loss is not physically visible as it occurs, it is difficult
to determine all process improvement opportunities and all stakeholders suffer from the impact
of large amounts of avoidable waste. Adoption of new technology and process management can
be a true paradigm shift.
It is difficult to estimate the general reduction of losses that can be realized using FEFO
versus FIFO, because each commodity and related supply chain variables are specific to that
combination. For example, where 57% of the blackberries arriving at the packing house dock did
not have enough shelf life for the longest supply chain routes, only a portion of those blackberries
would normally be assigned to the longest supply routes, which varies throughout the season,
based on demand, pricing and supply. The advantage of FEFO is likely to be greater during
peak supply periods, where the shipper has enough supply to match different pallets to different
shipments, because when supply is not sufficient, the shipper has to ship what is on-hand to
meet orders and avoid out-of-stock complaints. There are obvious advantages to having data that
make otherwise invisible advanced shelf-life loss known, and pallet-level shelf-life loss variation
is valuable to varying levels, dependent on supply and market factors.
Product being grown, distributed and marketed locally can have much higher quality and
shelf life delivered to the consumer, compared with longer logistic distribution, but even with
time for consumer

8
expected ambient
expected ambient
store storage and

temperature (°C)
temperature (°F)
Mexico to USA
retailer DC and
real time hours
shelf life hours
trucking from
storage in US
truck to store
warehouse
display
to eat
lost
DC

.........................................................
chain segment
75.0 23.9 field - harvest and hold for pickup 2.25 23.44 4 2 2 2 2 0.67
60.0 15.6 field - trucking to packhouse 1.00 5.50 4 2 1 2 2 1.67
70.0 21.1 packhouse receiving/dock time 0.25 2.08 4 1 2 2 2 1.67
34.0 1.1 consumer storage/consumer 47.50 58.06 adding 24 h to transportation, takes
total estimated days 16.00 22.71 1.00 days of real time, and 1.33 days of shelf life
baseline estimated days 15.00 21.38 MATCH LOGISTICS TO SHELF LIFE TO
variation days 1.00 1.33 REDUCE WASTE POTENTIAL
Figure 5. Adding 24 h to transportation only affects three rotation/routing options. Matching rotation/routing to shelf life
eliminates waste. (Online version in colour.)
time for consumer

expected ambient
expected ambient
store storage and

temperature (°C)
temperature (°F)
Mexico to USA
retailer DC and
real time hours
shelf life hours
trucking from
storage in US
truck to store
warehouse
display
to eat
lost
DC
chain segment
75.0 23.9 field - harvest and hold for pickup 10.25 106.77 4 2 2 2 2 (1.47)
60.0 15.6 field - trucking to packhouse 1.00 5.50 4 2 1 2 2 (0.47)
70.0 21.1 packhouse receiving / dock time 0.25 2.08 4 1 2 2 2 (0.47)
34.0 1.1 consumer storage/consumer 47.50 58.06 adding 8 h to pre-cool delay, takes
total estimated days 15.33 24.85 0.33 days of real time, and 3.47 days of shelf life
baseline estimated days 15.00 21.38 MATCH LOGISTICS TO SHELF LIFE TO
variation days 0.33 3.47 REDUCE WASTE POTENTIAL
Figure 6. Adding 8 h to cut-to-cool affects 11 rotation/routing options. Matching rotation/routing to shelf life eliminates waste.
(Online version in colour.)
typical FIFO inventory rotation and routing - based on physical inspection FEFO inventory rotation and routing - pallet level
FIFO shelf life FEFO 9
FIFO ship routing adjustment FEFO ship routing
actual date by date (distance per logged by date (distance ship -

.........................................................
received US (inventory to time and (inventory to route
lot no. pallet no. product warehouse rotation) retailer) temperature rotation) retailer) order
1234 5678 blackberry 1218 09 Dec 2011 11 Dec 2011 all OK –2.91 IMMEDIATE very close 1
1234 5681 blackberry 1218 09 Dec 2011 11 Dec 2011 all OK +0.56 11 Dec 2011 normal 4
1234 5684 blackberry 1218 09 Dec 2011 11 Dec 2011 all OK +1.25 12 Dec 2011 longer 7
1234 5688 blackberry 1218 09 Dec 2011 11 Dec 2011 all OK +2.05 13 Dec 2011 very long 11
Figure 7. Blackberry study: US warehouse receiving, where pallets graded equal based on physical inspection and rotated and
routed on FIFO basis, versus how each pallet should be rotated and routed on FEFO basis, using measured advanced shelf-life
loss.
locally grown and distributed product, the ‘local grower’ can waste any shelf life advantage by
not adequately managing the cut-to-cool time and not properly pre-cooling the product.
3. Shelf life and environmental conditions

