DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Temperature determines post-harvest quality of spinach leaves after gamma irradiation

  • Kim, Jin-Hong (Advanced Radiation Technology Institute, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) ;
  • Kim, Ji Hong (Advanced Radiation Technology Institute, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) ;
  • Lee, Min Hee (Advanced Radiation Technology Institute, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) ;
  • Kim, Jin Kyu (Advanced Radiation Technology Institute, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) ;
  • Chung, Byung Yeoup (Advanced Radiation Technology Institute, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute)
  • Received : 2014.03.14
  • Accepted : 2014.03.30
  • Published : 2014.03.01

Abstract

The relative importance of radiation dose, storage time, and temperature in radiation processing of spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.), was evaluated in terms of the postharvest quality through a model study using leaf disks. Physiological activity and chlorophyll and carotenoid contents were measured to represent the postharvest quality (in terms of external appearance) of spinach, a leafy green vegetable. At $22^{\circ}C$ and $30^{\circ}C$, the higher gamma-radiation dose caused a greater decrease in the physiological activity, depending on the storage time of 4 d. However, this decrease was not significant at $4^{\circ}C$ and $15^{\circ}C$. Total chlorophyll and carotenoid contents were substantially decreased by 3 kGy at $15^{\circ}C$, and dose-dependently by 0.5-3 kGy at $22^{\circ}C$. In contrast, the proportion of lutein in total carotenoid was significantly increased in the 2-3-kGy samples only at $22^{\circ}C$, while that of ${\beta}$-carotene was slightly decreased, indicating progression of leaf aging. These data suggest that the unfavorable effect of gamma irradiation on the postharvest quality of spinach could be avoided or controlled by the storage time or temperature rather than the radiation dose. The current study could be available to improve radiation processing of other leafy green vegetables.

Keywords

References

  1. Kader, A. A., Food Technol. 1986, 40(6), 117-121.
  2. Hallman, G. J.; Lenvang-Brilz, N. M.; Zettler, J. L.; Winborne, I. C. J. Econ. Entomology. 2010, 103(6), 1950-1963. https://doi.org/10.1603/EC10228
  3. Hallman, G. J. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2012, 81, 861-866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2012.03.010
  4. Fan, X.; Sokorai, K. J. B. J. Food Sci. 2008, 73, S367-S372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2008.00871.x
  5. Lester, G. E.; Hallman, G. J.; Perez, J. A. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 4901-4906. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf100146m
  6. Zhang, L.; Lu, Z.; Lu, F.; Bie, X. Food Control 2006, 17, 225-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2004.10.005
  7. Kim, J.-H.; Moon, Y. R.; Lee, M. H.; Kim, T. H.; Lee, J.-W.; Chung, B. Y. Kor. J. Hort. Sci. Technol. 2010, 28(1), 126-131.
  8. Kim, J.-H.; Moon, Y. R.; Lee, M. H.; Kim, J. H.; Wi, S. G.; Park, B.-J.; Kim, C. S.; Chung, B. Y. J. Radiat. Res. 2011, 52, 441-449. https://doi.org/10.1269/jrr.10157
  9. Niemira, B. A. J. Food Prot. 2007, 70, 2526-2532. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-70.11.2526
  10. Neal, J. A.; Cabrera-Diaz, E.; Marquez-Gonzaalez, M.; Maxim, J. E.; Castillo, A. J. Food Prot. 2008, 71, 2415-2420. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-71.12.2415
  11. Krause, C. H; Weis, E. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1991, 42, 313-349. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pp.42.060191.001525
  12. Lu, C.; Lu, Q.; Zhang, J.; Kuang, T. J. Exp. Bot. 2001, 52(362), 1805-1810. https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/52.362.1805