EFFECT GF HORACE TEMPERAFURE
AND ATMOSPHERE ON THE
CHEPPEMG QUALEW 0F P'O'FATOES

The“: for Hm Dog?“ of MpS.
IEHCHEQAN STATE UNIVERSITY
T‘ukaram Bhujangarao Chawan
£965

ABSTRACT

EFFECT OF STORAGE TEMPERATURE AND ATMOSPHERE
ON THE CHIPPING QUALITY OF POTATOES

by Tukaram Bhujangarao Chawan

Modified levels of Carbon dioxide and oxygen in
combination with controlled temperatures were studied to
determine their usefulness to provide a reliable storage
condition for potatoes to be used in the manufacture of
potato chips.

The project was of three years duration and the
varieties used were: Kennebec, Arenac, Sebago, Emmet,
Russet Rural and Russet Arenac. The temperatures used were
from 34°F. to 50°F. The various gas level combinations of
Carbon dioxide were from 5% to 10% and of oxygen from 1%
to 5%.

A chipping test, was carried out at regular inter-
vals with potatoes, out of storage and after two, four and
six weeks conditioning. The thickness of the slices, the
frying fat, time and temperature were kept constant. A

flavor evaluation technique was used.

Tukaram Bhujangarao Chawan

Kennebec and Arenac were found to store at 400F. and
5% C02, 5% 02 level, for 30 weeks and produce #5 color
(highly acceptable) chips after two weeks conditioning. It
was also found that at 34°F. with controlled atmosphere con-
ditions and also in air, the potatoes could not be stored
for more than 4-8 weeks in good chipping condition. It was
observed that high carbon dioxide in combination with low
oxygen levels in the atmosphere causes poor horticultural
variety of the potatoes.

It was found that the mold susceptibility varied
with variety, temperature and controlled atmosphere storage

conditions.

   

Approved by

‘JMaj<:)Profe§§or

EFFECT OF STORAGE TEMPERATURE AND ATMOSPHERE
ON THE CHIPPING QUALITY OF POTATOES

BY

Tukaram Bhujangarao Chawan

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Food Science

August 1965

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express his appreciation to
Professor I. J. Pflug, his Major Professor and chairman of
the committee, under whose guidance this project was com-
pleted and this manuscript prepared.

The author also wishes to thank Dr. N. R. Thompson,
of the CrOp Science Department, for his continuous support
and help during the project.

The author is very thankful to The Whirlpool Corpor-
ation for their financial support of this study.

A sincere thank you is extended to the author's wife
Chandrajyothi, for her understanding and encouragement

throughout the study.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION .

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A.

B
C.
D

Potato growth and harvest

Physical structure of the potato
Chemical composition

Utilization of potato crop

l. Chipping industry

2. Frozen french-fried potatoes

3. Other products

Storage practice

1. The effect of temperature in storage
2. The effect of humidity in storage
3. The effect of gas levels in storage
4. The effect of radiation

5. The effect of conditioning

III. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

A.

B.

Introduction
Raw product
1. Varieties

a. Kennebec

iii

Page

10
ll
11
ll
12

12

Page

b. Arenac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

c. Sebago and Emmet . . . . . . . . . . 12

d. Russet rural and Russet Arenac . . . 12

2. Raw material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l3
3. Preparation of product for storage . . . 13
C. Experimental storage conditions . . . . . . 14
1. Experimental storages . . . . . . . . . 14
a. Types and their construction . . . . 14

i. Concrete room . . . . . . . . . 14

ii. Metal room . . . . . . . . . . 14

iii. Haskolite room . . . . . . . . 15

iv. Tile room . . . . . . . . . . . 15

v. Panel room . . . . . . . . . . 16

b. Refrigeration . . . . . . . . . . . 16

c. Gas source . . . . . . . . . . . . . l7

2. Control of storage conditions . . . . . 18
a. Temperature control . . . . . . . . 18

b. Humidity control . . . . . . . . . . 18

i. 1962-63 and 1963—64 . . . . . . 18

ii. 1964-65 . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

c. Gas analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

d. Inspection cycle . . . . . . . . . . 20

iv

IV.

D. Sampling and evaluation

1.

RESULTS

Sampling of the stored products
a. Random sampling
b. Conditioning samples
Horticultural evaluation
a. Inspection for mold growth
b. Inspection for spoilage
c. Inspection for sprout growth
d. Inspection for any other defects
Chipping test
a. Equipment

i. Slicer

ii. Deep fat fryer
b. Raw product preparation
c. Frying procedure
d. Sampling the chips
e. Color evaluation

f. Storage of chip samples

A. Chipping test

B. Moisture loss experiments

C. General horticultural quality

D. Flavor tests

Page

20
20
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
22
22
22
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26

27

V. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

A. General discussion

1.
2.
3.

B. The
ent

1.

2.

10.

11.
12.

13.

1962-63
1963-64
1964-65

effect of various gas levels on differ-
varieties of potatoes

10% c02, 3% 02 at 34°F.

10% c0 3% 02 at 60°F.

2’

10% c0 3% 02 at 50°F.

2)

5% c0 5% 02 at 34°F.

2’

5% 0 at 40°F.

5% CO 2

2’

5% c0 5% at 50°F.

2,

0
5% c0 1% 0 at 40°F.

2,

5% co 1% 02 at 50°F.

2’

5% c0 3% 0 at 40°F.

