Babarinde G.O., Fabunmi O.A
Babarinde G.O., Fabunmi O.A
Babarinde G.O., Fabunmi O.A
42 (4) 2009
Abstract
The effect of packaging materials on weight loss, colour, titratable acidity, microbial load, moisture, ascorbic acid,
pH and ash contents of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) was studied during storage at room (28 ± 2°C) and
refrigerating condition (15 ± 2°C) using three different packages (open plastic bowl (which served as control),
plastic sieve over-wrapped with low density polyethylene bags, low density polyethylene bags (LDPE) –
15 × 15 cm). The experiments were set up in a split plot design with storage medium being main plots and
packaging material being sub-plots. The results showed that packaging materials had a significant (p < 0.05) effect
on weight loss, firmness, pH and ascorbic acid. Ash content was better preserved in low density polyethylene
(LDPE) bags stored in both storage media. Okra stored in polyethylene followed by plastic sieve container
controlled weight loss and delayed senescence significantly (p < 0.05). The results of the chemical analysis showed
a decrease in pH from 6.7 to 5.5, increase in titratable acidity and decrease in ascorbic acid content under both
storage conditions. Ascorbic acid was however more retained in polyethylene at refrigerating condition than its
control counter part. Fruit rot was noticed on the twelfth day of storage. Result of total viable count showed growth
increase in polyethylene samples during storage than the control under room condition. LDPE packaging material
however extended okra marketable life with lowest weight loss up till the ninth day at room temperature and more
than 9 days under refrigerating condition. Therefore, our results indicate that LDPE was better than other storage
materials in okra storage, with refrigeration better than room condition storage medium.
Key words: okra (Abelmoschus esculentus), packaging materials, low density polyethylene, ambient temperature,
refrigerating condition, storage period
151
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA VOL. 42 (4) 2009
MATERIALS AND METHODS about 10 ml of nutrient agar was gently dispensed on it.
The plate was swirled gently and was inverted after it
Freshly harvested okra (47.4 variety) was purchased had solidified. The plates were inverted and incubated at
from a commercial farm at Gambari Village, Surulere 37°C for 24 hours. The colonies were counted and the
Local Government, Ogbomoso, Nigeria. The packaging number of colonies per plate was multiplied by the
materials: low density polyethylene bag was obtained dilution factor to obtain the total viable counts per ml of
from a sachet water company in Ogbomoso and plastic the original sample.
sieve and bowl containers were purchased from a plastic
store in Ogbomoso. Fruits of average dimension 50– Statistical analysis
70 mm long and 12–15 mm diameter were selected for The experiment was set up in split plot design. Data
the study. The fruits were sorted for size, colour and generated were subjected to analysis of variance
physical damage. These were later packaged in low (ANOVA) using SAS Software package (SAS Institute,
density polyethylene (15/15 cm), plastic sieve type 1985). Significant means were determined with the aid of
container over wrapped with low density polyethylene Fischer’s Least significant difference (LSD) at 5%
and plastic bowl container which was left open as probability level.
control. Each container contained 20 fruits of okra. The
packaged samples were kept at both ambient
temperature (28 ± 2°C) and refrigerating condition RESULTS
(15 ± 2°C) in a thermostatically controlled fridge.
Loss in weight
Analysis Generally weight loss progressively increased with
Samples from each treatment were removed from storage time and was higher in unwrapped bowl samples
storage every 3 days for assessment. Moisture, ash, pH stored at ambient and refrigeration conditions as shown
values and titratable acidity of all samples were in Table 1. There was significant difference in weight
determined using the AOAC official methods of loss of okra stored in the open bowl and those stored in
analysis (AOAC, 1990). LDPE and plastic sieve over-wrapped with LDPE.
The colour of okra samples was evaluated using the About six percent of the weight was lost by the third
Jenway colorimeter (model 6051) on the milled samples. day in the control sample while about 3 percent was loss
The iodine titration method was used to determine the in the polyethylene when stored in the fridge, whereas
vitamin C content of okra as described by Jacobs (1999). bowl weight loss was 8.1%, while LDPE weight loss
was 1.1% under room condition. At the end of 9 days,
Weight loss the control samples lost 27.3% and 37.2% of their
Weight loss of okra was recorded to an accuracy of original weight while samples stored in polyethylene
0.01 g using a Mettler balance model P1200 and per- lost just 3.9% and 5.8% of their original weight, when
centage weight loss was calculated thus stored under fridge and room conditions respectively.
