INTERNATIONAL

Agrophysics
www.international-agrophysics.org
Int. Agrophys., 2013, 27, 369-375
doi: 10.2478/intag-2013-0006

Development of Aloe vera based edible coating for tomato

K.A. Athmaselvi1*, P. Sumitha1, and B. Revathy2
1
Department of Food Process Engineering, SRM University, Kattankulathur, 603 203, Tamil Nadu, India
2
Department of Fruit and Vegetable Processing, Central Food Technological Research Institute, Mysore, India

Received April 19, 2012; accepted August 24, 2012

A b s t r a c t. The effect of formulated Aloe vera based edible half-ripe fruits show pink colour over most or all of the
coating on mass loss, colour, firmness, pH, acidity, total soluble surface; ripe or red-ripe fruits are those that have developed
solid, ascorbic acid and lycopene on the coated tomato was in- the full colour peculiar to the type but are, at the same time,
vestigated. The tomato in control showed a rapid deterioration with firm. Ripe fruits can be picked profitably if the market is
an estimated shelf life period of 19 days, based on the mass loss, close by. For transport to distant places, fruits are harvested
colour changes, accelerated softening and ripening. On the con-
at the half-ripe stage; they develop normal colour in 3-7
trary, the coating on tomatoes delayed the ripening and extended
days. Fruits for canning or for juice extraction are harvested
the shelf life up to 39 days. The physiological loss in weight was
7.6 and 15.1%, firmness was 36 and 46.2 N on 20th day for control
when they reach the ripe stage, and processed soon after
and coated tomatoes, respectively. From the results, it was con- (Shankara et al., 2005).
cluded that the use of Aloe vera based edible coating leads to in- There is a high production of tomato fruits during the
creased tomato shelf-life. harvest time, but post-harvest processing and preservation
K e y w o r d s: Aloe vera, edible coating, colour, firmness, techniques are inefficient. Therefore, fruits spoil very early
tomato because of lack of appropriate systems of preservation and
processing (Ameyapoh et al., 2008).
INTRODUCTION Edible coatings can provide an additional protective
coating for fresh products and can also give the same effect
Tomato is a climacteric fruit and continues to ripen after as modified atmosphere storage in modifying internal gas
harvest. During ripening, the green pigment chlorophyll composition (Park et al., 1994). The concept of using edible
degrades and carotenoids are synthesised (Liu et al., 2009). coatings to extend shelf life of fresh and minimally proces-
For fresh tomatoes, the two quality attributes that are most sed produce and to protect them from harmful environmen-
important to buyers and consumers are texture and skin tal effects has been emphasised based on the need for high
colour. Texture is influenced by flesh firmness and skin quality and the demand for minimal food processing and
strength. Softening during storage, distribution and ripening storage technologies (Tharanathan, 2003). By regulating the
of tomatoes can be a major problem because it may increase transfer of moisture, oxygen, carbon dioxide, aroma, and
their susceptibility to damage. There is increasing consumer taste compounds in a food system, edible coatings have de-
concern about the eating quality of tomatoes. After harvest, monstrated the capability of improving food quality and pro-
ripening continues and tomatoes can become overripe very longing shelf life of fresh produce (Castillo and Serrano,
rapidly. This can result in loss of quality and restricted shelf 2005). An ideal coating is defined as one that can extend
life (Batu, 2004). storage life of fresh fruit without causing anaerobiosis, and
Tomatoes are harvested at different stages of maturity that reduces decay without affecting the quality of the fruit
depending on the purpose for which they are required. (Sonti, 2003).
Several stages of maturity are recognised – mature green Aloe vera is a tropical or subtropical plant characterised
fruits are those which have not begun to turn pink, while by lance-shaped leaves with jagged edges and sharp points.
those classed as turning show some pink at the blossom end; Aloe vera contains two major liquid sources, yellow latex

*Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected] © 2013 Institute of Agrophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences
370 K.A. ATHMASELVI et al.

