Temperature and packing influence in storage of

minimally processed pineapple and papaya

P.C.C. Lima1, P. Calvo2,a, P.S. Souza3, B.M. Vilas Boas4 and B.S. Souza3
1Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa, Brazil; 2The University of Queensland University, Brisbane, Australia;
3IFSULDEMINAS, Muzambinho, Brazil; 4IFSULDEMINAS, Machado, Brazil.

Abstract
Pineapple and papaya have laborious peeling and cutting, making them
inconvenient to the consumer. For this reason, the present work aims to study the
chemical aspects for conservation of minimally processed ‘Formosa’ papaya and
‘Pérola’ pineapple together in the same packing. Fruits were selected, washed,
sanitized (200 mg Cl L-1) and stored for 12 h at 10°C. Then, the fruits were minimally
processed in a room at 12°C, pineapples were peeled, cut into slices (1.5-2.0 cm thick),
and these slides cut in halves, papayas were cut longitudinally in half, ends and seeds
were removed and then sliced in transvers direction (1.5-2.0 cm thick). The slices were
rinsed (20 mg Cl L-1), drained and packed in PET trays with lids and styrofoam trays
covered with PVC film and stored at 4 and 8°C. Every 3 days during storage time, soluble
solids (SS), titratable acidity (TA), SS/TA ratio, pH, ascorbic acid, soluble carbohydrates,
color (luminosity, Hue, chromaticity), mass loss, texture and appearance were
evaluated. For both products, there was an increase in titratable acidity at 4°C and small
decreases in soluble solids, SS/TA ratio and pH, these changes being more pronounced
at 8°C. Ascorbic acid increased in pineapple and decreased in papaya at 8°C. Soluble
carbohydrates decreased in pineapple at 4°C, while in papaya the greater decrease
occurred at 8°C. Larger increases in luminosity, Hue angle and chromaticity were
observed at 4°C, and they were more significant for pineapple. After 9 days of storage,
both fruits presented adequate quality for consumption and sale, the best temperature
was 4°C in combination with the styrofoam packing covered with PVC.

Keywords: postharvest, fresh-cut, Ananas comosus, Carica papaya

INTRODUCTION
Pineapple is a commonly consumed fruit due to its excellent organoleptic quality, being
a good source of vitamins, sugars and fibers, besides assisting in the digestive process
(Figueiredo et al., 2003). Papaya is also highly appreciated for its pleasant taste, suitable sugar
content, low acidity, nutrient balance and the presence of vitamin A and C, and it is known to
have nutritional properties beneficial to human health (Martins, 2005). However, both have
low consumer convenience, since they require laborious peeling. Minimally processed fruits
are products that have been subjected to physical changes to maintain their freshness (De
Ancos et al., 2011). Fruit mixes, in which two or more fruits are combined to obtain a product
with special characteristics, are often used to meet consumer needs regarding flavor, texture
and the nutritional value of fruit (Rojas-Graü et al., 2011). The process of peeling and cutting
promotes the release of enzymes, causing the fruit surface to brown and negatively affecting
product appearance (Ragaert et al., 2011).
This study aims to evaluate the chemical aspects for conservation related to
temperature and packing influence on pineapple and papaya minimally processed together in
the same packing.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The fruits were obtained in the local market, where they were harvested at commercial
maturation stage: ‘Perola’ pineapple – center of each fruit yellowish or up to 25% of yellow
aE-mail: paula.calvobrenes@uq.net.au