Tab. 1: Effects of storage medium and packaging material on percentage weight loss of stored okra fruit
Storage duration (days )±
Storage medium Packaging material
3 6 9
Fridge Bowl 6.3 ± 0.0a 16.3 ± 0.0a 27.3 ± 0.0c
LDPE 3.1 ± 0.0c 3.8 ± 0.0c 3.9 ± 0.0a
Sieve 3.8 ± 0.0b 5.6 ± 0.0b 14.6 ± 0.0b
Room Bowl 8.1 ± 0.0a 18.3 ± 0.0a 37.2 ± 0.0c
LDPE 1.1 ± 0.0c 4.5 ± 0.00 5.8 ± 0.0a
Sieve 5.7 ± 0.0b 12.86 ± 0.0b 22.9 ± 0.0b
± = standard deviation; Bowl = unwrapped plastic bowl; LDPE = low density polyethylene bags; Sieve = over-
wrapped with low density polyethylene bags
For each of the storage medium, means carrying similar alphabets within the column are not significantly different
(LSD at 5% probability).
152
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA VOL. 42 (4) 2009
Tab. 2: Effects of storage medium and packaging material on percentage moisture content of stored okra fruit
Packaging Storage duration (days )
Storage medium
material 0 3 6 9
Fridge Bowl 87.8 ± 0.1 87.65 ± 0.2a 85.7 ± 0.1b 84.4 ± 0.2c
LDPE 87.8 ± 0.1 86.8 ± 0.1b 86.0 ± 0.0a 85.4 ± 0.1b
Sieve 87.8 ± 0.1 87.6 ± 0.1c 85.4 ± 0.1b 85.0 ± 0.0a
Room Bowl 87.8 ± 0.1 86.4 ± 0.1b 84.04 ± 0.0a 83.5 ± 0.1b
LDPE 87.6 ± 0.1 86.8 ± 0.2a 86.0 ± 0.0a 85.2 ± 0.00a
Sieve 87.6 ± 0.1 86.9 ± 0.07a 86.02 ± 0.09a 85.4 ± 0.00
± = standard deviation; Bowl = unwrapped plastic bowl; LDPE = low density polyethylene bags; Sieve = over-
wrapped with low density polyethylene bags
For each of the storage medium, means carrying similar alphabets within the column are not significantly different
(LSD at 5% probability).
Tab. 3: Effects of storage medium and packaging material on percentage Ash content of stored okra fruit
Packaging Storage duration (days)
Storage medium
material 0 3 6 9
Fridge Bowl 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.4 ± 0.0a 8.9 ± 0.0a
LDPE 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a
Sieve 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.2 ± 0.0a
Room Bowl 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.0 ± 0.0b 7.9 ± 0.2c
LDPE 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.4 ± 0.0a 9.3 ± 0.0a
Sieve 9.5 ± 0.0a 9.4 ± 0.0a 8.4 ± 0.02c 8.3 ± 0.0b
± = standard deviation; Bowl = unwrapped plastic bowl; LDPE = low density polyethylene bags; Sieve = over-
wrapped with low density polyethylene bags
For each of the storage medium, means carrying similar alphabets within the column are not significantly different
(LSD at 5% probability).
Tab. 4: Effects of storage medium and packaging material on pH of stored okra fruit
Packaging Storage duration (days )
Storage medium
material 0 3 6 9
Fridge Bowl 6.7 ± 0.0a 6.6 ± 0.0a 6.3 ± 0.0b 5.9 ± 0.0b
LDPE 6.7 ± 0.0a 6.4 ± 0.4b 6.6 ± 0.0a 5.8 ± 0.0b
Sieve 6.7 ± 0.0a 6.6 ± 0.0a 6.5 ± 0.0a 5.6 ± 0.0a
Room Bowl 6.7 ± 0.0a 6.5 ± 0.0a 6.0 ± 0.0b 5.9 ± 0.0a
LDPE 6.7 ± 0.0a 6.5 ± 0.0a 6.3 ± 0.0b 6.0 ± 0.0a
Sieve 6.7 ± 0.0a 6.6 ± 0.0a 6.5 ± 0.0a 5.9 ± 0.0a
± = standard deviation; Bowl = unwrapped plastic bowl; LDPE = low density polyethylene bags; Sieve = over-
wrapped with low density polyethylene bags
For each of the storage medium, means carrying similar alphabets within the column are not significantly different
(LSD at 5% probability).