(exudates) and clear gel (mucilage). Yellow latex is mainly pening and jumping of stages from mature green to breaker,
composed of aloin, aloe-emodin and phenols. The muci- turning, pink, light red and red. Similar results were reported
laginous jelly from the parenchymal cells of the plant is the by Ali et al. (1979).
aloe vera gel. Aloe vera can provide many benefits to human During storage tomato crosses different stages (Andres
health. The gel works better through a combination of me- et al., 2004). The different stages of tomato were identified
chanisms. Composed mostly of polysaccharides, the gel ap- by USDA colour maturity stage chart (Yang et al., 1987).
pears to act as a natural barrier to moisture and oxygen Physiological loss in mass was calculated according to
which can speed up food deterioration. It can also enhance the procedure by Valverde et al. (2005). Ten tomatoes from
food safety. Aloe vera gel appears to contain various anti- each batch were taken and the mass of individual tomatoes
biotic and antifungal compounds that can potentially delay was recorded on the day of coating, and at every 5 days
or inhibit microorganisms that are responsible for food bor- interval till it attained red stage. Cumulative mass losses
ne illness in humans as well as food spoilage. Recently, there
were calculated by:
has been increased interest in using Aloe vera gel as a functio-
nal ingredient in drinks, beverages, and ice cream and as an IW - FW
Mass loss (%)= 100 , (1)
edible coating material for fruits and vegetables driven by its FW
antifungal activity. Aloe vera gel-based edible coatings have
where: IW – initial mass of sample, FW – final mass of
been shown to prevent loss of moisture and firmness, control
sample.
respiratory rate and maturation development, delay oxida-
tive browning, and reduce microorganism proliferation on Microstructure analysis of coating was done using SEM
sweet cherries (Lin and Zhao, 2007). The aim of this work (Scanning Electron Microscopy). Coating was applied on
was to study the effect of A. vera, along with functional a craft paper and allowed to dry. Using micrometer, the
ingredients applied as an edible coating on the change in thickness of the craft paper was measured after drying, at six
physicochemical parameters related to tomato quality locations, and average of the thickness was calculated
during storage and its role in extending the shelf life of (Chaim et al., 1996).
tomato. Colour of the tomato was measured using the Hunter
colour meter (Colour Quest XE, USA). The average value of
MATERIALS AND METHODS L*, a*, b* was measured and chroma value (DC) was calcu-
lated using the formula given below (Andres et al., 2004).
Tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. ‘Ruchi
618’) were harvested at breaker stage from a commercial DC = ( L*) 2 + ( a*) 2 + ( b*) 2 . (2)
farm in Mysore, Karnatake, India. At the laboratory, toma-
toes were selected to obtain homogeneous batches based on Total soluble solid concentration (TSS) was determined
colour, size, absence of injuries, and healthy. Tomatoes using digital refractometer (PAL-3, ATAGO, Japan), pH
were divided to obtain 120 fruits in control and coated batch. using pH meter. Titratable acidity was determined by ti-
The procured tomatoes were washed thoroughly with run- trating 1 ml of juice in 25 ml distilled water against 0.1 N
ning water and surface dried before coating, else the coating NaOH. Ascorbic acid was determined by 2, 6-dichloro-
would not adhere to the surface. phenol indophenol visual titration method and total sugars
Aloe vera based edible coating was formed by mixing
by Phenol sulphuric acid method (Ranganna, 2004).
Aloe vera juice (500 ml) with 0.3% antioxidant rich herb,
Firmness of the tomato was analysed using TA-XT tex-
then a thickening agent (20 g) was added gradually and stir-
ture analyzer (Stable Microsystems Limited, UK). The to-
red continuously for uniform dispersion. Glycerol (2 %) was
mato was placed at the centre of the platform and the force
added to increase the plasticising effect. Oleic acid (3 ml)
was added drop by drop to avoid precipitation. Aloe vera applied by the blade to cut the tomato was measured. The
juice (150 ml) was added simultaneously during emulsion specification given was the load cell 1 KN and speed 100 mm
formation. Cinamaldehyde (0.2 ml), an anti-microbial com- min-1. The value thus obtained was used to determine the
pound, dissolved in tween 80 (polysorbate 80 solubilising firmness of the tomato (Yang et al., 1987).
agent) at the ratio of 1:1, was added along with oleic acid for Lycopene was determined by extracting 10 g of sample
uniform dispersion. The solution was then filtered after ad- with acetone and transferred to separating funnel containing
ding 2.5 l of water. Total soluble solids were measured be- 20 ml of petroleum ether. Upper phase petroleum ether ex-
fore coating to maintain the solid percentage. Tomatoes tract containing lycopene in made up to 100 ml with petro-
were coated by dipping method. leum ether and absorbance was measured at 503 nm using
The various maturity stages are green, breaker, turning, petroleum ether as blank (Ranganna, 2004).
pink, light red and red. The best stage for giving coating to Statistical analysis and test of significant difference
tomato was breaker and turning stage (Park, 1994). If the (p£0.05) was performed using SPSS software package ver-
coating was given at the green stage, it showed a blotchy ri- sion 10 (Valverde et al., 2005).
 EDIBLE COATING FOR TOMATO USING Aloe vera 371