Acta Hortic. 1278. ISHS 2020. DOI 10.17660/ActaHortic.2020.1278.7 45

Proc. IV International Conference on Postharvest and Quality Management of
Horticultural Products of Interest for Tropical Regions
Eds.: C.K. Beneragama et al.
peel; ‘Formosa’ papaya – up to 25% of the yellow surface and matured until reaching 50 to
75% of yellow peel (Paull and Chen, 1997). Afterwards, the fruits were transported to the
Agroindustry of IFSULDEMINAS - Muzambinho, Minas Gerais and were selected, washed,
sanitized (200 mg L-1 chlorine) and stored for 12 h at 10°C. After this, in a cold room (12°C)
with all utensils sanitized, pineapples were peeled, cut into slices (1.5-2.0 cm thick). Papayas
were cut longitudinally in half, ends and seeds were removed and then sliced in transvers
direction (1.5-2.0 cm thick). The slices were rinsed (20 mg Cl L-1), drained and packed together
in PET trays with lids and Styrofoam trays covered with PVC film and stored at 4 and 8°C.
Following parameters were evaluated every 3 days during storage time: soluble solids
(SS) – determined in digital refractometer (Atago PR 101), expressed in °Brix (AOAC, 2012);
titratable acidity (TA) – expressed in g citric acid 100 g-1 (AOAC, 2012); SS/TA ratio(Tressler
and Joslyn, 1961); pH – determined using a potentiometer (AOAC, 2012); ascorbic acid,
expressed in mg ascorbic acid 100 g-1, where pulp diluted with 5% oxalic acid was titrated
with Tillman reagent (2,6-dichlorophenolindofenol sodium 0.1%) (AOAC, 2012); soluble
carbohydrate contents (Dubois et al., 1956) and the results were expressed as g sucrose 100
g-1; color (L*, Hue angle, chromaticity) (Minolta Corp., 1994); mass loss – calculated by the
difference between the final weight and the initial weight of the package; texture – determined
by Penetrometer FT 327 with 8-mm tip, expressed in Newtons and appearance – evaluated
according to the scale (Souza et al., 2005), where it was considered that the product was still
suitable for commercialization with note 3.
The statistical design was the completely randomized, with 3 replicates, having a
package as an experimental unit. The polynomial regression models, used for storage time,
were selected based on the models tested and the coefficient of determination. The graphs
were compiled using SigmaPlot 10.0 software.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

During storage, the texture of the products presented a variable behavior (Figure 1A, B)
in which the temperature had a greater influence on this variable than the type of packaging,
showing increase at 4°C and decrease at 8°C. These changes can be attributed to changes in
the structures and composition of the cell wall by the action of enzymes (Wiley, 1994) or the
loss of moisture promotes the formation of a resistant surface tissue, causing the pieces to
become firmer (Souza et al., 2005). The minimally processed products maintained a suitable
appearance for commercialization, indicated by the note below 3 until the 9th day (Figure 1C),
but the styrofoam tray covered with PVC film showed slightly better appearance than PET
packaging. Sarzi et al. (2002), also observed that ‘Pé rola’ pineapple minimally processed and
stored at 3 and 6°C, maintained a suitable appearance and flavor for consumption, for up to 9
days. The mass loss by the products during storage was greatly reduced due to the protection
offered by the packages, but the packaging type had a greater influence on this variable than
the temperature (Figure 1D), in which the losses in styrofoam trays covered with PVC were
higher, and was attributed to the higher permeability of the film to water vapor. This behavior
was also observed by Sarzi et al. (2002) in minimally processed pineapples.
During storage, darkening occurred only in products stored in styrofoam trays stored at
8°C (Figure 2A, B), probably due to the decomposition of the enzymes and substrates, which
led to darkening reactions. For the other treatments, there were increases in luminosity, a
behavior that agrees with that observed by Trigo et al. (2012) in which the papaya luminosity
of the control sample and those coated with rice starch, sodium alginate and carboxymethyl
cellulose tended to increase in 15 days of storage.

46
 20
Pineapple A 12
Papaya
B
18
10

16
Texture (Newtons)

8
14
6
12

4
10
y = 0,0544x3-1,1615x2+7,1322x+5,39 R²=1 y = 0,0998x2-1,3012x+9,7183 R²=0,8848
y = -0,0555x3+1,3067x2-9,5187x+34,627 R²=1 y = 0,0524x3-1,2794x2+9,2465x-11,76 R²=1
8 2
y = -0,1951x2+3,3456x+3,9608 R²=0,9768 y = 0,0524x3-1,225x2+8,4843x-8,6567 R²=1
y = 0,0393x3-0,7985x2+4,4372x+8,33 R²=1 y = -0,0232x3+0,5172x2-3,303x+11,597 R²=1
0 0
0 3 6 9 12 0 3 6 9 12
Days Days

Pineapple/Papaya C Pineapple/Papaya D
y = -0,0006x2+0,0266x+0,0305 R²=0,9979
4,5 1,6
y = 0,0006x2+0,0035x+0,1016 R²=1
4,0 y = -0,003x2+0,12x-0,0182 R²=0,9996
1,4
y = 0,003x2+0,0519x+0,2887 R²=0,907
3,5
1,2
Packing weight loss (%)
Packing appearance

3,0
1,0
2,5
0,8
2,0
0,6
1,5

1,0 y = 0,0185x2-0,0556x+1,6667 R²=1 0,4

y = 0,0185x2-0,0556x+2 R²=1
0,5 y = -0,0093x2+0,3278x+0,75 R²=0,9966 0,2
y = 0,0093x2+0,1167x+0,9167 R²=0,9981
0,0 0,0
0 3 6 9 12 0 4 6 8 10 12
Days Days

Figure 1. A) Texture of pineapple; B) texture of papaya; C) packing appearance of pineapple

and papaya; D) packing weight loss of pineapple and papaya. Symbols: ⦁ – PET tray
with lid at 4°C, ∎ – PET tray with lid at 8°C, ▲ – styrofoam tray covered with PVC
film at 4°C and ♦ – styrofoam tray covered with PVC film at 8°C. Notes for
appearance: 1 = optimal, 2 = good, 3 = regular, 4 = bad and 5 = very bad.

