Advertisement

European Food Research and Technology

, Volume 245, Issue 12, pp 2655–2668 | Cite as

Fruit aroma and sensorial characteristics of traditional and innovative Japanese plum (Prunus salicina Lindl.) cultivars grown in Italy

  • Cosimo Taiti
  • Camilla Pandolfi
  • Stefania CaparrottaEmail author
  • Matilde Dei
  • Edgardo Giordani
  • Stefano Mancuso
  • Valter Nencetti
Original Paper
  • 153 Downloads

Abstract

Plums are climacteric fruits with reduced shelf life and they represent a very appreciated product for fresh consumption. European consumers can find several plum cultivars that offer different organoleptic characteristics, flavor and aroma. In this study, chemical properties, such as total soluble solids (TSS), pH, titratable acidity, total phenolic and anthocyanin contents, aroma profile and sensory evaluation of seven plum cultivars were investigated. Significant differences in chemical properties were found in ‘Settembrine’ and ‘Angeleno’, the late ripening European plums that showed the highest TSS content and the lowest acidity values. As expected, a high level of anthocyanins was detected in red pulp and red flesh plums such as ‘Dofi Giudy’ and ‘Black Diamond’, though significant differences in their total phenolic amount were observed. ‘Dofi Giudy’, ‘Black Diamond’ and ‘Laroda’ showed the highest aroma profile among the investigated cultivars. Finally, a discrimination among the cultivars was obtained by combining the volatile profiles with a back-propagation neural network analysis (BPNN). The results showed that C6 compounds such as esters and aldehydes were strongly related to flavor perception of the panelists. ‘Dofi Giudy’ was the mostly appreciated plum due to its juiciness, sweetness and flavor intensity; furthermore, when compared to the other cultivars, it also showed remarkable levels of total soluble solids, total phenolic and anthocyanin contents.

Keywords

Plum cultivar Chemical properties Neural network analysis Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank “Vivai Calderoni” for having supported the research. This study was also supported by “Fondazione CR Firenze” funds.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Compliance with ethics requirements

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.