(a) Shelf life
Shelf life is the period during which a fruit or vegetable maintains its desired quality
attributes. The desired quality attributes, however, depend on the grower, retailer and consumer
perceptions. For example, berry yield, absence of defects and firmness are major concerns for
growers, whereas retailers are concerned with the fruit’s appearance and suitability for purchase
upon arrival at the store. Consumers, on the other hand, look for an attractive fruit with uniform
colour, good eating quality and a reasonable ‘refrigerator shelf life’.
Depending on the product, shelf life may be limited by microbiological growth or by enzymatic
and biochemical reactions, which are all governed by temperature. Microbial growth can be
harmless, but can also cause food spoilage or disease; however, the changes in foods caused
by microorganisms are not always perceived by the human eye. Enzymatic and biochemical
reactions that also limit shelf life are usually triggered by internal or external factors that may
result in changes in food appearance and composition. In FFVs, changes in the typical appearance
of the product (i.e. colour, texture, freshness) often determine the end of shelf life. Overall, the
shelf life of FFVs depends on an array of variables and their changes over time. These include
the type of crop, cultivar, origin and weather conditions, and pre-harvest factors such as field
treatments applied (i.e. water supply, chemicals) as well as postharvest factors such as quality and
maturity at harvest, type of postharvest treatments applied (i.e. pre-cooling, waxing, coatings,
heat treatments, fumigation) and environmental conditions such as temperature, humidity and
atmosphere. While humidity and atmosphere can be reasonably controlled by appropriate
packaging, the temperature of FFVs greatly depends on the environmental conditions. Therefore,
the shelf life of FFVs depends considerably on their temperature history throughout the
supply chain.
(b) Temperature
Environmental conditions, primarily temperature, have a major impact on the overall quality
and shelf life of FFVs, particularly that of highly perishable fruits such as berry fruits.
Good temperature management is the most important and simplest way for delaying product
10

.........................................................
0
5
temperature (°C)
10
15
20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
time (days)
Figure 8. Impact of temperature on the appearance of ‘Killarney’ red raspberries during a storage period of 7 days [4,6]. (Online
version in colour.)
deterioration. Optimum quality maintenance and maximum shelf life can be reached only when
FFVs are promptly cooled to their optimum temperature as soon as possible after harvest
and subsequently maintained under optimum temperature conditions. However, delays before
cooling and poor temperature management inevitably occur throughout the FFV supply chain,
contributing to a reduction in overall quality and maximum potential shelf life. Several studies
have shown that promptly pre-cooling berry fruits and subsequently maintaining optimum
temperature significantly reduces loss of quality during storage and extends shelf life. For
example, decreasing the cooling delays from 16 to 2 h significantly reduced weight loss and
softening of blueberries during subsequent storage [1]. In order to reduce decay and loss of quality
during storage, strawberries should also be pre-cooled immediately or not more than 2 or 3 h after
harvest [2]. If, after harvest, strawberries are not pre-cooled or are inadequately pre-cooled, the
waste at the retail level can be as high as 92 to 50%, respectively (JP Emond et al. 2005, unpublished
data).
Numerous studies have shown the negative effects of temperature above 0◦ C on the overall
quality (i.e. sensorial, physical and compositional) of berries, yet few studies give information
regarding specific shelf-life times when fruits are exposed to optimum and non-optimum
temperatures. For example, depending on the cultivar, blackberries stored continuously at 2◦ C
had a shelf life of 4–10 days, whereas exposure to 5◦ C reduced their shelf life by half [3]. ‘Chester
Thornless’ blackberries stored at 0◦ C had 4 days of shelf life and retained better visual quality for
longer periods of time when compared with fruit stored at 5, 10, 15 and 20◦ C, which maintained
an acceptable appearance during approximately 1 or 2 days [4]. The quality of blueberries stored
continuously at 2◦ C was acceptable up to 11 days, whereas retail quality was reduced to 3 days
after holding the berries 4 days at 21◦ C [5]. Raspberries are among the most perishable small
fruits, and maximum shelf life is expected to be 2–7 days when held at temperatures from −0.5
to 0◦ C [6,7] (figure 8). The shelf life of strawberries can be as short as 5–7 days, even when stored
at 0◦ C [4]. Finally, fluctuating temperatures often encountered during shipping and distribution
11
of FFVs may also result in increased loss of quality and reduced shelf life [8]. For example,
strawberries exposed to fluctuating temperatures developed darker colour, had evident dryness