samples stored under refrigerating condition. For samples not significant. The pH of samples stored in
stored in the room temperature (28 ± 2°C), moisture polyethylene bags after 3 days had value of 6.4 which
contents ranged between 83.5% and 87.8%, with lowest was lower than values of other samples stored in bowl
moisture content observed in okra stored in bowl for 9 and plastic sieve containers under refrigeration
days. Result of the ash content is shown in Table 3 which condition (Table 4). The titratable acidity of all samples
ranged from 7.9–9.5%. There were changes in chemical increased with storage time and control bowl samples in
composition during refrigeration and ambient fridge had the least value (Table 5).
temperature storage of okra, with best result obtained in
LDPE and poorest retention of chemical composition Effect on vitamin C
observed in bowl under both storage conditions. Table 6 showed the effect of storage and packaging on
vitamin C level of okra. The initial vitamin C content
pH and titratable acidity of fresh okra was 43.5 mg/100 g. The ascorbic acid of
Storage duration made okra to be slightly acidic; all samples decreased during storage. Though, there
however, the difference due to storage condition was was no significant difference in the ability of LDPE
153
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA VOL. 42 (4) 2009
Tab. 5: Effects of storage medium and packaging material on percentage titratable acidity of stored okra fruit
Packaging Storage duration (days )
Storage medium
material 0 3 6 9
Fridge Bowl 3.0 ± 0.0a 3.0 ± 0.0b 3.2 ± 0.0c 3.4 ± 0.0c
LDPE 3.0 ± 0.0a 3.4 ± 0.0a 3.8 ± 0.1a 4.0 ± 0.0a
Sieve 3.0 ± 0.0a 3.0 ± 0.0b 3.5 ± 0.0b 3.6 ± 0.0b
Room Bowl 3.0 ± 0.0a 3.2 ± 0.0b 3.7 ± 0.0b 4.3 ± 0.1a
LDPE 3.0 ± 0.0a 3.5 ± 0.1a 3.9 ± 0.0a 4.0 ± 0.0b
Sieve 3.0 ± 0.0a 3.3 ± 0.1b 3.9 ± 0.0a 4.0 ± 0.0b
± = standard deviation; Bowl = unwrapped plastic bowl; LDPE = low density polyethylene bags; Sieve = over-
wrapped with low density polyethylene bags
For each of the storage medium, means carrying similar alphabets within the column are not significantly different
(LSD at 5% probability).
Tab. 6: Effects of storage medium and packaging material on vitamin C (mg/100 g) of stored okra fruit
Packaging Storage duration (days )
Storage medium
material 0 3 6 9
Fridge Bowl 43.5 ± 0.1 43.2 ± 0.1c 42.2 ± 0.0c 42.5 ± 0.0b
LDPE 43.5 ± 0.1 43.5 ± 0.0b 43.4 ± 0.0b 43.3 ± 0.0a
Sieve 43.5 ± 0.1 43.4 ± 0.0a 43.3 ± 0.0a 43.3 ± 0.0a
Room Bowl 43.5 ± 0.1 43.0 ± 0.0b 41.2 ± 0.0b 40.2 ± 0.00
LDPE 43.5 ± 0.1 43.4 ± 0.0a 42.4 ± 0.1a 42.5 ± 0.0a
Sieve 43.5 ± 0.1 43.4 ± 0.0a 42.2 ± 0.0a 41.3 ± 0.0b
± = standard deviation; Bowl = unwrapped plastic bowl; LDPE = low density polyethylene bags; Sieve = over-
wrapped with low density polyethylene bags
For each of the storage medium, means carrying similar alphabets within the column are not significantly different
(LSD at 5% probability).