In the minimally processed products, it is possible to notice that hue angle and
chromaticity (Figure 2C, D, E, F) maintained better stability when the products were stored at
4°C, regardless of the packaging. Pineapple slices had a yellow coloration and papaya
remained a vivid orange color due to the higher amount of pigments. Such behavior was also
observed by Argañ osa et al. (2008) in which minimally processed papaya cut into pieces
retained their natural yellow/red color for 10 days of storage.
Titratable acidity contents were more influenced by storage temperature and presented
an inverse behavior between pineapple and papaya (Figure 3A, B) as observed by Figueiredo
et al. (2003) in the study of minimally processed pineapple stored at 5 and 9°C. The variations
found can be attributed to variations in the organic acids content that are dissolved in the
vacuoles of the cells, both in the free and in the combined form, such as salts, esters, glycosides,
etc. (Chitarra and Chitarra, 2005).

47
Figure 2. A) Luminosity (L*) of pineapple; B) L* of papaya; C) color of pineapple; D) color of
papaya; E) chroma of pineapple; and F) chroma of papaya. Symbols: ⦁ – PET tray
with lid at 4°C, ∎ – PET tray with lid at 8°C, ▲ – styrofoam tray covered with PVC
film at 4°C and ♦ – styrofoam tray covered with PVC film at 8°C.

48
Figure 3. A) Titratable acidity of pineapple; B) titratable acidity of papaya; C) soluble solids
of pineapple; D) soluble solids of papaya; E) SS/TA reason of pineapple; and F)
SS/TA reason of papaya. Symbols: ⦁ – PET tray with lid at 4°C, ∎ – PET tray with lid
at 8°C, ▲ – styrofoam tray covered with PVC film at 4°C and ♦ – styrofoam tray
covered with PVC film at 8°C.

49
Figure 4. A) pH of pineapple; B) pH of papaya; C) vitamin C of pineapple; D) vitamin C of
papaya; E) soluble carbohydrates of pineapple; and F) soluble carbohydrates of
papaya. Symbols: ⦁ – PET tray with lid at 4°C, ∎ – PET tray with lid at 8°C, ▲ –
styrofoam tray covered with PVC film at 4°C and ♦ – styrofoam tray covered with
PVC film at 8°C.

50
 Soluble solids contents were also more influenced by the storage temperature (Figures
3C, D), where the products had higher values at 4°C. The results are similar to Figueiredo et
al. (2003) for minimally processed pineapple stored at 5°C and Argañ osa et al. (2008) for
minimally processed papaya stored at 4°C. Reductions in soluble solids contents at higher
temperatures related to the consumption of substrates in metabolism are also reported by
Figueiredo et al. (2003).
The SS/TA ratio was more influenced by storage temperature and showed an inverse
behavior between pineapple and papaya (Figure 3E, F), while there was an increase in
pineapple at 4°C and there was a decrease for papaya. Therefore, papaya stored at 8°C, the
highest values reported after 12 days of storage may be due to the deterioration process.
During storage, the pH values were more influenced by the storage temperature, and
presented lower values at 8°C for both products (Figure 4A, B) as observed by Figueiredo et
al. (2003) in minimally processed pineapples stored for 10 days at 5 and 9°C.
The ascorbic acid contents were more influenced by the storage temperature, and
presented higher values at 8°C for both products (Figure 4C, D). The results for pineapple are
similar to Figueiredo et al. (2003) for minimally processed pineapple stored at 5 and 9°C and
for papaya are similar to those found by Argañ osa et al. (2008) for minimally processed
papaya stored at 4°C. The reductions at lower temperatures can be attributed to the portion
from which the samples were extracted because, according to Spironello et al. (1997), can
present significantly different levels of ascorbic acid, as they come from the basal or apical
region of the fruits.
The soluble sugars contents were also influenced by the storage temperature and
presented an inverse behavior between pineapple and papaya (Figure 4E, F), while higher
values in pineapple stored at 4°C were lower for papaya. According to Chitarra and Chitarra
(2005), the variations in the soluble sugar content may be related to the ripening process of
the fruits, due to biosynthesis, degradation of polysaccharides or fruit water loss.