2)
5% C02, at 40°F. and low

humidity

3%.0

Control at 34°F.
Control at 40°F.

Control at 50 F.

C. Moisture loss

D. General horticultural quality

vi

Page

28
28
28
31

33

36
36
36
37
37
37
38
38
39

39

39
40
4O
41
41

42

F.

1. 1962—63
2. 1963-64
3. 1964-65

Mold susceptability of different
varieties . . . . . . . . .

Flavor evaluation

VI. SUMMARY

VII. CONCLUSIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX .

vii

Page

42
43

43

44
45
47
49
51

53

Table

10.

11.

12.

13.

LIST OF TABLES

Storage conditions and their sources used
during the study

Sample score sheet used in the evaluation of

potato chips

Relation between the National Chip Institute

color numbers,

their color and acceptability

Color rating scores of Kennebec variety for

1962-63

Color rating
1962-63

Color rating
1962-63

Color rating
for 1962-63

Color rating
1963-64.

Color rating
64

Color rating
64 .

Color rating
for 1963-64

Color rating
1964—65

Color rating
1964—65

SCOIGS

SCOIGS

scores

scores

scores

scores

SCOISS

SCOIGS

scores

of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of

of

Sebago variety for
Arenac variety for
Russet Rural variety
Kennebec variety for
Sebago variety for 1963-
Arenac variety for 1963-
Russet-Rural variety
Kennebec variety for

Q

Arenac variety for

viii

Page

54

56

57

58

6O

62

64

66

68

69

7O

71

72

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.
23.

24.

Color rating scores of Emmet variety for
1964—65

Color rating scores of Russet-Arenac
variety for 1964-65 . . . . . . . .

Per cent moisture loss (cumulative) for
Kennebec and Sebago varieties in 1962-63

Per cent moisture loss (cumulative) for
Kennebec and Arenac varieties in 1963-64

Per cent moisture loss (cumulative) for
Arenac variety in 1964-65

General horticultural quality of potatoes at
the end of storage period in 1962-63

General horticultural quality of postatoes at
the end of storage period in 1963-64

General horticultural quality of potatoes at the
end of storage period in 1964-65

Chip flavor scores for 1962-63
Chip flavor scores for 1963-64

Chip flavor scores for 1964-65

ix

Page

73

74

75

76

77

78

80

81
82
83

84

IloINTRODUCTION

Potatoes are one of the important seasonal food
crops of the North American continent. Due to the variation
in climate, in different parts of North America, it is
possible to obtain freshly harvested potatoes from July
through November. However, from N0vember through the winter
and following July, the potato supply should come from the
storages of the major potato growing areas. These areas are,
in the Northeast, Maine and the Canadian Maratrine provinces;
in the Central area, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Dakota; and
in the western area, Idaho, California, Washington, Oregon
and British Columbia.

With present day storage techniques it is possible
to store good quality potatoes for the table stock market
and have a very satisfactory product through July.

One of the major trends in the North American food
supply is toward an increase in quantity of processed food
in the diet rather than the raw food. In the processed food
area it would be potato chips compared to raw potatoes;
canned bean products compared to dry beans and so on. The
market for potatoes in the form of potato chips has been in-
creasing continuously for the past two decades. The increase

in the production of potato chips has brought about stress

in the potato production and storage areas. Potato chips
can not be economically shipped or stored for more than a
few weeks. Hence it is necessary to manufacture and dis-
tribute potato chips on a local basis the year around. The
consumer has been educated to expect light golden colored
potato chips and this places further stresses on the storage
area of the industry. To hold potatoes in storage until the
early spring months of April, May and June, and still have
the potatoes come out of storage to produce a light colored
chip requires special storage.

The objective of this study was to determine if con—
trolled atmosphere; where carbon dioxide and oxygen levels
of the atmosphere surrounding the tubers are modified could
be used in combination with controlled temperatures to pro-
vide better storage condition for potatoes that are to be

used for making potato chips.

II? REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Potato growth and harvest.

The potato is an enlarged tip of a rhizome (Fuller,
1963). In North America potatoes are grown once each
year. Potatoes from the previous year are cut into
sections with one or more eyes per section and this
piece of potato is planted in the later half of May. It
takes an average of 125 days after planting for most of

the varieties to mature (Kirkpatrick, et. a1. 1956).

Physical structure of the potato.

The potato (S. tuberosum) is composed of periderm, cor—
tex, parenchyma and pith. Schwimmer and Burr (1959)
describe the cortex as a narrow layer of Parenchyma
tissue, underlying the periderm. Parenchyma cells high
in starch content, lie within the shell of the cortex.
The pith forming a small central core with radiating
branches to reach the eyes is sometimes called the water
Core and contains the least amount of starch. An average
or medium sized potato tuber weight 6-8 ozs. Its spe—
cific gravity varies considerably according to the
variety, location and season.but the range is usually

from 1.064 to 1.090, in Michigan (Thompson, 1959).

Chemical composition.