.........................................................
of the skin and were considered unmarketable after approximately 3 days, whereas those held at
semi-constant temperatures were still acceptable after 4 days [9].
(c) Humidity
Besides temperature, relative humidity (RH) of the surrounding environment is also an important
factor that should be controlled during the handling of FFVs. Temperature and RH are critical in
minimizing the difference in water vapour pressure between the product and the environment.
The humidity of the surrounding environment should be maintained at a level that minimizes the
water vapour pressure deficit. Therefore, when RH is too low, transpiration is enhanced, resulting
in loss of moisture. The rate of fruit or vegetable transpiration, and thus loss of moisture, can
be reduced by raising the RH, by lowering the air temperature, by minimizing the difference
between the air temperature and the fruit temperature, by reducing air movement and by
protective packaging. The use of protective packaging creates an environment with higher RH
and thus helps reduce loss of moisture. However, fungal decay may constitute a problem when
FFVs are exposed to high temperature and high RH. In addition, fluctuating temperatures may
induce condensation inside the package and on the surface of the product creating a favourable
environment for fungal growth. For example, after 4 days, decay was higher in strawberries
held at either 10◦ C or 20◦ C and 95% RH (11.7% and 90.0%, respectively) compared with fruit
held at either 10◦ C or 20◦ C and 75% RH (3.9% and 59.2%, respectively) or 85% RH (9.3% and
90.0%, respectively) [10]. Few studies have yet reported the effects of different levels of RH on
the quality and shelf life of FFVs [11–13], and to the best of our knowledge, no studies have been
published on the effects of RH on the shelf life of berry fruits, presumably because small fruits are
usually commercialized in clamshells. Therefore, it is assumed that controlling RH is, in this case,
negligible compared with good temperature management. However, preliminary studies showed
that when blueberries and strawberries were stored at a constant temperature (2◦ C) in commercial
clamshells, even though the shelf life (based on sensory attributes) was slightly extended by high
RH compared with low RH, the lower the RH, the higher the weight loss and the lower the content
in bioactive compounds (MCN Nunes 2013, unpublished data).
(d) Atmosphere
The use of low temperatures combined with controlled atmosphere (CA) storage or modified
atmosphere packaging (MAP) have been successfully used with beneficial effects in reducing
decay, extending shelf life as well as maintaining quality of many FFVs. When combined with
proper refrigeration, one of the major benefits of CA storage or MAP is to slow down the
metabolic processes that normally occur within the cells that lead to ripening and senescence
of FFVs. Several studies showed that the use of CA storage has a beneficial effect on the quality
of berry fruits such as blackberries [14], blueberries [15], raspberries [16] and strawberries [17,18].
These and other studies have shown that when held under adequate CA conditions, the quality
of small fruits can be maintained for longer periods of time compared with that of fruits stored
in air, but few studies specify shelf-life times. For example, Duarte et al. [19] showed that after
24 days at 0◦ C, blueberries from different CA treatments had a higher percentage of marketable
fruits (35–45%) compared with those held in air (28%). The strawberry shelf life was also increased
when fruits were held at 5◦ C in high O2 concentrations (10–14 days) compared with storage in air
(6 days) [20]. Blackberries stored in 10% O2 plus 15% CO2 had less decay when stored for 7 days at
2◦ C and no adverse effect on flavour when compared with fruits stored in air [14]. In raspberries,
CA storage at 1.7◦ C reduced the respiration rate (RR) of the fruit and the development of decay
and kept the berry colour more attractive compared with air-storage [16]. Similarly, CA storage
of strawberries at low temperatures resulted in fruit with less decay, more attractive appearance,
12
better texture and aroma and higher nutritive value [17,18].

.........................................................
4. Shelf-life prediction
(a) Predictive microbiology
Predictive microbiology is based on modelling the growth of spoilage microorganisms inside or
on the surface of foods as a function of the characteristics of food (i.e. salt concentration, water
activity, pH), time and temperature. These models display the typical sigmoidal appearance of
the bacterial growth curve and have been used to calculate the shelf life of several minimally
processed vegetables [21]. These models are usually based on the response of the prevailing
microorganism in a specific food and thus are only valid under a specific range of conditions
outside which other microorganisms may also be responsible for spoilage [22]. Besides, the
characteristic and complexity of food systems, the contribution of non-microbial factors to food
deterioration and the possible interactions between microorganisms are some of the limitations
to the practical application of predictive microbiology [23,24]. Furthermore, predictive models
of microbial growth may not always be accurate in determining the end of FFV shelf life,
because deterioration of sensory quality often limits their shelf life before microbial growth
attains maximum acceptable values. Thus, the use of such models is more relevant when
the quality of food is strictly related to the growth of spoilage organisms. Nevertheless, they
constitute important food safety tools, particularly in predicting the shelf life of ready-to-eat FFVs,
because they can forecast when microbial counts reach the maximum acceptable contamination
values [21,25–28].
(b) Respiration rate

Respiration involves a chain of enzyme-catalysed oxidation–reduction reactions that breaks down
FFVs’ organic reserves (carbohydrates, fats and proteins) into simple molecules. Briefly, during
respiration, simple sugars (i.e. glucose) are combined with oxygen (O2 ) from the atmosphere
to produce carbon dioxide (CO2 ), water and the energy (adenosine triphosphate) necessary
to maintain the cell metabolism. The rate of respiration is closely related to the rate of cell
metabolism, because the energy resulting from respiration drives all other reactions within a cell.
Furthermore, there is an inverse relationship between the FFV RR and shelf life: the higher the
RR, the shorter the shelf life. Thus, the rate of the metabolic reactions that occur within the cells
of living organisms normally increases as the surrounding temperature increases. The changes in
the metabolic rates (i.e. chemical reactions) owing to temperature are typically described using
Q10 , which is the ratio of the rate of a specific reaction at one temperature (T1 ) versus the rate
at that temperature + 10◦ C (rate at T1 + 10◦ C/rate at T1 ) [29]. Because respiration gives a broad
estimate of the effect of temperature on the overall metabolic rate of the living tissue, the Q10
values often refer to respiration. Shelf-life data based on limiting quality attributes versus RR were
previously reported for blueberries and raspberries [6,30]. Possible reasons for the differences
in the shelf life of blueberries and raspberries from our studies and those based on RR from
the data reported in the literature are most likely related to unclear information regarding the
cultivar(s) used, the quality and maturity of the fruit at harvest, the time between harvest and
the beginning of data collection, the season and weather as well as other environmental factors
such as transport or storage conditions. In our blueberry and raspberry studies [6,30], all of the
above variables were identified and the quality of the fruit at the beginning of the data collection
was considered excellent.
One of the factors that have a paramount impact on the shelf life of FFVs is the quality at
harvest. If the initial quality of FFVs is considered good or acceptable instead of excellent, then
the shelf life of the product will be clearly shortened. That might explain the longer shelf life of
the blueberries and raspberries stored at 10◦ C, 15◦ C or 20◦ C compared with the data from the
literature (Q10 ). Another reason for the difference between shelf life from experimental quality
13
curves and the predicted quality curves may be that RR is not always a reliable predictor of fruit
quality or salability. That is, when only the RR is measured, the single aspect considered is the