CONCLUSIONS
When chemical analysis is considered, the products presented adequate quality for
consumption and sale for up to nine days while showing better maintenance of chemical
aspects during storage at 4°C in packing styrofoam tray covered with PVC film.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank the Fundaçã o de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais
(FAPEMIG) for project funding (APQ-00926-09) and IFSULDEMINAS, Muzambinho, for the
support and infrastructure.

Literature cited
AOAC. (2012). Official Methods of Analysis, 19th edn (Gaithersburg: Association of Official Analytical Chemistry),
pp.3000.
Argañ osa, A.C.S.J., Raposo, M.F.J., Teixeira, P.C.M., and Morais, A.M.M.B. (2008). Effect of cut-type on quality of
minimally processed papaya. J. Sci. Food Agric. 88 (12), 2050–2060 https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.3309.
Chitarra, M.I.F., and Chitarra, A.B. (2005) Pó s-Colheita de Frutas e Hortaliças: Fisiologia e Manuseio, 2nd edn
(Lavras: FAEPE), pp.785.
De Ancos, B., Sá nchez-Moreno, C., Plaza, L., and Cano, M.P. (2011). Nutritional and health aspects of fresh-cut
vegetables. In Advances in Fresh-Cut Fruits and Vegetables Processing, O. Martı́n-Belloso, and R. Soliva-Fortuny,
eds. (London, New York: CRC Press), p.145–184.
Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Rebers, P.A., and Smith, F. (1956). Colorimetric method for determination of
sugar and related substances. Anal. Chem. 28 (3), 350–356 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60111a017.
Figueiredo, R.M.F., Queiroz, A.J.M., and Noronha, M.A.S. (2003). Armazenamento de abacaxi minimamente
processado. Rev. Bras. Prod. Agropec. 1, 95–103.
Martins, D.S. (2005). Papaya Brasil: Mercado e Inovaçõ es Tecnoló gicas para o Mamã o (Vitó ria, ES: Incaper), pp.666.
Minolta Corp (1994). Precise Color Communication: Color Control from Feeling to Instrumentation (Ramsey:
Minolta Corporation Instrument Systems Division), pp.49.

51
Paull, R.E., and Chen, W. (1997). Minimal processing of papaya (Carica papaya L.) and the physiology of halved fruit.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 12 (1), 93–99 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5214(97)00030-6.
Ragaert, P., Jacxsens, L., Vandekinderen, I., Baert, L., and Devlieghere, F. (2011). Microbiological and safety aspects
of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables. In Advances in Fresh-Cut Fruits and Vegetables Processing, O. Martı́n-Belloso,
and R. Soliva-Fortuny, eds. (London, New York: CRC Press), p.53–86.
Rojas-Graü , M.A., Garner, E., and Martı́n-Belloso, O. (2011). The fresh-cut fruit and vegetables industry current
situation and market trends. In Advances in Fresh Cut Fruits and Vegetables Processing, O. Martı́n-Belloso, and R.
Soliva-Fortuny, eds. (London, New York: CRC Press), p.145–184.
Sarzi, B., Durigan, J.F., and Rossi, O.D., Junior. (2002). Temperatura e tipo de preparo na conservaçã o de produto
minimamente processado de abacaxi ‘Pé rola’. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 24 (2), 376–380 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-
29452002000200020.
Souza, B.S., Durigan, J.F., Donadon, J.R., and Teixeira, G.H.A. (2005). Conservaçã o de mamã o ‘Formosa’ minimamente
processado armazenado sob refrigeraçã o. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 27 (2), 273–276 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-
29452005000200021.
Spironello, A., Nagai, V., Sobrinho, J.T., Teixeira, L.A.J., and Sigrist, J.M.M. (1997). Avaliaçã o agrotecnoló gica de
variedades de abacaxizeiro, conforme os tipos de muda, em Cordeiró polis (SP). Bragantia 56 (2), 333–342
https://doi.org/10.1590/S0006-87051997000200014.
Tressler, O.K., and Joslyn, M.A. (1961). Fruit and Vegetables Juice - Processing Technology (Westport: The AVI Pub.
Inc.), pp.1028.
Trigo, J.M., Albertini, S., Spoto, M.H.F., Sarmento, S.B.S., Lai Reyes, A.E., and Sarrié s, G.A. (2012). Efeito de
revestimentos comestı́veis na conservaçã o de mamõ es minimamente processados. Braz. J. Food. Technol. 15 (2),
125–133 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1981-67232012005000005.
Wiley, R.C. (1994). Minimally Processed Refrigerated Fruits and Vegetables (New York: Chapman & Hall), pp.368.

52