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ter loss and high respiration rate. Edible coating help in ex-
tending the life of fruit / vegetable by restricting the rate of
Tomatoes both from control and Aloe vera coated show-
respiration and preventing moisture loss. A similar result is
ed mass loss throughout the storage period (Fig. 1). Toma-
also reported by Thirupathi et al. (2006).
toes not coated with Aloe vera gel had statistically higher
Figure 2b shows the SEM image of tomato peel coated
mass loss compared to fruit coated with Aloe vera gel.
with Aloe vera based edible coating with 8.26% of total so-
The formulated Aloe vera based edible coating con-
lids. The SEM image shows thick coating on the tomato peel.
tained 8.26% solids. When it was coated on the tomatoes at
Tomatoes coated with 8.26% total solids are prone to an-
this concentration, the tomatoes underwent anaerobic spoila-
aerobic degradation, due to very low respiration rate; a simi-
ge and gave foul smell. Hence experiments were conducted
using 1, 2 and 3% solids. The loss in mass of coated and lar result is also reported by Zevallos and Krochta (2003).
control tomatoes was monitored continuously to optimise Figure 2c shows the SEM image of tomato peel coated
solid percentage. Figure 1 shows the effect of the solid con- with Aloe vera based edible coating with 2% of total solids.
centration of coating on mass loss of tomatoes. 3% solids The coating with 2% solids formed a thin and uniform semi-
coated tomato showed a drastic increase in mass loss of permeable membrane for gas exchange on the surface of
23.09 % while compared to the control, and coating with 1% tomato skin.
solids followed a curve very near to the control itself; it Tomatoes, both control and coated, registered some
showed a decrease in mass loss at initial period of storage changes in L*, a* and b* values during the storage period.
while at the 15th day the values were nearer to the control. Table 1 shows the effect of coating on L*, a*, b* and
Out of this, the coating with 2% solids showed a decrease in firmness values of tomatoes.
mass loss of 8.32% while compared to control 11.23%. L* means lightness (from white to black). L*values did
Hence, further coatings studies were conducted using 2% not change until the turning stage, indicating that there was
solids on tomatoes. Coating thickness was related to coating no change in lightness when the green colour was still
solution concentration and probably influenced by physio- predominant. The initial L* values for the control and coated
chemical properties of the coating solution. According to tomatoes were 43.57 and 43.66 (slight difference in the
Park (1994), coating thickness may vary from 4 to 13 µm initial L* value is due to coating). When red colour pigments
depending on the fruit and vegetable. The thickness of final started to synthesise, there was a decline in L* value; a simi-
formulated solution with 2% solid was 6.75 µm and gauge lar result was also reported by Andres et al. (2004). Though
was 25 µm. Maturity indices of coated and control were com- there was a decrease in L* value in both coated and control
pared during storage period. Coating was applied to the field tomatoes, coating showed a significant difference in L*
harvested fruit during its breaker stage. Control fruits value when compared to control on 20th day. L* value of
attained the turning stage on 7th day, pink stage on 13th day, control during its red stage on the 20th day was 26.74,
light red on 17th day, and red stage on the 19th day. whereas for the coated fruit on the same day it was 40.87. L*
Whereas, the coated fruit attained the turning stage on 14th value of coated fruit decreased during its ripening. L* value
day, pink stage on 28th day, light red on 35th day, and red of coated fruit during its red stage on 40th day was 27.05.
stage on 39th day. a* values change from negative (green colour) to posi-
Scanning electron microscopy was used to obtain ima- tive (red colour) (Andres et al., 2004). a* value of control
ges of tomato skin, to study the effect of coating on the during its red stage on the 20th day was 22.50, whereas for
tomato skin. Figure 2a shows the SEM image of uncoated the coated fruit on the same day it was 8.38. The increase in
tomato skin. The uncoated tomato peel image is compared a* value was, however, slower for the tomatoes treated with
with the coated peel image to study its effects. This image Aloe vera gel compared to control, resulting in significant
clearly shows the pores on the surface of the peel. The natu- differences among the treatments. a* value of tomato in-
ral waxy coat is not adequate to offer protection against wa- creased during its ripening, and for the coated fruit during its
red stage on the 40th day it was 22.70.
The initial b* (blue to yellow) values for control and
Physiological loss in mass (%)