Tab. 7: Effects of storage medium and packaging material on microbial load (cfu/ml) of stored okra fruit
Packaging Storage duration (days )
Storage medium
material 0 3 6 9
Fridge Bowl 6.0 × 106 6.0×108 8.5×108 8.0×108
LDPE 6.0 × 106 3.5×108 6.0×108 9.5×108
6 9 8
Sieve 6.0 × 10 1.9×10 9.0×10 1.2×109
6 7 7
Room Bowl 6.0 × 10 6.0×10 6.2×10 3.4×108
6 8 9
LDPE 6.0 × 10 3.9×10 1.8×10 1.2×109
6 8 8
Sieve 6.0 × 10 3.9×10 6.0×10 1.0×109
Bowl = unwrapped plastic bowl; LDPE = low density polyethylene bags; Sieve = over-wrapped with low density
polyethylene bags; cfu = Colony forming unit
154
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA VOL. 42 (4) 2009
(1998) reported weight loss in tomatoes stored in films to and the bowl control samples. Ash content of samples
be related to film permeability due to transmission rates stored in the three packaging materials differed
of water vapour and this could also be associated with significantly at 5% probability level with LDPE
lower losses recorded in okra stored in polyethylene bags retaining ash content better. This was followed by
and plastic sieve containers. Samples stored at 15 ±2°C samples stored in plastic sieve over wrapped with LDPE
had the weight of okra better preserved than samples and the loss was higher in control bowl samples. Reason
stored under ambient condition. This agreed with findings for the loss in ash content was not known. Titratable
of Finger et al. (2008) who reported that lowering the acidity with storage time increased and bowl samples in
temperature of storage room decrease the weight loss in the fridge were less acidic. For samples stored in the
both poly vinyl chloride (PVC) wrapped and control room condition, the increase in titratable acidity for all
fruits with a lower rate at 5°C. packaging materials was not significant.
Variation in moisture content of fresh okra (87.7%) to There was reduction in the pH of all samples which
the one reported by the Ihekoronye and Ngoddy (1985) implies that fresh okra turned more acidic with increase
could be due to environmental and varietal difference. in storage period. LDPE samples stored in the fridge had
The moistures content of all samples decreased with the the value of 5.8 at 9 days of storage and this may be
storage time, the changes were however not significant- attributed to increase in total acids which increased the
ly different until the sixth day of storage. The moisture hydrogen ion concentration (Pantastico, 1975). Samples
loss in all packaging materials at the two storage stored in low density polyethylene and plastic sieve in
conditions was however significant (p < 0.05) after the fridge retained vitamin C better than those stored in
sixth day of storage. Samples stored in LDPE retained ambient condition and this was similar to what
moisture better than the control bowl samples. This Weichmann (1987) reported that ascorbic acid content of
could be attributed to the property of the low density stored produce generally decrease more rapidly at higher
polyethylene which exhibited good barrier to water storage temperature since it is thermo labile. Greater loss
vapour loss (Zagory, 1995) and also had the ability to of vitamin C in samples stored in bowl at 28 ± 2°C was
reduce respiration rate of vegetables which in turn due to the fact that it was exposed to oxygen and light
reduced moisture loss as reported by Lee et al. (1995). which affected the stability of vitamin C.
Finger et al. 2008 also reported that relative water Okra colour changed rapidly after the first 3 days of
content of the fruit pericarp of okra was maintained storage and later at a slower rate over the next 6 days.
through out in the storage while at 25°C the high weight Fruit sealed in LDPE changed colour more slowly than
loss was associated with significant reduction of the those stored in plastic sieve container and bowl although
water. Considering the samples stored under ambient the difference was not significant. However colour of
condition, moisture loss was greater in the control bowl samples stored in fridge at 15 ± 2°C was better retained.
samples. Plastic sieve samples retained more and a little Rapid colour loss in bowl samples stored at room
above polyethylene which was not significant. Decrease temperature could be attributed to exposure of samples
in moisture content which was more pronounced in the to atmosphere gases which results in fading out of
control samples was similar to findings of Amati et al. greenish colour (Salunkhe, 1991).
(1989) who reported moisture loss in fruit and vege- The microbial load of okra samples increased during the
tables to be due to post-harvest physiological processes storage time of all packaged samples. The microbial
such as respiration and transpiration. The ash content of load showed significant differences as storage time
produce was not affected by storage and packaging increased. The trend continued for the rest of the
material until the sixth day of storage (Table 3). The experimental study with the room polyethylene samples
LDPE bags retained ash content better than plastic sieve having the highest microbial load. This could be due
155
AGRICULTURA TROPICA ET SUBTROPICA VOL. 42 (4) 2009
to the heat of respiration in the packaging material at the ISIONG N.C. (1997): Processing and Preservation of
early period of storage. Fruits. Nigeria Institute of Food Science and
Technology, 1: 49–55.
JACOBS M.B. (1999): The Chemical Analysis of Food
CONCLUSION Products. CBS Publishers and Distributors.
Kordylas J.M. (1991): Processing and Preservation of
The results of this work suggest that the storage Tropical and Sub tropical Foods. Macmillan Educa-
medium, the method of storage and packaging material tion Ltd., London, UK.
had significant effect on quality of okra. The moisture LEE L., ARUL J., LENCK R. CASTAIGNE F. (1995): A
content, ash and vitamin C in LDPE bags, followed by review on modified atmosphere packaging and
plastic sieve over wrapped with LDPE were better preservation of fresh fruits and vegetables. Physio-
preserved. It may therefore be suggested that okra logical basis and practical aspects. Part I. Packaging
should be packaged in low density polyethylene and Technol. Sci., 9: 1–17.
stored at room temperature for optimum period of nine MOREASON E., BULLARD E.T. (1984): Handbook of
days and more than nine days in a thermostatically Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture. AIE Publisher
controlled refrigerator at 15 ± 2°C. Plastic sieve Washington DC, USA, pp: 143–145.
materials can be employed when okra is freshly NGUYEN T.B.T., KETSA S., DOORN S., VAN W.G.
harvested from farm after appropriate cooling and can (2004): Effects of modified atmosphere on chilling
be over-wrapped with low density polyethylene rather induced peel browning in banana. Post-harvest Bio-
than conventional raffia basket used in developing logy and Technology, 31: 312–313.
countries which can also cause mechanical damage to PANTATISCO E.R.B. (1975): Post Harvest Physiology
produce. However, further studies are still needed on Handling of Tropical and Subtropical Fruits and
pre-treatment of fresh okra samples prior to storage. Vegetables. AVI publishing company Inc., West Port,
Conneticut, pp. 67–71.
SALUNKHE D.K., BOLIN H.R., REDDY N.R. (1991):
REFERENCES Storage Processing and Nutritional Quality of Fruits
and Vegetables. 2nd ed., Vol II, CRC Press Inc, Boca
ADOM K.K, DZOGBEFIA V.P., ELLIS W.O. (1996). Com- Raton, FL, USA.
bined effect of drying time and slice thickness on the SANTI R., BHOWMILK S.R., JUNG C.P. (1992): Shelf life
solar drying of okra. J. Sci. Food Agric., 73: 315–320. of mature green tomatoes stored in controlled
AOAC (1990). Official Method of Analysis. 15th ed. atmosphere and high humidity. J. Food Sci., 57: 948–
Association of Official Analytical Chemist, Washing- 951.
ton, DC, USA. SCHIPPERS R.R. (2000): African Indigenous Vegetables.
AMATI M., ERIK D., YEUSV.L., ELLISE P., SAM C.A. (1989): An Overview of the Cultivated Species. Chathan UK.
How to Grow Tomatoes and Peppers. AROMISA National Resource Institute ACPEC Technical Centre
Foundation, Wageningen, Netherlands. pp. 12–25. for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation, pp. 948–951.
BATU A., THOMPSON A.K. (1998): Effect of modified WEICHMANN J. (1987): Post Harvest Physiology of
atmosphere packaging on post-harvest qualities of Vegetables. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, pp. 42–
pink tomatoes. J. Agric. For., 22: 365–372. 44.
FAO (1992). Food and Agricultural Organisation Re- ZAGORY D. (1995): Principle and Practice of Modified
port: Use of Fertilizer in Nigeria. Paper 8, pp. 63–77. Atmosphere Packaging of Horticultural Commodities
FINGER F.L., DLLA-JUSTINA M.E., CASALI V.W., In: Farber J.M., Dodda K.L. (ed.): Principles of
PUIATT M.: (2008). Temperature and modified Modified Atmosphere and Sous Vide Product
atmosphere affect the quality of okra. Sci Agric. Packaging. Lancaster, PA; Economic Publishing Co
(Piracicaba Braz), 65 (1): 312–313. Inc., pp 175–204.
IHEKORONYE I., NGODDY P.O. (1985): Integrated Food
Science and Technology for the Tropics. Macmillan Received for publication on February, 17, 2009
Ltd., London. Accepted for publication on June 17, 2009
Corresponding author:
156