References

  1. 1.
    FAOSTAT (2017). Agriculture organization corporate statistical database. Production/crops. http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/Q/QC/E
  2. 2.
    Morettini A (1963). Frutticoltura Generale e Speciale. Vol. R.E.D.A., RomaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Faust M, Surányi D (1999) Origin and dissemination of plums. Hort Rev 23:179–231Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blazek J (2004) A survey of the genetic resources used in plum breeding. VIII international symposium on plum and prune genetics, breeding and pomology 734:31–45Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Okie WR, Hancock JF (2008) Plums. Temperate fruit crop breeding. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nencetti V, Peano C, Palara U, Pirazzini P, Mezzetti B, Capocasa F, Mennone C, Sottile F, Catalano L (2008) Plum production in Italy: state of the art and perspectives. IX international symposium on plum and prune genetics, breeding and pomology 874:25–34Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ohata K, Togano Y, Matsumoto T, Uchida Y, Kurahashi T, Itamura H (2017) Selection of prune (Prunus domestica L.) cultivars suitable for the East Asian Temperate Monsoon Climate: ripening characteristics and fruit qualities of certain prunes in a warm Southwest Region of Japan. Horticult J 86(4):437–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ballistreri G, Continella A, Gentile A, Amenta M, Fabroni S, Rapisarda P (2013) Fruit quality and bioactive compounds relevant to human health of sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) cultivars grown in Italy. Food 140(4):630–638Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Walkowiak-Tomczak D, Reguła J, Łysiak G (2008) Physico-chemical properties and antioxidant activity of selected plum cultivars fruit. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Technologia Alimentaria 7(4):15–22Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Calvo Villegas I (2009) El cultivo del ciruelo (Prunus doméstica) (No. CIDAB-SB359-I5c). Instituto Nacional de Innovación y Transferencia de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Boletin Tecnico 9:1–8Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ozturk B, Yildiz K, Kucuker E (2015) Effect of pre harvest methyl jasmonate treatments on ethylene production water soluble phenolic compounds and fruit quality of Japanese plums. J Sci Food Agric 95(3):583–591PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Crisosto CH, Crisosto GM, Day KR (2008) Market life update for peach, nectarine, and plum cultivars grown in California. Adv Hortic Sci 22(3):201–204Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Valero D, Martınez-Romero D, Valverde JM, Guillen F, Serrano M (2003) Quality improvement and extension of shelf life by 1-methylcyclopropene in plum as affected by ripening stage at harvest. Innov Food Sci Emerg 4(3):339–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sahamishirazi S, Moehring J, Claupein W, Graeff-Hoenninger S (2017) Quality assessment of 178 cultivars of plum regarding phenolic, anthocyanin and sugar content. Food Chem 214:694–701PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kucuker E, Ozturk B, Aksit H, Genc N (2015) Effect of pre harvest aminoethoxyvinylglycine AVG application on bioactive compounds and fruit quality of plum Prunus salicina Lindell cv Black Beauty at the time of harvest and during cold storage. J Animal Plant Sci 25(3):763–770Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim DO, Jeong SW, Lee CY (2003) Antioxidant capacity of phenolic phytochemicals from various cultivars of plums. Food Chem 81(3):321–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim DO, Chun OK, Kim YJ, Moon HY, Lee CY (2003) Quantification of polyphenolics and their antioxidant capacity in fresh plums. J Agr Food Chem 51(22):6509–6515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karaman S, Ozturk B, Genc N, Celik SM (2013) Effect of preharvest application of methyl jasmonate on fruit quality of plum Prunus salicina lindell cv fortune at harvest and during cold storage. J Food Process Preserv 37(6):1049–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ertekin C, Gozlekci S, Kabas O, Sonmez S, Akinci I (2006) Some physical, pomological and nutritional properties of two plum (Prunus domestica L) cultivars. J Food Eng 75(4):508–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bellini E, Nencetti V (2001) “Dofi-Giudy”: A new early red Japanese plum. VII international symposium on plum and prune genetics, breeding and pomology 577:221–222Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cobianchi D, Watkins R (1984). Plum descriptors: descriptor list for plum and allied species (Prunus). IBPGRGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Crisosto CH, Garner D, Crisosto GM, Bowerman E (2004) Increasing ‘Blackamber’ plum (Prunus salicina Lindell) consumer acceptance. Postharvest Biol Tec 34(3):237–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Crisosto CH, Crisosto GM, Garner D (2004) Understanding tree fruit consumer acceptance. V International Postharvest Symposium 682:865–870Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Taiti C, Marone E, Lanza M, Azzarello E, Masi E, Pandolfi C, Giordani E, Mancuso S (2017) Nashi or Williams pear fruits? Use of volatile organic compounds, physicochemical parameters, and sensory evaluation to understand the consumer’s preference. Eur Food Res Technol 243(11):1917–1931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Blake RS, Monks PS, Ellis AM (2009) Proton-transfer reaction mass spectrometry. Chem Rev 109(3):861–896PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taiti C, Marone E, Bazihizina N, Caparrotta S, Azzarello E, Petrucci AW, Pandolfi C, Giordani E (2016) Sometimes a little mango goes a long way: a rapid approach to assess how different shipping systems affect fruit commercial quality. Food Anal Method 