.........................................................
O2 consumed and CO2 released and not the FFVs’ visual quality. That means that FFVs may be
respiring (consuming O2 and releasing CO2 ) at a low rate, but this may not relate to whether
they remain acceptable in terms of sensory quality. Overall, RR measures the O2 consumed and
the CO2 released, but not quality attributes such as appearance, texture or composition. Besides,
physical injury, stress and/or decay are not taken into consideration when RR is used to predict
FFV shelf life.
(c) Single quality factor

Shelf-life prediction based on single quality factors assumes changes in a particular quality
attribute as a measure of averaged biological ageing or developmental pattern. For example,
Hertog [31] used a mechanistic modelling approach to predict shrivelling in apples (based on
weight loss) and colour change in avocados, assuming that the rejection or acceptance of each of
these crops is based on some biology-based quality aspects whose behaviour is a function of time.
Later, Hertog et al. [32] used the colour changes of tomatoes as a function of time–temperature
to develop a mathematical approach to the interpretation of postharvest behaviour combining
kinetic models with the concept of biological age and suggested that this approach enables
postharvest management taking into account the full range of product variations. Modelling
based on single FFV quality attributes has also been used by others in an attempt to predict
shelf life under different storage conditions. For example, colour has been used to predict the
batch-keeping quality of cucumbers based on the chlorophyll degradation patterns [33], to predict
the maturity of mangoes [34] and for the assessment of safe storage based on changes in the
whiteness of mushrooms under MAP [35]. Firmness, another important quality attribute, has
been used to predict nectarine shelf life [36,37]. A model based on changes in soluble solids
content was used to predict the time for sapote mamey to reach the ripe stage [38]. Overall,
a single quality factor approach can be used to effectively predict FFV shelf life, but only
within a well-defined postharvest scenario in which the factor being monitored is actually shelf-
life limiting. However, a single factor does not usually limit FFV shelf life under a range of
different conditions.
(d) Multiple quality factors

We have developed mathematical models (Emond and Nunes) based on experimental data
collected from various FFVs’ multi-quality factor evaluations and shelf-life studies [6,11–13,
30,39–44]. Using these data, an algorithm was developed to integrate changes over time in
quality attributes of FFVs. Examples of differential equations from these measurements can
be found in Nunes et al. [6,30]. Piagentini et al. [45] and Meng et al. [46] used a similar
multi-quality factor approach to model the shelf life of fresh-cut vegetables and suggested
that the mathematical models developed are a useful tool to predict quality loss or shelf life
under a broad range of storage temperatures normally encountered during the supply chain
process. In a recent study, Amodio et al. [47] also used several quality attributes showing
significant changes over time to model sensorial and nutritional changes and the shelf life of
fresh-cut melons. The authors concluded that the Weibull model fitted sensorial and chemical
changes better than conventional zero- and first-order models. Besides, results from our
previous studies agree with results from Amodio et al. [47] in that at the marketability limit
(minimum acceptable quality before a product becomes unmarketable), some quality factors
may be more critical than others and that a single quality attribute cannot be used to express
loss of quality [13,44]. Finally, according to Amodio et al. [47], loss in vitamin C should be
taken into consideration rather than shelf life being estimated based only on appearance. In
fact, our previous work showed that more than 50% of the initial content of vitamin C in
(a) (b)
14
28
500
27

.........................................................
26
480
25
24
460
23
days
22
440
21
20
420
19
18
400
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
box number
Figure 9. (a) Temperature distribution inside a pallet as the container temperature increases (from top left to bottom right);
(b) shelf life of each box under after a 24 h summer temperature profile. (Online version in colour.)
snap beans may be lost before the product had reached the minimum acceptable sensory
quality [44].
5. How to estimate product temperatures with external pallet sensors