The chemical composition of the potato tuber varies with
variety, area of growth, cultural practices, maturity at
harvest and subsequent storage history. The average
potato tuber (Schwimmer and Burr, 1959) consists of 77.5%
water and 22.5% total solids. The solids are about 86%
carbohydrate, 9% protein, 0.5% fat and 4.5% ash. The

ash is 4.5% composed of 50% Potassium, 15% Phosphorous
and small amounts of Sulfur, Magnesium, Calcium and
Silicon depending on the cultural practices. In addition
to these there are very small amounts of organic com—
pounds such as phenols, chlorOphyll, solanine, lipids,
organic acids, nitrogen (1/3-1/2) is protein nitrogen

and vitamins. Of the vitamins the following have been
detected in nutritionally significant quantities: Vita-
min A., Thiamin, Riboflavin, Ascorbic acid, Niacin, Pyri-
doxin, Vitamin K., Biotin, Inositol and Pantathenic acid
(Schwimmer and Burr, 1959). The amount of Ascorbic acid
is considered important since it is large enough to
supply the daily requirement of Vitamin C. in some areas
where the percapita consumption of potatoes is high
(Schwimmer and Burr, 1959). The Vitamin C content varies
from 10 to 40 mg. per 100 gm. of fresh tubers (Kroner and
volksen, 1950). The ascorbic acid content decreases

during storage.

Potatoes have a fat content in the neighborhood of 0.10
per cent on a fresh weight basis (Kroner and Volksen,
1950; Lampitt and Goldenberg, 1940).

When potatoes are stored for longer periods of time
under light a green layer is formed under the potato
skin, seldom exceeding 1/8 inch in thickness (Schwimmer
and Burr, 1959). This green layer is composed mostly of
chlorophyll (product of photosynthesis), and depends on
light intensity (foot-candles) and time the tubers are
exposed. The Optimum temperature is 68 F. Below 40°F.

greening seldom occurs (Schwimmer and Burr, 1959).
Utilization of potato crOp.

Potatoes are dug from the ground two weeks after the
vines are sprayed with Sodium Arsenite. This is done to
facilitate harvesting and to set the skin of the tubers.
50-6OQF. stimulates the growth of suberin in the cut
surfaces and thickening of the uninjured surface
(Phillips, 1952). After this curing process the potatoes
are stored at conditions suitable for respective future

uses.

1. Chipping industry.
In 1963, 23% of the total potato production was uti-
lized for processing. Of this 46% were used for the
chip industry, (Mercker, 1964). The chip industry

has been steadily increasing all through the years

and is expected to continue. Since the shelf life

of chips is short it is necessary to produce them
throughout the year. This necessitates ideal storage
conditions of the tubers such that they produce chips
of acceptable quality. Since the potato is an annual
crOp it is difficult to get fresh potatoes all
through the year to manufacture chips. Hence it is
necessary to find a suitable storage to permit the
chip industry to process all through the year, par-

ticularly in winter and spring seasons.

Frozen french-fried potatoes.

Frozen french-fried potatoes are the largest single
item (86%) of the total frozen products. About 70%
of these frozen fries are sold to restaurants
(Mercker, 1964). In this industry also, reducing
sugars cause dark color in the fries. But this
problem is not as critical as in that of the chip
industry. Processors manufacture and store french-
fries at the peak season of potato availability and
keep the plant idle for periods of the year (Mercker,

1964).

Other products.
Other products which fall in the category of de—
hydrated potato products are potato granules, potato

flakes, potato flour, and potato starch. The

operation of this industry is not year around and
can be adjusted with peak potato production. Thus

it is not too dependent on potato storage.

Storage practice.

All potatoes after harvesting are held at 60-7OOF. for
two weeks, to allow for the cuts and bruises to heal
(Phillips, 1952). Then these potatoes thus cured are
stored for various future uses. In the post-harvest
physiology of potatoes the variables which influence the
quality of the tuber are: temperature, relative humidity

and gas levels in the storage environment.

1. The effect of temperature.
The influence of storage temperature on the quality
of potato tubers has been studied for a long time.
Phillips (1952) recommends an Optimum temperature of
38°F. for keeping the potatoes from sprouting.
Heinze (1961) discussed the effect of storage temper—
ature on potatoes. He concludes that at 40°F.
potatoes could be stored and remain sprout free for
5-7 months. However, at 40°F. the potatoes accumulate
reducing sugars and sweeten the cooked product
(Heinze et. a1. 1955).
Smith and Davis (1964) report that it takes four to
seven days at 40°F. to accumulate reducing sugars and

produce an unacceptable chip from tubers which

produced light colored chips to start with.

The accumulation of reducing sugars causes the dark
color in fried potato products, since reducing
sugars interact with amino acids in producing dark

colored chips (Shallenberger, 1956).

The effect of humidity.

Smith (1956) reports that very little change in spe-
cific gravity will be found if the humidity of the
storage is maintained at 85%. Increase in specific
gravity is the result of loss of water. Kushman
(1958) states that loss of water from tubers occurs
more rapidly than loss of dry matter through respir—
ation, thus resulting in an increase in tuber spe-
cific gravity.

Miyamoto et. a1. (1958) reports, that more rapid
reconditioning is achieved by using low humidity con-
ditions. Miyamoto et. al. used tubers stored for 5
months at 40°F. and they recommend approximately 85%
relative humidity in the reconditioning period. At
this condition they obtained a 3.05 color chip after
7 weeks conditioning which is exceptionally good

chip color.

The effect of gas levels.
Denny (1941) reported that the rapid increase in the

reducing sugar content that occurs in tubers stored

at 41°F. can be prevented by adding five per cent
C02 to the surrounding air. Smith (1959) found that
increasing the C02 content of the storage atmosphere
reduced the rate of formation of reducing sugars.
Burton (1958) reported that sprouting of the tubers

could be totally inhibited by using 15% C0 and 65%

2
N2 in the storage atmosphere at SOOF.
Smith (1964) reports on the use of high levels of

CO2 in the atmosphere. He found that 95% C0 and 5%

2
02 in the storage atmosphere at 32°F. and 40°F. pro-
duced “highly acceptable" light colored chips, for 7
weeks. Smith in 1965, reports that research on high

C02 storage for chipping potatoes is very promising

but does not give any data.