9(3):691–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lindinger W, Hansel A, Jordan A (1998) On-line monitoring of volatile organic compounds at pptv levels by means of proton transfer- reaction mass spectrometry (PTR-MS): medical applications, food control, and environmental research. Int J Mass Spectrom Ion Process 173:191–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    White IR, Blake RS, Taylor AJ, Monks PS (2016) Metabolite profiling of the ripening of Mangoes Mangifera indica L. cv. ‘Tommy Atkins’ by real-time measurement of volatile organic compounds. Metabolomics 12(3):57PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee J, Durst RW, Wrolstad RE (2005) Determination of total monomeric anthocyanin pigment content of fruit juices, beverages, natural colorants, and wines by the pH differential method: collaborative study. J AOAC I 88(5):1269–1278Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ainsworth EA, Gilliespie KM (2007) Estimation of total phenolic content and other oxidation substrate in plant tissues using Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. Nat Protoc 2(4):875–877PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zurada JM (1992) Introduction to artificial neural systems, vol 8. West publishing company, St, PaulGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zurada JM, Malinowski A (1994) Multilayer perceptron networks: selected aspects of training optimization. Appl Math Comp Sci 4:281–307Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Morgan A, Boddy L, Mordue JEM, Morris CW (1998) Evaluation of artificial neural networks for fungal identification, employing morphometric data from spores of Pestalotiopsis species. Mycol Res 102:975–984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chai Q, Wu B, Liu W, Wang L, Yang C, Wang Y, Fang J, Liu Y, Li S (2012) Volatiles of plums evaluated by HS-SPME with GC–MS at the germplasm level. Food Chem 130(2):432–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pino JA, Quijano CE (2012) Study of the volatile compounds from plum (Prunus domestica L. cv. Horvin) and estimation of their contribution to the fruit aroma. Food Sci Technol 32(1):76–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    El Hadi MAM, Zhang FJ, Wu FF, Zhou CH, Tao J (2013) Advances in fruit aroma volatile research. Molecules 18(7):8200–8229PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Baietto M, Wilson AD (2015) Electronic-nose applications for fruit identification, ripeness and quality grading. Sensors 15:899–993PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bertin N, Génard M, Hertog M (2018) Quality of horticultural crops: a recurrent/new challenge for plant scientists in a changing world. Front Plant Sci 9:1151PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pesis E (2005) The role of the anaerobic metabolites, acetaldehyde and ethanol, in fruit ripening, enhancement of fruit quality and fruit deterioration. Postharvest Biol Tec 37(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pesis E, Faiman D, Dori S (1998) Postharvest effects of acetaldehyde vapour on ripening-related enzyme activity in avocado fruit. Postharvest Biol Tec 13(3):245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Palou P, Crisosto CH, Garner D, Basinal LM (2003) Effect of continuous exposure to exogenous ethylene during cold storage on postharvest decay development and quality attributes of stone fruits and table grapes. Postharvest Biol Technol 27:243–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gomez E, Ledbetter CA (1994) Comparative study of the aromatic profiles of two different plum species: Prunus salicina Lindl and Prunus simonii L. J Sci Food Agri 65(1):111–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lozano M, Vidal-Aragón MC, Hernández MT, Ayuso MC, Bernalte MJ, García J, Velardo B (2009) Physicochemical and nutritional properties and volatile constituents of six Japanese plum (Prunus salicina Lindl.) cultivars. Eur Food Res Technol 228(3):403–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Crouzet J, Etievant P, Bayonove C (1990). Stoned fruit: Apricot, plum, peach, cherry. In: Morton ID, Macleod AJ (eds) Food flavours, Part C:The flavour of fruits, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V, Amsterdam, p 43–91Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Crisosto CH (1994) Stone fruit maturity indices: a descriptive. Postharvest News and Information 5(6):65N–68NGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Crisosto CH, Crisosto GM, Echeverria G, Puy J (2007) Segregation of plum and pluot cultivars according to their organoleptic characteristics. Postharvest Biol Technol 44(3):271–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Díaz-Mula HM, Zapata PJ, Guillén F, Castillo S, Martínez-Romero D, Valero D, Serrano M (2008) Changes in physicochemical and nutritive parameters and bioactive compounds during development and on tree ripening of eight plum cultivars: a comparative study. J Sci Food Agri 88(14):2499–2507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Usenik V, Kastelec D, Veberič R, Štampar F (2008) Quality changes during ripening of plums (Prunus domestica L.). Food Chem 111(4):830–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kitzberger CSG, da Silva CM, dos Santos Scholz MB, Ferreira MIF, Bauchrowitz IM, Eilert JB, dos Santos Neto J (2017) Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of plums accesses (Prunus salicina). AIMS AgriFood 2(1):101–112Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Vangdal E, Flatland S, Hjeltnes SH, Sivertsen H (2004) September). Consumer preferences for new plum cultivars (Prunus domestica L.). VIII international symposium on plum and prune genetics, breeding and pomology 734:169–172Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Cevallos-Casals BA, Cisneros-Zevallos L (2003) Stoichiometric and kinetic studies of phenolic antioxidants from Andean purple corn and red-fleshed sweet potato. J Agric Food Chem 