for high accuracy shelf-life prediction
In order to ensure the longest shelf life, the perishable food products must be kept under
controlled temperatures throughout transportation and storage in a well-managed cold chain.
Monitoring devices are used to ensure temperature integrity; however, resource limitations and
cost factors severely limit their use to one-per-pallet or even one-per-container scenarios. For
example, in a traditional shipping scenario with no additional environmental monitoring in place,
there are one to three sensors placed inside, expected to represent the wide temperature spectrum
in the shipping container. In fact, even when there is additional temperature information
available via more extensive use of sensors inside the container, the monitoring resolution rarely
goes beyond pallet level. Nevertheless, owing to characteristics of food and insulation of the
packaging, the temperature is not always homogeneously distributed inside the pallet, and using
a single sensor for the entire pallet does not provide a realistic representation.
We investigated the extent and the effects of temperature differences inside a food pallet as
we looked at first strike rations (FSRs), which are compact, eat-on-the-move military rations
consisting of several components and primarily semi-perishable, intermediate moisture, ready-
to-eat food components. FSRs are able to withstand a wide range of temperatures, but just like
all perishables, if the temperature threshold is surpassed, deterioration is accelerated. Hence, to
ensure quality and safety, it is ideal to monitor FSR temperatures at every stage in as detailed
a manner as possible. It is important to note that even though the algorithms discussed in this
section were developed for FSR pallets, the methodology to acquire the data for training these
algorithms and the way their input–output relationships are constructed will be similar for FFVs.
The FSR pallet used in this study consisted of 45 cartons, each of which is instrumented to
measure the product temperature throughout the full duration of a 24 h summer temperature
profile. As the temperature inside the container which houses the FSR pallet was varied,
differences on the temperature distribution were documented. Cartons closer to the core of the
pallet exhibited different temperature dynamic behaviour compared with the exterior cartons
(figure 9a). As expected, the rate of temperature increase at the centre of the pallet was lower than
the outside of the pallet owing to isolation of the cartons and heat transfer dynamics of the food
itself. While the average temperature throughout transportation might be similar for all cartons,
because the shelf-life losses increase exponentially at higher temperatures, one can observe a
significant difference between the remaining predicted shelf lives of products (figure 9b). At the
hidden layers:
15
create and model
nonlinear relationship

.........................................................
between input and output
output:
estimated product
temperature
input layer:
consists of source
sensors placed
outside the pallet
Figure 10. The structure of an artificial neural network to estimate temperature dynamics. (Online version in colour.)
end of transportation, the cartons in the middle of the pallet possessed longer shelf lives compared
with the cartons located near the outside. Therefore, one can conclude that the temperature
variations inside a pallet have a quantifiable impact on individual product qualities.
We investigated how to estimate the full temperature distribution inside an FSR pallet using
a different number of sensors placed outside the pallet. Note that the goal of this study is not
to find the optimal placing or number of sensors which is a different research problem [48].
Three International Safe Transit Association temperature profiles were used, a regular summer
profile (30◦ C to 25◦ C), wide range summer profile (50◦ C to 20◦ C) and winter profile (14◦ C to
4◦ C), to develop and compare three different temperature estimation algorithms. The capacitor
method is used, because the temperature rise and fall rates within a food pallet closely resemble
rise/fall time constants in a resistor–capacitor electrical circuit [49]. The input to the capacitor
method consists of a single ambient temperature vector where the outputs are defined by different
rise/fall constants for each location in the pallet. As the second algorithm, the Kriging method has
previously been used in environmental estimation problems defined within a continuous feature
space (such as temperature inside a homogeneous container) [48]. Finally, as the third algorithm,
we assume that the inherently nonlinear relationship between the product temperature inside a
pallet and the air temperature can be modelled by an artificial neural network (ANN) as shown in
figure 10 [50]. Input to the network consists of time–temperature data provided by the sensor(s)
placed outside the pallet, whereas output is the estimated time–temperature data for products
placed inside the pallet. Hidden layers consist of artificial neurons, which weigh and sum their
inputs as they propagate their outputs to the next hidden layer. ANNs need to be trained with part
of the temperature data to learn how to estimate the nonlinear relationship between the input and
target output. A significant advantage of the ANN method is the fact that heat-generating FFV
temperature patterns can be predicted more effectively as additional nonlinearities in the model,
which can impact the performance of capacitor and Kriging methods.
In order to compare the different estimation algorithms, we looked at the average root-mean-
squared error (RMSE) between actual and estimated temperatures for each box inside the pallet
and the air temperature (table 1). Out of all the methods used in the study, ANN showed the
16
16
air temperature
14 real temperature

.........................................................
Kriging estimation
capacitor estimation
12
neural net estimation
temperature (ºC)
10
0 10 20 30 40 50
time (h)
Figure 11. Winter profile temperature estimations. (Online version in colour.)
Table 1. Root-mean-squared errors for estimated and actual product temperatures compared with ambient temperature
difference.
average product average air
experiment analysis method temperature RMSE (◦ C) temperature RMSE (◦ C)
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
wide range summer profile capacitor 1.08 11.60

Kriging 1.15
neural network 0.29
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
summer profile capacitor 1.91 3.56

Kriging 3.30
neural network 0.17
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
winter profile capacitor 0.45 3.38

Kriging 0.89
neural network 0.16
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
best overall performance followed by the capacitor and Kriging method. For example, for the
winter temperature profile, ANN resulted in 0.16◦ C average RMSE between actual and estimated
product temperature compared with the ambient temperature RMSE difference of 3.38◦ C which
we would have if no estimation algorithm was used.
Out of all temperature profiles, the winter profile is the best approximation to
real-life cold-chain transportation which typically includes a pre-cooling period and
varying temperatures around 5–6◦ C, because most perishable products are stored under
controlled temperatures during most of their shelf life. Figure 11 shows the ambient temperature
compared with the average actual and estimated product temperatures by each of the three
methods for winter profile. It is very important to note that, although neural network displayed
a better estimation performance compared with the other two, all three methods estimated
values closer to real product temperatures. In fact, as shown in table 1, in each of the nine
combinations using three different profiles and three different methods, the average RMSE
17
between the estimated and the actual product temperatures was lower compared with the average
RMSE of the ambient temperature.

.........................................................
6. Concluding remarks
Traditional FIFO inventory management of FFVs is not capable of eliminating waste caused by
accumulated, invisible, shelf-life loss. New solutions using new RFID temperature monitoring
technology are emerging that empower the FFV industry to significantly reduce waste and
increase quality, profit, jobs in producing countries and food safety. As automated data collection
solutions are adopted by industry, advanced multi-factor shelf-life prediction models can enhance
the benefits of the collected data even more. As the success of recent algorithms to predict internal
pallet temperatures receives more industry awareness, using these new methods can further the
benefit of automated data collection and help advanced solution evolution further. However,
it is naive to assume that product-level temperature monitoring exists in most commercial
perishable cold chains. Multiple constraints ranging from technological challenges to increased
cost of high-resolution monitoring limit temperature monitoring in most cases to a single-
location air temperature measurement. However, it is crucial to have sufficient insights into
product temperature during transportation for effective shelf-life prediction. Changes in ambient
temperature create non-homogeneous temperature distributions inside perishable food pallets
during transportation which cause significant and quantifiable shelf-life differences between
boxes stacked inside the same pallet. In situations where high-resolution monitoring is not
feasible, various estimation algorithms such as ANNs can predict the product temperature based
on the ambient temperature. As the cold-chain industry slowly adopts enhanced monitoring
technologies and standards, such methods can provide better insight and improved supply chain
management in the absence of adequate hardware.
Acknowledgements. The authors thank the US Army NSRDEC and the University of Florida for providing the
support needed to carry out the work presented in §5 of the article.
References
1. Tetteh MK, Prussia SE, NeSmith DS, Verma BP, Aggarwall D. 2004 Modelling blueberry
firmness and mass loss during cooling delays and storage. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 47,
1121–1127. (doi:10.13031/2013.16543)
2. Nunes MCN, Brecht JK, Sargent SA, Morais AMMB. 2005 Prompt cooling reduces incidence
and severity of decay caused by Botrytis cinerea and Rhizopus stolonifer in strawberry.
HortTechnology 15, 153–156.
3. Perkins-Veazie P, Collins JK, Clark JR. 1993 Fruit characteristics of some erect blackberry
cultivars. HortScience 28, 853.
4. Nunes MCN (ed). 2008 Color atlas of postharvest quality of fruits and vegetables. London, UK:
Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
5. Lang GA, Tao J. 1992 Postharvest performance of southern highbush blueberry fruit.
HortTechnology 2, 366–370.
6. Nunes MCN, Emond J-P, Brecht JK. 2003 Predicting shelf life and quality of raspberries under
different storage temperatures. Acta Horticulturae 628, 599–606.
7. Perkins-Veazie P. 2004 Raspberry. In The commercial storage of fruits, vegetables, and florist
and nursery crops (eds KC Gross, CY Wang, M Saltveit). Beltsville, MD: US Department of
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. http://usna.usda. gov/hb66/121raspberry.pdf
(accessed 6 October 2013).
8. Nunes MCN. 2008 Impact of environmental conditions on fruit and vegetable quality. Stewart
Postharvest Rev. 4, 1–14. (doi:10.2212/spr.2008.4.4)
9. Nunes MCN, Emond J-P, Brecht JK. 2003 Quality of strawberries as affected by temperature
abuse during ground, in-flight and retail handling operations. Acta Horticulturae 604, 239–246.
10. Shin U, Liu RH, Nock JF, Holliday D, Watkins CB. 2007 Temperature and relative
humidity effects on quality, total ascorbic acid, phenolics and flavonoids concentrations,
and antioxidant activity of strawberry. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 45, 349–357. (doi:10.1016/
18
j.postharvbio.2007.03.007)
11. Chilson D, Delgado A, Nunes MCN. 2011 Shelf life of vine tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum)