25
coated tomatoes were 21.45 and 21.60, afterwards the va-
20
Control lues gradually decreased to 12.43 for control tomatoes and
15 1% solids to 20.43 for coated tomatoes on 20th day. b* value of coated
10 2%solids tomato during its red stage on the 40th day was 12.71.
3%Solids
solids
5
The chroma value (DC) depends on a* and b* values.
The chroma value indicates the colour intensity (saturation)
0
0 3 6 9 12 15 of the sample. There was a slight increase in the Chroma
No.of.Days
Number of days value from the initial value. But there were significant
differences in chroma value of coated tomatoes when
Fig. 1. Effect of coating with different solid concentrations on
compared to control tomatoes. DC of the control was 25.62
physiological loss in mass of tomato.
372 K.A. ATHMASELVI et al.

a enzymes, including polygalacturonase, pectin-methyl-este-

rase, endo-b-mannase, a- and b-galactosidases, and b-gluca-
nases, causes softening of the whole fruit by altering the
texture due to degradation of the structural components
necessary to reinforce the cell wall and the adhesion of cells.
Initial values of firmness for control and coated tomatoes
were 57.34 and 58.67 N. The firmness of control during its
red stage on the 20th day was 31.65 N, whereas for the
coated fruit on the same day it was 46.79 N. Coating showed
statistical difference in firmness when compared to control
on 20th day. Firmness gradually decreased for coated
tomatoes after 20th day. The firmness of coated fruit during
the red stage on the 40th day was 32.51 N. Coating was the
most effective treatment for retardation of softening of har-
vested fruits and vegetables compared to the control; similar
b results were also reported by Keneko et al. (2002).
Table 2 shows the effect of coating on TSS, reducing
sugar and total sugar of tomato. TSS concentration slightly
increased initially and latter decreased. TSS of control du-
ring red stage on 20th day was 4.49° Brix, whereas for the
coated fruit on the same day it was 4.89° Brix. There was a gra-
dual decrease in the TSS of the coated tomatoes after 20th
day, and the TSS was 4.51°Brix on 40th day. This may be
due to the break-up of carbohydrates and pectin, partial hydro-
lysis of protein, and decomposition of glycosides into sub-
units during respiration causing a decrease of total soluble
solids; similar results were also reported by Torgul and
Arslan (2004).
The sugar content increases progressively through the
c maturation process and ripening, but particularly a pronoun-
ced rise occurs with the appearance of yellow pigmentation.
Total sugar content of control during its red stage on the 20th
day was 3.49 mg 100 g-1, whereas for the coated fruit it was
3.39 mg 100 g-1. Total sugar value of the coated fruit during
its red stage on the 40th day was 4.31 mg 100 g-1. There was
a pronounced increase in the sugar content of control during
the turning stage, and then it started to decline. But in the
coated fruit there was drastic increase and the sugar content
of tomato during the red stage was higher compared to the
control, due to the controlled atmosphere maintained around
the fruit which reduced the transpiration and respiration
loss. Reducing sugar content increased during the ripening
stage. At the initial stage, the level of reducing sugar was
Fig. 2. SEM image of tomato skin: a – uncoated; coated with more, was stored in the reserved form. As the stage crossed,
formulated edible coating with: b – 8.26%, and c – 2% total solids. there was a decline in sugar content and it attained the
maximum at the pink stage. Similar results were also
during its ripening on the 20th day, whereas for the coated reported by Ali et al. (1979). Reducing sugar value of con- -1
fruit it was 21.51 on the same day. DC value increased trol during its red stage on the 20th day was 2.84 mg 100 g-1,
during ripening of tomato. DC value of coated fruit during whereas for the coated fruit it was 2.85 mg 100 g .
its red stage on the 40th day was 25.69. Reducing sugar value of coated fruit during its red stage on
-1
Fruit firmness for both control and coated tomatoes 40th day was 3.08 mg 100 g . Whereas, there was increase
gradually decreased during the storage period. During the in sugar content at the pink stage in both control and coated
ripening process, cell wall-modifying activity of several fruits, followed by a decline.
 EDIBLE COATING FOR TOMATO USING Aleo vera 373

T a b l e 1. Effect of coating on L*, a*, b* colour values and firmness of tomato

Colour L* value Colour a* value Colour b* value Chroma value Firmness (N)
Days
Control Coated Control Coated Control Coated Control Coated Control Coated

43.57 43.66 -7.77 -7.58 21.45 21.60 22.18 22.89 57.34 58.67
0
±0.36a ±0.12c ±0.15d ±0.08i ±0.23a ±0.09b ±0.08a ±0.19c ±0.66a ±0.53b
43.73 44.29 -4.87 -6.37 21.45 21.60 21.99 22.51 51.28 66.22
5
±0.21a ±0.24a ±0.06c ±0.32h ±0.23a ±0.09b ±0.21a ±0.23c ±0.57a ±0.55c
36.74 43.97 -4.40 -5.27 21.72 21.83 22.16 22.45 48.55 54.57
10
±0.19b ±0.07i ±0.10e ±0.25g ±0.20a ±0.09a ±0.09a ±0.07c ±0.35c ±0.45b
30.82 44.04 18.83 -4.30 15.59 21.90 24.44 22.31 34.67 50.70
15
±0.20c ±0.76b ±0.10f ±0.23b ±0.02a ±0.1b ±0.09c ±0.18d ±0.82e
26.74 40.87 22.50 8.38 12.43 20.43 25.62 21.51 31.65 46.79
20
±0.17d ±0.16b ±0.20a ±0.08e ±0.12c ±0.14c ±0.13d ±0.09c ±0.22e ±0.19f
35.8 13.93 18.45 23.11 41.56
25 – – – – –
±0.10e ±0.15d ±0.06d ±0.08b ±0.39g
33.69 16.70 16.51 23.48 37.97
30 – – – – –
±0.17f ±0.20c ±0.03e ±0.13b ±0.27h
30.50 20.83 14.27 25.24 34.64
35 – – – – –
±0.06g ±0.21b ±0.12f ±0.06d ±0.24i
27.05 22.70 12.71 25.69 32.51
40 – – – – –
±0.16h ±0.20a ±0.11g ±0.14e ±0.37j
Values are mean and SD of three separate determinations. Values in the same column and row (control and coated) with different letters
are significantly different (p<0.05).

T a b l e 2. Effect of coating on TSS, reducing sugar and total sugar of tomato

TSS (°Brix) Reducing sugar (mg 100 g-1) Total sugar (mg 100 g-1)
Days
Control Coated Control Coated Control Coated
0 4.65±0.05c 4.63±0.03f 4.95±0.05a 4.99±0.02b 7.38±0.01a 7.45±0.05a
5 5.02±0.02a 4.70±0.02e 1.59±0.03e 3.57±0.02d 3.28±0.08e 5.64±0.03b
10 5.07±0.01a 4.84±0.02c 3.77±0.03c 2.16±0.03g 5.13±0.04c 4.45±0.05c
15 4.95±0.05b 4.94±0.02a 4.17±0.02b 1.76±0.03h 5.95±0.05b 3.49±0.03g
20 4.49±0.03d 4.89±0.02b 2.84±0.02d 2.85±0.03f 3.49±0.03d 3.39±0.02h
25 – 4.84±0.01c 3.79±0.03c 4.06±0.04e
30 – 4.80±0.01d 4.99±0.04b 3.49±0.03g
35 – 4.35±0.03h 5.46±0.04a 3.89±0.03f
40 – 4.51±0.02g 3.08±0.05e 4.31±0.03d
Explanations as in Table 1.
Table 3 shows the effect of coating on pH, acidity, near curve, one author said that malic acid concentration
ascorbic acid and lycopene of tomato. pH value of control at falls during ripening and citric acid increases up to turning
the time of red stage on the 20th day was 4.15, whereas for stage, whereas another reported that malic acid increased
coated fruit it was 4.07. The increase in pH value may be due steadily throughout maturation (Humle, 1971). The titratab-
to break-up of acids with respiration during storage. The pH le acidity of control at the time of red stage on the 20th day
value of coated fruit was increased to 4.25 during red stage was 0.611%, whereas for coated fruit on the same day it was
on the 40th day. 0.559%. Titratable acidity of the coated fruit during its red
The acidity of tomato plays a major role and imparts stage on the 40th day was 0.623%. At the red stage, both for
taste to the fruit. The predominant acids in ripened tomato control and coated fruit, acidity remained the same in which
fruit are citric acid and malic acid. Acidity does not form a li- it showed the decline at the turning stage.
374 K.A. ATHMASELVI et al.

T a b l e 3. Effect of coating on pH, acidity, ascorbic acid and lycopene of tomato

pH Acidity (%) Ascorbic acid (mg 100 g-1) Lycopene (mg g-1)
Days
Control Coated Control Coated Control Coated Control Coated

0 3.81±0.01d 3.93±0.03d 0.685±0.006a 0.694±0.004a 8.67±0.01a 8.74±0.03a 0.63±0.03d 0.64±0.03d