51:3313–3319PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tomás-Barberán FA, Gil MI, Cremin P, Waterhouse AL, Hess-Pierce B, Kader AA (2001) HPLC − DAD − ESIMS analysis of phenolic compounds in nectarines, peaches, and plums. Agri Food Chem 49(10):4748–4760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Vizzotto M, Cisneros-Zevallos L, Byrne DH, Ramming DW, Okie WR (2006) Total phenolic, carotenoid, and anthocyanin content and antioxidant activity of peach and plum genotypes. Acta Hortic 713:453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rupasinghe HPV, Jayasankar S, Lay W (2006) Variation in total phenolics and antioxidants among European plum genotype. Sci Hortic 108:243–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ozturk B, Kucuker E, Karaman S, Yildiz K, Kılıc K (2013) Effect of aminoethoxyvinylglycine and methyl jasmonate on individual phenolics and post harvest fruit quality of three different japanese plums Prunus salicina lindell. Int J Food Eng 9(4):421–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Robertson JA, Meredith FI, Lyon BG, Norton JD (1991) Effect of cold storage effect of cold storage on the quality characteristics of “Au-Rumbrum” plum. J Food Quality 14(2):107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Daza A, García-Galavís PA, Grande MJ, Santamaría C (2008) Fruit quality parameters of ‘Pioneer’Japanese plums produced on eight different rootstocks. Sci Hortic 118(3):206–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bozhkova V (2015) Chemical composition and sensory evaluation of plum fruits. Trakya University J Natural Sci 15(1):31–35Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Cappellin L, Makhoul S, Schuhfried E, Romano A, del Pulgar JS, Aprea E, Farneti B, Costa F, Gasperi F, Biasioli F (2014) Ethylene: absolute real-time high-sensitivity detection with PTR/SRI-MS. The example of fruits, leaves and bacteria. Int J Mass Spectro 365:33–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Cappellin L, Costa F, Aprea E, Betta E, Gasperi F, Biasioli F (2015) Double clustering of PTR-ToF-MS data enables the mapping of QTLs related to apple fruit volatilome. Sci Horti 197:24–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Bianchi T, Weesepoel Y, Koot A, Iglesias I, Eduardo I, Gratacós-Cubarsí M, Gurrero L, Hortos M, van Ruth S (2017) Investigation of the aroma of commercial peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) types by proton transfer reaction-mass spectrometry (PTR-MS) and sensory analysis. Food Res Inter 99:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Jardine K, Abrell L, Kurc SA, Huxman T, Ortega J, Guenther A (2010) Volatile organic compound emissions from Larrea tridentata (creosote bush). Atmos Chem Phys 10:12191–12206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Buhr K, van Ruth S, Delahunty C (2002) Analysis of volatile flavour compounds by Proton Transfer Reaction-Mass Spectrometry: fragmentation patterns and discrimination between isobaric and isomeric compounds. Int J Mass Spectro 221:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Taiti C, Costa C, Menesatti P, Caparrotta S, Bazihizina N, Azzarello E, Petrucci WA, Masi E, Giordani E (2015) Use of volatile organic compounds and physicochemical parameters for monitoring the post-harvest ripening of imported tropical fruits. Eur Food Res Technol 241(1):91–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Pang X (2015) Biogenic volatile organic compound analyses by PTR-TOF-MS: calibration, humidity effect and reduced electric field dependency. J Environ Sci 32:196–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Brilli F, Ruuskanen TM, Schnitzhofer R, Müller M, Breitenlechner M, Bittner V, Wohlfahrt G, Loreto F, Hansel A (2011) Detection of plant volatiles after leaf wounding and darkening by proton transfer reaction “time-of-flight” mass spectrometry (PTR-TOF). PLoS ONE 6(5):e20419PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lee A, Goldstein AH, Kroll JH, Ng NL, Varutbangkul V, Flagan RC, Seinfeld JH (2006). Gas-phase products and secondary aerosol yields from the photooxidation of 16 different terpenes. J Geophys Res 111Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Tani A (2013) Fragmentation and reaction rate constants of terpenoids determined by proton transfer reaction-mass spectrometry. Environ Control Biol 51:23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Aprea E, Romano A, Betta E, Biasioli F, Cappellin L, Fanti M, Gasperi F (2015) Volatile compound changes during shelf life of dried Boletus edulis: comparison between SPME-GC-MS and PTR-ToF-MS analysis. J Mass Spectro 50(1):56–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    de Gouw J, Warneke C (2007) Measurements of volatile organic compounds in the earth’s atmosphere using proton-transfer-reaction mass spectrometry. Mass Spectro Rev 26(2):223–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    De Gouw JA, Goldan PD, Warneke C, Kuster WC, Roberts JM, Marchewka M, Bertman SB, Pszenny AAP, Keene WC (2003). Validation of proton transfer reaction‐mass spectrometry (PTR‐MS) measurements of gas‐phase organic compounds in the atmosphere during the New England Air Quality Study (NEAQS) in 2002. J Geophys Res Atmos, 108(D21)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Farneti B, Khomenko I, Grisenti M, Ajelli M, Betta E, Algarra AA, Cappellin L, Aprea E, Gasperi F, Biasoli F, Giongo L (2017) Exploring blueberry aroma complexity by chromatographic and direct-injection spectrometric techniques. Fronti Plant Sci 8:617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Maleknia SD, Bell TL, Adams MA (2007) PTR-MS analysis of reference and plant-emitted volatile organic compounds. Int J Mass Spectrom 262:203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Agrarie, Alimentari, Ambientali e Forestali (DAGRI)University of FlorenceFlorenceItaly
  2. 2.School of Physics and Astronomy (SUPA)University of GlasgowGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations