post cosecha uvas

Postharvest research and its contribution to export inIsrael: grape production as a model

Dr Amnon Lichter

Department of Postharvest ScienceARO, The Volcani Center

The significance of postharvest research to export andlocal markets

In general the cost of production after harvest is about 50% of the total cost.

Therefore investment in proper postharvest practice is essential to minimize losses.

The presence of infrastructure for postharvest researchensures that problems and modifications can be handled and performed in a professional manner.

Local markets can be negative or positive drivers of quality

The Table grape model

The investment in labor to prepare vineyards for high quality grape production is estimated at 30% of annual cost.

Strong local market and presence of strong local producer derives quality to high standards.

Maintenance of high quality in local markets persuades importers to buy fruit from farmers with good practice.

If there is one standard for local markets and export companies – export can be done upon demand at any time during the season.

In the case of table grapes there are 2 major exportwindows.1. Early production in May when fruit from South Africa and Chile is no longer available2. A “mountain” of grapes in the middle of the season makes export very economical.

In addition – local storage extends the season by 3-4 month and there is minor export of fruit from local storage

For Table grapes – export serves as a buffer for the local market.

The Avocado/Pepper model

Export is a major driver of quality. The overall production ismuch larger than local market demands.The local markets serves as a buffer for the export and as a source of sale of low grade produce.

Example what can be done for tomato

Tomato model

Medium export due to competition – export is reserved to“niche” produce such as cluster tomato (this niche developed over the last 10 years to 0.5 M tons in EU market).

In tomato fluctuations in production make export less profitable. Cold stress causes attenuation of supply > rise in fruit price in the local market > decline in profitability to export tomato.

Col

or (h

)Fi

rmne

ss (g

r/mm

)290

280

270

260

Rotem

250

240

230

50

46

42

38

Control MCP Control MCP

15.1.07 22.1.07

Rotem

34

30Control MCP Control MCP

15.1.07 22.1.07

Semi commercial experiment with 1-MCP to delayripening and extend the season in cherry tomato

Deca

y (%

)

100

80

60

40

20

0

Orange 12C

a a

a a

a

b

b b b

b

b b

Cheek Severe

Cheek Initial

Stem end Severe

Stem end Initial

C 300 600 C 300 600 C 300 600 C 300 600

1 2 3 4

Experiments in avocadoand apples with 1-MCP to delay ripening, reduce decay and storagedisorders

1-MCP Control

Postharvest research: the Israeli model

Structure of the department of postharvest science

Root vegetables

Fruit

Herbs

Vegetables 4

3

2

1

0

Phytopathology

Transgenics

Fresh cut

Flowers

•In large (and rich) countries postharvest science is

scattered

•In small countries (especially isolated countries) it

makes sense to bring together all the postharvest

scientists.

•This can produce competition among them but also fast

dissemination of knowledge across the board.

•The key is to build a successful structure is to minimize

overlap and build synergistic interactions

•It is also important to keep tight connections with the

industry, the farmers and the consumers.

Lessons from the Israeli export system

The situation in the past• One big company• One medium company• Three small companies

The big company had:A network of growers and product managers Logistic and R&D department sShips and a network of branches in Europe

Investment in new knowledge and support of research was highResearchers had an address to address problems Standard quality was maintained at high level

Competition was low and wastage was high Large investments failed to deliverKeeping the entire network was costly

The situation today

•The big company did not make it.•The medium company became big•The smaller exporters kept there share or became smaller•More than a hundreds of small companies joined the race

•Competition became very high•R&D was broken down•A lot of knowledge was lost•The standards became low•Incidents of low quality export reflected on all the companies•The association between Israel as a label of quality deteriorated.

Achievements in grape production and export in Israel

•Advancing ripening•Delaying ripening•Improving grape quality•Study of factors affecting sensitivity to decay•Improving current storage methods•Development of alternative storage technologies

Application of ABA to advance ripening: the extreme case

Control 400 / 800 ppm S-ABA

Dist

ribut

ion

of fr

uit c

olor

(%)

Ethrel facilitates reduction in the amount of ABA

31.0

7.9

28.4 30.7

62.7

73.2

61.1

74.3

58.7

Dark

Medium

Light

Green

17.89.9

18.8

10.6

Control S-ABA S-ABA Ethrel E+S

200 400 0.05% 200+0.05%

Advancing production of Flame Seedless - Jordan ValleyControl Ethrel X 2 S-ABA 600 ppm

Delaying maturation of Thompson Seedless with the cytokinin CPPU

Multiplex3 – portable autofluoresence instrument to measure fruit quality in the vineyard

FLR

(FER

_RU

V; S

FR)

FLR

(NBI

; FER

_RG)

5 2.0

4 1.5

3 1.0

2 0.5

11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

0.0

SFR_G SFR_R FER_RUV FER_RG NBI_G NBI_R

SFR_

R

The effect of CPPU on chlorophyll level in Thompson Seedless grapes

2.9

2.7

2.5

2.3

2.1

1.9

1.7

Control

2ppm 1st

4ppm 1st

2ppm 2nd

4ppm 2nd

1.5

Delay of maturation of Thompson Seedless grapes with CPPU

Rachis Browning after storage

After Harvest After Storage

1 2 3 4 5

Image analysis

Rach

is In

dex

Brow

ning

(Br-

50)

Comparison of subjective and objective measurements

Thompson5

2 d 4 d 7 d 11 d

4

1.0

0.8

Thompson

2 d 4 d

3 0.6

0.4

20.2

1VPD

RH T

0.06 0.07 0.41 0.68

95 97 67 70

10 20 11 19

0.0

VPD

RH T

0.06 0.07 0.41 0.68

95 97 67 70

10 20 11 19

BR-5

0

The effect of packaging on rachis quality in 4 table grape cultivars

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

Control a Packaging a

a

b b b

aa

0.2

0.1

0.0A B C D

Cultivars

2- למ נט•ם SO2 ש חרור

DR-O VL9-5d VL3

SO2

ppm

Prolonging storage of grapes by improved control of SO2 release

• י

120

100

80

60

40

20

00 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

ימים

XF PE

Dec

ay (%

)C

O2

(%)

Combination of sanitation and modified atmosphere for improved storage of grapes

25

20

45 d15

10

5

010 15 20 25 30 35 Control Ethanol

40 a a

30

20

b 10

c 0

45 d+3

b b

cMA MA+EtOH

Specific liners with control of excess RH

EFControl

Air-phase control of decay during storage

Air-phase control of fungal development

0 h 1h 3 h

0 h 6 h

6 h 12 h 24 h1h 12 h

h 24 h

T0=0 T0=24 h

The question: who do we work for…

The Abubaker familyChad

1.23 $ a week

The Malander family Germany

500 $ a week

The truth is probably in the middle