.........................................................
stored at non-chilling temperature and different relative humidity levels. Proc. Florida State
Hort. Soc. 124, 246–255.
12. Nunes MCN, Delgado A, Emond J.-P. 2012 Quality curves for green bell pepper (Capsicum
annuum L) stored at low and recommended relative humidity levels. Acta Horticulturae 945,
71–78.
13. Nunes MCN, Emond J-P. 2013 Influence of environmental conditions on the quality
attributes and shelf life of ‘Goldfinger’ bananas. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 86, 309–320.
(doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2013.07.010)
14. Perkins-Veazie P, Collins JK. 2002 Quality of erect-type blackberry fruit after short intervals
of controlled atmosphere storage. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 25, 235–239. (doi:10.1016/
S0925-5214(02)00025-X)
15. Schotsmans W, Molan A, MacKay B. 2007 Controlled atmosphere storage of rabbiteye
blueberries enhances postharvest quality aspects. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 44, 277–285.
(doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2006.12.009)
16. Haffner K, Rosenfeld HJ, Skrede G, Wang L. 2002 Quality of red raspberry Rubus idaeus L.
cultivars after storage in controlled and normal atmospheres. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 24,
279–289. (doi:10.1016/S0925-5214(01)00147-8)
17. Nunes MCN, Morais AMMB, Brecht JK, Sargent SA. 2002 Fruit maturity and storage
temperature influence response of strawberries to controlled atmospheres. J Am. Soc. Hort.
Sci. 127, 836–842.
18. Almenar E, Hernández-Muñoz P, Lagarón JM, Catalã R, Gavara R. 2006 Controlled
atmosphere storage of wild strawberry fruit (Fragaria vesca L.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 54, 86–91.
(doi:10.1021/jf0517492)
19. Duarte C, Guerra M, Daniel P, Camelo AL, Yommi A. 2009 Quality changes of highbush
blueberries fruit stored in CA with different CO2 levels. J. Food Sci. 74, S154–S159.
(doi:10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01118.x)
20. Ayala-Zavala JF, Wang SY, Wang CY, González-Aguilar A. 2007 High oxygen treatment
increases antioxidant capacity and postharvest life of strawberry fruit. Food Technol. Biotechnol.
5, 166–173.
21. Corbo MR, Nobile MAD, Sinigaglia M. 2006 A novel approach for calculating shelf
life of minimally processed vegetables. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 106, 69–73. (doi:10.1016/
j.ijfoodmicro.2005.05.012)
22. Pin C, Baranyi J. 1998 Predictive models as means to quantify the interactions of spoilage
organisms. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 41, 59–72. (doi:10.1016/S0168-1605(98)00035-X)
23. McMeekin TA, Ross T. 1996 Shelf life prediction: status and future possibilities. Int. J. Food
Microbiol. 33, 65–83. (doi:10.1016/0168-1605(96)01138-5)
24. Verhaelen K, Bouwknegt M, Lodder-Verschoor F, Rutjes S, Husman AMR. 2012 Persistence
of human noravirus GII.4 and GI.4, murine noravirus, and human adenovirus of soft berries
as compared with PBS at commonly applied storage conditions. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 160,
137–144. (doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2012.10.008)
25. Labuza TP, Fu B. 1993 Growth kinetics for shelf-life prediction: theory and practice. J. Ind.
Microbiol. 12, 309–323. (doi:10.1007/BF01584208)
26. Riva M, Piergiovanni L, Schiraldi A. 2001 Performances of time–temperature indicators in
the study of temperature exposure of packaged fresh foods. Packag. Technol. Sci. 14, 1–9.
(doi:10.1002/pts.521)
27. Jacxsens L, Devlieghere F, Debevere J. 2002 Temperature dependence of shelf-life as affected
by microbial proliferation and sensory quality of equilibrium modified atmosphere packaged
fresh produce. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 26, 59–73. (doi:10.1016/S0925-5214(02)00004-2)
28. Sinigaglia M, Corbo MR, D’Amato D, Campaniello D, Altieri C. 2003 Shelf-life
modeling of ready-to-eat coconut. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 38, 547–552. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-
2621.2003.00695.x)
29. Kays SJ, Paull RE. 2004 Metabolic processes in harvested products. In Postharvest biology (eds
SJ Kays, RE Paull), ch. 3, pp. 79–136. Athens, GA: Exon Press.
30. Nunes MCN, Emond J-P, Brecht JK. 2004 Quality curves for highbush blueberries as a function
of the storage temperature. Small Fruits Rev. 3, 423–440. (doi:10.1300/J301v03n03_18)
31. Hertog MLATM. 2002 The impact of biological variations on postharvest population
19
dynamics. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 26, 253–263. (doi:10.1016/S0925-5214(02)00044-3)
32. Hertog MLATM, Lammertyn J, Desmet M, Scheelinck N, Nicoläi BM. 2004 The impact of