The effect of radiation in storage of potatoes.
Brownell et. a1. (1957) reports that weight loss in
storage decreases with increased dosages of up to
15,000 to 25,000 REP, for Russet Burbank potatoes.

He also reports that periderm formation is completely
inhibited and suberization of cut areas is delayed
at all levels of gamma irradiation from 15- 200 kilo
REP, thus accounting for most storage rots.
Heiligman (1964) states that treatment of tubers by
gamma radiation in the range of 5,000 to 10,000 rads,
inhibits sprouting and does not significantly affect

nutritional wholesomeness of culinary qualities.

10

The effect of conditioning.

Burton (1953) reports that holding tubers with high
sugars, at 60-650F. for 2 weeks, would convert most
of the sugars to starch and some sugars might be
used up in respiration, thus giving an acceptable

colored fried potato products, mainly chips.

III. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

Introduction.

The basic objective of this study was to evaluate the
effect of several storage conditions on several varie-
ties of potatoes. Therefore the overall project con—
sists of a number of tests in which potatoes were sub-
jected to the different storage conditions for different
periods of time and evaluated primarily by a chipping
quality test. In addition observations were made re-
garding general horticultural qualities of sprouting,
weight loss and spoilage. The overall project was
carried out over three storage seasons. The results of
the previous storage season were used in determining the

storage conditions to be followed in the subsequent year.
Raw product.

Four varieties were used. In 1962 and 1963, Kennebec,
Sebago, Russet rural and Arenac varieties were used. In
1964 Emmet and Russet Arenac varieties were employed in-
stead of Sebago and Russet rural respectively (these two
varieties were employed since Sebago and Russet rurals
were not available and since they closely resembled the

Sebago and Russet rural varieties).

ll

1.

l2

Varieties.

Kenebec.

The Kennebec variety is known to the commercial

world for its unique good chipping quality. It
produces the best potato chips regarding texture
and flavor. This variety was readily available

at the time. It stores well, and has an excel-

lent process rating with high specific gravity

(Thompson,hl959).

Sebago.

The Sebago variety is not recommended for
chipping after winter storage but is very good
for boiling and baking. This variety was chosen
to contrast with the variety Kennebec. It has

a fair process rating with medium specific

gravity (Thompson, 1959).

Arenac.

The Arenac variety was developed in Michigan for
high total solids; it has an excellent process
rating with high specific gravity. It is a late

summer and early fall variety (Thompson, 1965).

Russet Rural.
The Russet Rural variety has a long history as a

chipping potato. It is a round russet skinned

l3

potato, capable of producing high total solids

(Thompson, 1959).
Raw material.

The potato tubers for this study were obtained from
the Michigan State University experiment station at
Lake City, Michigan. The potatoes, after they are
dug and cleaned of any adhering material, were packed
into 50 lbs. paper sacks. These bags of potatoes
were transported to East Lansing to the storage where
they were held at 60-750F. in a covered condition.
(Light exposure of the tubers induces the formation
of chlorophyll which is objectionable since the green
color impairs the culinary quality of the potatoes.)
They were held in closed containers for 15 days to
maintain the high moisture content necessary to help

in the curing or healing process.
Preparation of product for storage.

During the storage experiment the potato tubers were
in field crates. A random distribution technique was
employed in transferring the potatoes from the 50 lb.
sacks to the crates; two tubers at a time were re—
moved from the 50 lb sack and placed in each of the
crates for a particular experiment. This was con-
tinued until the sack was empty; in the same manner

another 50 lb. sack was distributed. Each 50 lb.

14

paper sack was distributed into all the field crates

used for each variety. Each crate was identified on

the outside by a label giving information of variety,

the storage room and the temperature.

C. Experimental storage conditions.

1. Experimental storages.

a. Types and their construction.

ii.

Concrete room. This room was made of insu-
lated concrete panels. The inside walls and
ceiling were insulated with 4 inches of poly—
styrene foam. There was no insulation in the
floor. A blower type evaporator provided
cooling. The gas sampling tubes and thermo-
couples leads are inserted through the wall
at the back of the room. The front end has
an insulated door. The inside dimensions of

the room were 6%' x 3' x 5' (97.5 cu. ft.).

Metal room. The metal room is in reality a
wood frame structure insulated with poly-
styrene inside the outside covered with galva—
nized metal sheet which acted as a gas seal.
This has an Opening at the rear for the
thermocouples and gas sampling tubes. A side

opening serves as the gas inlet. The power

iii.

iv.

15

cord passes through for the evaporation in
the rear. This room has double doors. The
inside metal door fits into a groove which
is filled with petroleum jelly. This door
provides a gas seal. An insulated external
wooden door is then placed over the metal

door to provide a refrigeration seal. The

dimensions inside were 6 x 3.25 x 5' (112.2

cu. ft.).

Haskolite room. This is constructed with
"Haskolite" foam filled panels of prefabri-
cated polystyrene type material. This has

an opening at the rear for gas sampling
tubes, thermocouples and a power cord for

the evaporator. It has 6.5 x 3.3 x 5' inside
dimensions (100.65 cu. ft.). The insulated

door of the Haskolite room is gas tight.

Tile room. This is a double tile wall
structure insulated with palco wool. The in-
side is covered with thin sheets of aluminum,
which serves as a gas seal. This has an open—
ing tube on the side which serves as an in-
let for gas. An opening on the other side

has sampling tubes, thermocouples and power
cord pass through. The tile room is equipped

with double doors. The inner door is the gas

16

seal door and fits in a vaseline filled
groove whereas the outside door is the insu-
lated refrigerated door which is bolted in
place on the outside of the room. The in-
side dimensions are 6 x 5 x 3.5' (105 cu.

ft.).

v. Panel rooms. The panel room installation
consists of five small CA chambers inside,
an overall facility that includes a work
room and a 40°F. storage area. The panel
room unit is made of a sandwich of 4-inches
of flame retardent expanded polystyrene
(Styrofoam) insulation with %" Douglas fir
plywood faces. The corners are sealed by in—
stalling galvanized sheet metal ells and
filled behind the ells with an architectural
calking compound. Each small chamber is
equipped with its own evaporator and has
pipes for gas inlet, sampling inlet, thermo-
couples, and power service for the room. The
inside dimensions of the individual chambers

are 4/k 5 x 7.5' (150 cu. ft.).

b. Refrigeration.
I

All rooms contained an individual evaporator fan.

The concrete, metal, tile and Haskolite rooms

17

contained evaporators with a larger amount<ofsur—
face area than the panel rooms. The-evaporator
system of all the rooms were designed to main—
tain a high humidity. Suction line pressure re-
ducing valves were used with liquid line and
suction line solenoid to completely isolate the
rooms during the off cycle. In the 1964-65
season, the Haskolite room was kept at a lower
relative humidity by using ammonium chloride in-
side the room to absorb moisture to control

humidity.

c. Gas source.
The gas source for the experiments in 1962—63 and
1963-64 was from a TECTROL gas generator using
natural gas. The gas was burned in the generator

and the evolved high CO and low 02 gas was

2
supplied to the storage rooms with a compressor.
A water scrubber was used to reduce C02 level and
increase the 02 level to produce a second experi—
mental gas. Two rooms were fed at each of the
two gas levels and each room was fed inter-
mittently at one minute intervals by a cycling
timer.

In 1964-65, two TECTROL generators which each con—

tained carbon dioxide scrubbing apparatus were used and these

18

generators produced the desired gas levels directly at their

output which was again delivered to the rooms using an inter—

mediate compressor.

The various storage conditions used each year are

listed in Table 1.

2. Control of storage conditions.

3.

Temperature control.

In the 1962-63 and 1963-64 storage experiments,
each room was controlled for temperature by a bi—
metal sensing element with mercury contact type
thermostat. This has a # 10F. control of temper-
ature. In 1964-65 experiment the wood rooms
were controlled by a thermister sensing element
with a transistorized amplifier type control re-
lay. The temperatures were checked every day

and recorded.

Humidity control.

i. 1962-63 and 1963-64. The humidity was con-
trolled by the design of the refrigeration
equipment; the average humidity level was

less than.92%.

ii. 1964-65. The humidity in the tile, concrete

and wood rooms was in the range of 90—92%.

The humidity in the panel rooms was slightly

19

lower and probably was in the range of 89-
91%.

The Haskolite room was set up to study the
effect of low relative humidity. Initially
the gas was supplied first to the hermetic
room which was maintained at 320E. to serve
as a condensor with the gas piped to the
Haskolite room after it had circulated in the
hermetic room. This system of reducing
moisture was not satisfactory. To control
the moisture at a known level, ammonium
chloride which has:an”equilihrium relative
humidity of 79.5% at 20°C., 79.3% at 25°C.,
and 77.5%.at 30°C. was placed in plastic
screened cylinders underneath the evaporator
in a plastic container so that the amonium
chloride would absorb moisture from the air,
go into solution and drOp down into the
plastic container. It was necessary to keep
all moisture off the floor of the room in
order to maintain low humidity conditions.
It is estimated that the relative humidity in

the room was in the vicinity of 80-85%-

20

Gas analysis.

The gas levels in each room were analyzed and re—
corded each morning with an Orsat gas analyzer.
For two days immediately following sampling, the

gas levels were checked every two hours.

Inspection cycle.

The produce in the storage was inspected once
every four weeks during the 1962-63 season.
During the 1963-64, and the 1964-65 seasons the
inspection cycle was once every six weeks. Care
was taken to see that the time between opening
and closing of the storages for sampling, was a

minimum.

D. Sampling and evaluation.

1.

Sampling of the stored product.

Twenty pounds capacity paper bags were used for this
purpose. The bags were identified regarding the
variety of potatoes, storage conditions and data of

sampling.

Random sampling.
Fifteen potatoes from each variety at each storage
condition were selected randomly and placed into

the bags already identified for the purpose.

21

b. Conditioning samples.
Three tubers were used immediately for the out
of storage chipping test. The rest were kept in
the same bag and the top of the bag folded to
prevent light exposure. The bags were then kept
in a room at an average temperature of 750F. and
40% average relative humidity. Three potatoes
from each of these bags were used for the chipping
test at the end of two, four, and six weeks
conditioning.