5 3.98±0.01c 3.43±0.03e 0.579±0.003d 0.681±0.002b 8.52±0.02b 8.74±0.03a 0.93±0.01e 0.77±0.01gf
10 4.04±0.01b 3.97±0.02d 0.545±0.005e 0.657±0.002d 8.19±0.01c 8.57±0.03b 7.68±0.02c 0.93±0.01f
15 3.99±0.01c 4.13±0.03b 0.648±0.003b 0.565±0.004f 7.96±0.01d 8.64±0.04c 33.64±0.55b 0.93±0.01f
20 4.15±0.01a 4.07±0.06c 0.611±0.003c 0.559±0.003f 8.18±0.01c 8.52±0.02d 42.09±0.24a 1.39±0.01e
25 4.07±0.06c 0.537±0.002g 8.57±0.03d 2.46±0.01d
30 4.06±0.01c 0.521±0.005h 8.56±0.05d 7.67±0.01c
35 4.08±0.01bc 0.667±0.003c 6.52±0.03e 37.20±0.08b
40 4.25±0.05a 0.623±0.007e 8.28±0.02f 43.27±0.02a
Explanations as in Table 1.
Ascorbic acid content during maturity stage was conti-
nuously increasing with a slight fall during the light red REFERENCES
stage. The ascorbic acid content of control during its red
Ali M.H., Al Shaibani, and Greig J.K., 1979. Effects of stage of
stage on 20th day was 8.18 mg 100 g-1, whereas for coated
maturity storage, cutivar on some quality attributes of
fruit on the same day it was 8.52 mg 100 g-1. The ascorbic
tomatoes. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci., 1046, 880-882.
acid content of the coated fruit during its red stage on 40th
Ameyapoh Y., Comlan de S., and Traore A.S., 2008. Hygienic
day was 8.28 mg 100 g-1. Whereas, the coated sample a quality of traditional processing and stability of tomato
slight increase in the ascorbic acid level was observed on (Lycopersicon esculentum) puree in Togo. Bioresource
40th day, because the ascorbic acid level depends upon the Technol., 99, 5798-5803.
relative exposure to sunlight. Andres F., Camelo L., and Gomez P.A., 2004. Comparison of
During ripening the chlorophyll content decreases, and color indexes for tomato ripening. Horticultura Brasileira,
there is a rapid synthesis of the red pigment lycopene. The 22, 534-537.
lycopene content of control during its red stage on the 20th Batu A., 2004. Determination of acceptable firmness and colour
day was 42.09 µg g-1, whereas lycopene of coated fruit on values of tomatoes. J. Eng., 61, 471-475.
the same day was 1.39 µg g-1. The lycopene content of toma- Castillo S. and Serrano M., 2005. Novel edible coating based on
to increased during its ripening. The lycopene content of coat- Aloe vera gel to maintain table grape quality and safety. J. Agric.
ed fruit during its red stage on the 40th day was 43.27 µg g-1. Food Chem., 53, 7807-7813.
Chaim H., Mannheim M., and Soffer T., 1996. Wettability of dif-
There was a steady increase in the lycopene content of both
ferent wax coating and their effects on citrus quality. J. Agric.
the control and coated tomatoes. Food Chem., 44, 919-923.
Humle A.C., 1971. The Biochemistry of Fruits and Their
CONCLUSIONS
Products. Academic Press, London-New York.
1. The firmness of control fruit during red stage on the Keneko T., Claybon R., and Barringer S.A., 2002. Consumer ac-
20th day was 31.65 N, whereas for the coated fruit on the ceptability of color in processed tomato products by African-
same day it was 46.79 N. Coating was the most effective American, Latino and prototypical consumers. J. Food
treatment for retardation of softening of harvested fruits and Quality, 25, 487-498.
vegetables. Lin D. and Zhao Y., 2007. Innovations in the development and ap-
plication of edible coatings for fresh and minimally proces-
2. Total soluble solid of control fruit during red stage on
sed fruits and vegetables comprehensive review. J. Food
20th day was 4.49°Brix whereas for the coated fruit on the
Sci. Food Safety, 6, 60-71.
same day it was 4.89°Brix. Total sugar content of control
Liu L.H., Zabaras D., Bennett L.E., Agues P., and Woonton
during its red stage on the 20th day was 3.49 mg 100 g-1 B.W., 2009. Effects of UV-C, red light and sun light on the
whereas for the coated fruit it was 3.39 mg 100 g-1. The carotenoid content and physical qualities of tomatoes during
titratable acidity of control at the time of red stage on the post-harvest storage. Food Chem., 115, 495-500.
20th day was 0.611% whereas for coated fruit on the same Park H.J., Chinnan M.S., and Shewfelt R.L., 1994. Edible corn-
day it was 0.559%. zein film coatings to extend storage life of tomatoes. J. Food
3. Aloe vera as an edible coating with 2% solid percen- Proc. Preserv., 18, 317-331.
tage remains a viable alternative to delay the ripening of Ranganna S., 2004. Handbook of Analysis and Quality Control of
tomato. By optimising the solid percentage it could be Fruits and Vegetables Products. Tata McGraw Hill Press,
applicable to other fruits and vegetables too. New Delhi, India.
 EDIBLE COATING FOR TOMATO USING Aleo vera 375

Shankara N., Maijade G., Matin H., and Van Dam B., 2005. Togrul H. and Arslan N., 2004. Carboxymethyl cellulose from
Cultivation of tomato, production, processing and market- sugar beet pulp cellulose as a hydrophilic polymer in coating
ing. Digigrafi Press, Wangeningen, the Netherlands. of mandarin. J. Food Eng., 62, 271-279.
Sonti S., 2003. Consumer perception and application of edible Valverde J. M., Valero D., Romera D. M., Fabiaa N., Guillean C.,
coatings on fresh-cut fruits and vegetables. MSc. Thesis, Castillo S., and Serrano M., 2005. Novel edible coating
based on Aloe vera gel to maintain table grape quality and
Osmania University, Hyderabad, India.
safety. J. Agric. Food Chem., 53, 7807-7813.
Tharanathan R.N., 2003. Biodegradable films and composite Yang C.C., Brennan P., Chinnan M.S., and Shewfelt R.L., 1987.
coatings: past, present and future. Trends Food Sci. Characterization of tomato ripening process as influenced
Technol., 14, 71-78. seal – packing and temperature. J. Food Quality, 10, 21-23.
Thirupathi V., Sasikala S., and Kennedy J.Z., 2006. Preser- Zevallos C. and Krochta J.M., 2003. Dependence upon coating
vation of fruits and vegetables by wax coating. Sci. Tech. thickness on viscosity of coating solution applied to fruits and
Entrepreneur, 22, 19-24. vegetables by dipping method. J. Food Sci., 66, 503-510.