.........................................................
biological variation on postharvest behavior of tomato fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 34, 271–
284. (doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2004.05.014)
33. Schouten RE, Tijskens LMM, van Kooten O. 2002 Predicting keeping quality of batches of
cucumber fruit based on a physiological mechanism. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 26, 209–220.
(doi:10.1016/S0925-5214(02)00017-0)
34. Jha SN, Chopra S, Kingsly ARP. 2007 Modeling of color values for nondestructive evaluation
of maturity of mango. J. Food Eng. 78, 22–26. (doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.08.048)
35. Paul S, Rai DR. 2010 An empirical approach for assessment of safe storage period for
button mushroom (Agaricus bisporus) based upon color changes under modified atmosphere
packaging. J. Food Process. Preservation 34, 557–570. (doi:10.1111/j.1745-4549.2009.00374.x)
36. Rizzolo A, Vanoli M, Zerbini PE, Jacob S, Torricelli A, Spinelli L, Schouten RE, Tijskens LMM.
2009 Prediction of ability of firmness decay models of nectarines based on the biological
shift factor measured by time-resolved reflectance spectroscopy. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 54,
131–140. (doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2009.05.010)
37. Zerbin PE, Vanoli M, Lovati F, Spinelli L, Torricelli A, Rizzolo A, Lurie S. 2011 Maturity
assessment at harvest and prediction of softening in a late maturing nectarine cultivar after
cold storage. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 62, 275–281. (doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2011.06.008)
38. Díaz-Pérez JC, Bautista S, Villanueva R, López-Gómez R. 2003 Modeling the ripening of
sapote mamey [Pouteria sapota (Jacq.) H.E. Moore and Stearn] fruit at various temperatures.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 28, 199–201. (doi:10.1016/S0925-5214(02)00123-0)
39. Nunes MCN, Emond J-P, Brecht JK. 2001 Temperature abuse during ground and in-flight
handling operations affects quality of snap beans. HortScience 36, 510.
40. Nunes MCN, Proulx E, Emond J-P, Brecht JK. 2003 Quality characteristics of ‘horn of plenty’
and ‘medallion’ yellow summer squash as a function of the storage temperature. Acta
Horticulturae 628, 607–617.
41. Nunes MCN, Emond J-P, Brecht JK, Dea S, Proulx E. 2007 Quality curves for mango
as a function of the storage temperature. J. Food Quality 30, 104–120. (doi:10.1111/j.1745-
4557.2007.00109.x)
42. Proulx E, Nunes MCN, Emond J-P, Brecht JKB. 2001 Quality curves for tomato exposed at
chilling and non-chilling temperatures. HortScience 36, 509.
43. Proulx E, Nunes MCN, Emond J-P, Brecht JK. 2005 Quality attributes limiting papaya
postharvest life at chilling and non-chilling temperatures. Proc. Florida State Hort. Soc. 118,
389–395.
44. Proulx E, Yagiz Y, Nunes MCN, Emond J-P. 2010 Quality attributes limiting snap bean
(Phaseolus vulgaris L.) postharvest life at chilling and non-chilling temperatures. HortScience
45, 1238–1249.
45. Piagentini AM, Mendez JC, Guemes DR, Pirovani ME. 2005 Modeling changes of sensory
attributes for individual and mixed fresh-cut leafy vegetables. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 38,
202–212. (doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2005.07.001)
46. Meng X, Zhang M, Adhikari B. 2012 Prediction of storage quality of fresh-cut
green peppers using artificial neural network. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 47, 1586–1592.
(doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2012.03007.x)
47. Amodio ML, Derossi A, Colelli G. 2013 Modeling sensorial and nutritional changes
to better define quality and shelf life of fresh-cut melons. J. Agric. Eng. 44, 38–45.
(doi:10.4081/jae.2013.e6)
48. Jedermann R, Palafox-Albarrán J, Robla JI, Barreiro P, Ruiz-García L, Lang W. 2011
Interpolation of spatial temperature profiles by sensor networks. In Proc. IEEE Sensors,
Limerick, Ireland, 28–31 October 2011, pp. 778–781. (doi:10.1109/ICSENS.2011.6127148)
49. Badia Melis R, Brecht E, Lowe A, Uysal I. 2013 Pallet-wide temperature estimation and
mapping for perishable food. In American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers Annual
Meeting, Kansas City, MO, 21–24 July 2013.
50. Zhang GP, Qi M. 2005 Neural network forecasting for seasonal and trend time series. Eur. J.
Oper. Res. 160, 501–514. (doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2003.08.037)
View publication stats

Reducing Strawberry Waste and Losses in The Postharvest Supply Chain Via Intelligent Distribution Management

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reducing Strawberry Waste and Losses in The Postharvest Supply Chain Via Intelligent Distribution Management

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Reducing strawberry waste and losses in the postharvest supply

Article in Acta horticulturae · July 2016

Jeffrey K. Brecht Maria Cecilia do Nascimento Nunes

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jean-Pierre Emond Ismail Uysal

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Improvement in fresh fruit and vegetable logistics

References This article cites 45 articles, 3 of which can be accessed free

Subject collections Articles on similar topics can be found in the following

software (38 articles)

To subscribe to Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A go to:

Improvement in fresh fruit

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

supply chain logistics variation 3

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

brand owner warehouse storage and shipping 0.5 3

retailer DC and truck

time for consumer

store storage and

shelf life hours

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

60 min 12/06/12 18:29

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

34.7 F 34.5 F 35.0 F

cooler supply air 32.0 F

time for consumer

store storage and

shelf life hours

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

time for consumer

store storage and

shelf life hours

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

3. Shelf life and environmental conditions

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

(b) Respiration rate

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

(c) Single quality factor

(d) Multiple quality factors

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

5. How to estimate product temperatures with external pallet sensors

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

Figure 11. Winter profile temperature estimations. (Online version in colour.)

wide range summer profile capacitor 1.08 11.60

summer profile capacitor 1.91 3.56

winter profile capacitor 0.45 3.38

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 372: 20130307

View publication stats

You might also like