2. Horticultural evaluation.

a. Inspection for mold growth.
Any noticeable mold growth on the tubers was
noted and recorded. The extent of the growth and
the area were also approximated.

b. Inspection for spoilage.
Spoiled tubers were taken out and the number of
such tubers recorded.

c. Inspection for sprout growth.
Sprouting of tubers if any was noted. The
length of the sprouts and the number of tubers
sprouted were recorded.

d. Inspection for any other defects.

All other noticeable differences were recorded.

3.

22

Chipping test.

a.

Equipment.

The equipment employed in the chipping test were:

slicer, deep fat fryer, timer, thermometer and

an enamel pan.

ii.

Slicer. This is a manually operated food
slicer. The thickness of the slice can be
adjusted by adjusting the position of the
blades. Four 0.07" thick 1" x %" metal
strips are placed on a smooth level surface.
The screw keeping the blades in position made
loose. This was then placed in between the
four metal strips such that the blades rest
on the smooth surface. Then the screw
tightened. This method gives a slice thick—

ness of 0.07".

Deep fat fryer. The deep fat fryer used was
a Hot Point model 201HK3 deep fat fryer with
a 200°F. — 400°F. range. The temperature is
maintained by a thermostat. The temperature
of the fat was checked in the beginning of

frying with a mercury-in—glass thermometer.

Raw product preparation.

Three potatoes, randomly selected from the

sampled fifteen tubers, were washed to remove

23

adhering soil and any other foreign material.
These were sliced to a uniform thickness of 0.07
inch, with a vegetable slicer. Each potato was
sliced up to the middle in a cross-sectional way.
These slices were then kept in water, in a pan,
at 55-600F. for sixty seconds, with slight agi-
tation at fifteen seconds intervals to remove any
adhering starch to the slices. This starch if

present may cause the slices to stick together.

Frying procedure.

The slices as prepared in the above manner were
then transfered to the baskets of the deep fat
fryer with a minimum amount of water sticking to
the slices. The baskets were lowered into the
fat at 3750F. and the timer started simultaneous—
ly. The slices were agitated every five second
so that they would not stick, and fried for two
minutes. Then the baskets were allowed to drain
and the chips to cool; the chips were transfered
to paper towelling to remove the excess fat ad-
hering to the chips and for final cooling. The
fat used during this experiment was Kraft "Red

Label" type pure vegetable shortening.

Sampling the chips.
The cooled chips were bagged in cellophane bags

and an identification tag stapled to the bag.

24

Care was taken to see that during frying and
sampling the chips and slices were mixed to en-

sure a random sample.

Color evaluation.

The color of the chips was determined by com-
paring it with a color standard table published
by the Potato Chip Institute International. The

color ratings were then recorded.

Storage of chip samples.

After evaluating for color the chip samples were
stored at room temperature, in cardboard boxes.
The boxes were kept in dark rooms so that any
possible effect of light on the chips was elimi-
nated. The samples were compared with the other
samples made throughout the year and the experi—

ment was concluded.

IV . RESULTS

Chipping test.

The potatoes were checked at regular intervals for their
chipping quality. The chip color was evaluated by com-
paring the potato chips to the chip color standard de-
veloped by the Potato Chip Institute. The potatoes were
chipped directly out of stOrage and at the end of 2,4
and 6 week conditioning periods.
1. 1962-63.
In this year 4 varieties were evaluated. The atmos-
pheres were:
a) 10% coz, 3% 02 at 34°F.
b) 10% c02, 3% 02 at 42°F.
c) 5% C02, 5%.02 at 34°F.
d) 5% C0 , 5%.0 at 42°F.
e) contro at 32 F.
f) control at 40°F.
g) control at 75°F.
The chip color ratings for the several varieties and

the several evaluation times are shown in tables 1

to 4.

2. 1963—64.
The same four varieties used in 1962-63, were evalu-
ated in 1963-64. The atmospheres were:
a) 10% C02, 3% 02 at 40°F.
b) 5% C02, 5% 02 at 40°F.

25

26
c) 5% c02, 5% 02 at 50°F, and
d) 10% C02, 3% 02 at 50°F.
The chip color ratings obtained are recorded in

tables 5-8.

3. 1964—65.

In this year two new varieties were employed. Emmet
was used instead of Sebago and Russet-Arenac instead
of Russet—rural. The atmosphere used were:

a) 1% 02, 5% C02 at 40°F.

b) 1% 02; 5% C02 at SOOF.

c) 3% 02, 5% C02 at 40°F.

d) 3% 02, 5% C02 at 40°F. and an average R.H. of

85%.

The color ratings for the chips are recorded as in

tables 9-12.

Moisture losses.

To determine moisture loss 0.5 bushel of potatoes were
placed in weighing baskets and the potatoes plus basket
were weighed each time the storage was Opened for
sampling and evaluation. Kennebec and Sebago varieties
were used in 1962-63, Kennebec and Arenac in 1963-64,

and Arenac only in 1964~65. The weight loss was recorded
and the percentage calculated as cumulative per cent loss.

The resulting data are shown in tables 13, 14, and 15.
General horticultural quality.

All potatoes were evaluated at the end of the storage

period for their horticultural quality. The amounts of

27

spoilage, sprout growth and mold growth are shown in

tables 17, 18 and 19.
Flavor test.

Chips made during the year were evaluated occasionally
for their flavor. After a few preliminary tests a score
sheet was developed by using the names given by the
panelists for flavor attributes. Table 16 shows a sample
score sheet. The chips were evaluated by a panel. Chip
scores were tabulated; the average chip scores are shown

in tables 20, 21, and 22.

V. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

A. General discussion.
1. 1962-63.

The 34oF. (air) storage experiment was concluded at
the end of 28 weeks storage, because of high spoil—
age. In the Russet—rural variety 75% spoiled, in
the Kennebec and Sebago varieties 50% spoiled and in
the Arenac variety 40% spoiled. Russet-rural pro—
duced #10 color chips after the 8th week of storage.
Kennebec, Sebago and Arenac produced #9+ color chips
directly out of storage starting with the 8th week
of storage. Although there was variation in the pro-
duction of dark colored chips with the variety, all
varieties produced unacceptable chips. Kennebec
tubers did not physiologically hold up through the 2
week conditioning period after 28 weeks in storage.
Sebago and Arenac did not hold up through the two
week conditioning period after 20 weeks in storage.
Russet-rural, after 24 weeks in storage did not hold
up through the two week conditioning period.

At 10% c02, 3% 02 and 34°F. Kennebec, Sebago and

Russet-rural produced #5.5 and #5 color chips directly

28

29

out of storage at the end of 4 weeks storage. Then
from the 8th week on they produced #9 and above
colored chips. Arenac produced #6 color chips at
the end of the 8th week and then started producing
#9 from the 12th week. Kennebec variety did not
last more than two weeks conditioning after 16 weeks
storage. Sebago did not last two weeks conditioning
after 16 weeks in storage. Arenac lasted only two
weeks conditioning after 20 weeks in storage.
Russet-rural did not survive conditioning after 20
weeks storage. This experiment was concluded by the
end of 20 weeks since more than 65% of the tubers
were spoiled. Russet-rural had 80%, Kennebec and
Sebago 75% and Arenac 65% spoiled.

In 5% CO at 34°F. Sebago and Arenac had 50%,

2,
Kennebec had 65% and Russet-rural had 75% spoilage.
The Kennebec and Arenac produced #10 color chips
after 20 weeks in storage. Sebago produced #10 chip
after 16 weeks, and Russet—rural at the end of 12
weeks in storage. After 16 weeks in storage, all
the varieties did not physiologically hold up after
the two week conditioning. The 5% C02, 5% 02 at 34oF.
storage was concluded after 24 weeks.

At 42°F. controls, all the four varieties were held

for 36 weeks. At this point none of the four

30

varieties were able to physiologically stand con—
ditioning of more than two weeks. By the end of 32
weeks in storage, Kennebec, Sebago and Russet-rural
produced #9.5 chips, directly out of storage, where—
as Arenac produced #10 color chips. There was no
spoilage at the end of the storage.

At 5% C0 5% 02 and 42°F. all the four varieties

2,
were unable to stand the 2 week conditioning after
36 weeks in storage. Under these conditions all
four varieties produced chips one color point better
than the controls at 40°F. There were no spoilage
in any of the varieties.

At 10% C02, 3% 02 and 420E. all the four varieties
produced chips one color point lighter than controls.
At the end of 36 weeks in storage, none of them were
able to hold through more than 2 week conditioning.
There was spoilage of more than 2%. Kennebec and
Arenac had 8% and 2% respectively, Sebago had 50%
and Russet-rural 20% spoilage.

The potatoes chipped darker out of storage as the
length in storage increased. With controlled atmos—
phere storage of 10% C02, 3% 02 and.5% C02, 5%02 at
429E. this increase in darkness was gradual. With

42°F control the increase was very rapid.

31

1963-64.

The same four varieties, Kennebec, Sebago, Arenac
and Russet-rural were evaluated during 1963-64.
Storage temperature of 34°F. was not employed.

Since we were looking for the best storage con—
ditions, the storage tenoeratures which were not
satisfactory were not employed.

The most consistent result during this year was that
the color of the chips increased in darkness, coming
out of storage, as the storage period increased.
Kennebec produced #10 color chips at the end of 24
weeks storage at 10% C02, 3% 02 and 40°F. For
Arenac, Sebago and Russet-rural, it took only 18
weeks to produce #10 color chips. At the same con-
ditions in 1962-63, Sebago produced #10 color chips
at the end of 36 weeks in storage. Arenac, Russet-
rural and Kennebec never reached #10 color in 1962—63
at 10% coz, 3% 02 at 40°F. This might be due to the
humidity conditions in different rooms during the two
years. The humidity was higher in 1963-64 season
than 1962-63, in the respective rooms.

At 5% C02, 5% 02 and 40°F. Kennebec produced #8
color chips at the end of 30 weeks and 2 weeks con-
ditioning was sufficient to produce a #5 color chip.
Although Sebago produced a #6 color chip at the end

of 30 weeks, it did not produce lighter chips after

32

6 weeks conditioning. Russet-rural behaved in the
same way as Sebago. Arenac produced a #7 color chip
and with 2 weeks conditioning produced a #5 color
chip. In 1962-63 the varieties produced darker chips
at the same conditions, but were in different

rooms.

All the controls at 40°F. produced 1 color darker
chips than the potatoes stored at 5% C02 at 40°F.

The 42°F. control would not condition in 2 weeks and
produce chips lighter (#5), in color than the 5% C02,
5% 02 stored potatoes. In controls and at 5% C02,

5% 02 and 40°F. there were no spoilage. At 5% C02,
5% 02 and 50°F., Arenac, Kennebec and Russet-rural
varieties produced #5 and #6 color chips, directly
out of storage, for 30 weeks, and could not stand

the conditioning period. Sebago produced chips up

to color #7 and after 24 weeks in storage could not
stand the conditioning period and deteriorated. There
was spoilage in all varieties: Kennebec and Arenac
had 7%, Russet-rural had 14% and Sebago 75% spoilage.
The mold growth was 90—100% on all the varieties.
There was 6" sprouts on Kennebec, Arenac and Russet—
rural varieties. Sebago had 4" long sprouts.

At 10% coz, 3% 02 and 50°F. Kennebec and Russet—rural
produced #5 to #6 color chips directly out of stor-

age, at the end of 30 weeks. Arenac and Sebago

33

produced #7 and #7.5 color chips respectively at the
end of 24 weeks storage. Kennebec and Arenac had 5%
mold whereas Russet-rural and Sebago had 100%.
Spoilage was 12.5% in Sebago, 6.5% in Arenac, 6% in
Russet-rural and 1.5% in Kennebec. Kennebec had 4"
sprout length. Sebago 3", Arenac 1.5" and Russet-

rural 1.75" sprout lengths.
1964—65.

Kennebec, Arenac, Emmet and Russet-Arenac were evalu-
ated during 1964-65. At the end of 24 weeks in 50°F.
control storage, Kennebec had 0.5% spoilage and 1.5"
long sprouts, Arenac had 5.0% spoilage and 15" long
sprouts, Emmet had 7.0% spoilage and 17" long sprouts
and Russet-Arenac had 5.0% spoilage and 29" long
sprouts. Kennebec and Emmet produced #5 color chips
at the end of 24 weeks directly out of storage and
Arenac and Russet-Arenac produced #4.5 color chips.
Due to sprouting and loss of moisture, the tubers
were soft and flacid. Kennebec and Arenac were less
flacid than Emmet and Russet-Arenac. All four varie-
ties deteriorated after two weeks conditioning. Al—
so, conditioning darkened the color of the chips. The
50°F. control experiment was concluded at the end of
24 weeks of storage.

At 10% C02 and 40°F. Kennebec and Arenac produced

#10 and #9 color chips respectively. Sebago and

34

Russet—rural produced #8 color chips. Kennebec,
Arenac and Russet—rural produced #6 color chips after
4 weeks conditioning, after 30 weeks in storage,
whereas Sebago produced only a #7 color chip. There
was only 2% spoilage at the end of 30 weeks in storage
in Arenac variety and no spoilage in the others.

There were sunken spots of 3/16" diameter on 90% of
the Kennebec tubers and 10% of Arenac tubers. 1/32"
of the potato under this spot was black. The cause

of this sunken spots was not known. It probably

might be due to high CO level and variety.

2

In 5% C0 1% 02 and 50°F. storage at the end of 24

2,
weeks: Kennebec had 90% spoilage, Emmet had 90%
apoilage, Arenac had 75% spoilage and Russet Arenac
had 95% Spoilage. The few good tubers were taken
for chipping, Kennebec, Emmet and Arenac produced
#7.5 color chips and Russet-Arenac made #9.5 color
chips. The experiment was concluded at the end of
24 weeks.

The 40°F. air control at the end of 30 weeks showed
no signs of spoilage. Kennebec produced 6.5, Arenac
7.5, Emmet 8.0 and Russet-Arenac 8.5 color chips.

For Kennebec and Emmet 4 weeks conditioning did not
improve the color, at the end of 30 weeks in storage.
For Arenac and Russet—Arenac, 2 weeks conditioning

was enough to produce an #5.5 to #5 color acceptable

light colored (#5.5 to 5) chip.

35

At 5% C02, 1% 02 and 40°F. Kennebec and Arenac pro-
duced #10 chips directly out of storage after 18
weeks storage. Emmet and Russet-Arenac produced #10
color chips starting from 12th week. Kennebec and
Arenac conditioned to light colored chips (#5) where
as Emmet and Russet-Arenac did not.

At 5% c0 3% 02 and 40°F, with high humidity, Emmet

2,
and Russet-Arenac made #10 color chips at the end of
18 weeks, Kennebec made #10 chips at the end of 24
weeks. Kennebec conditioned faster (2 weeks) to pro-
duce lighter colored (#5.5) chips than Emmet, Russet-
Arenac or Arenac. At the end of 30 weeks storage,
there was no spoilage or sprout growth on any of the
varieties. There was a slight mold growth of 0.5%
on the total area of the potatoes.

At 5% C0 3% 02 and 40°F., with low relative

2,
humidity, after 30 weeks in storage, it was found
that the tubers were void of defects such as spoilage
and mold growth. Some sprouts initials were visible
on all the varieties. Kennebec variety, at the end
of 30 weeks, produced #6.5 color chips, same as the
40°F. controls. 2 weeks conditioning produced a

#4.5 color chip with the Kennebecs stored at low
humidity, where as even 4 weeks conditioning produced

only #6 color chips with Kennebecs stored at 40°F.

controls. Arenac at the end of 30 weeks produced a

36

#7.5 color chip, Emmet a #10.0 color chip and Russet
Arenac a #8.0 color chip. Arenac after 6 weeks con—
ditioning produced a #5 color chip. Emmet and Russet-
Arenac produced #6.5 and #7.0 color chips after 4

weeks conditioning.

B. The effect of various storage conditions on different
varieties of potatoes.

1.

10% c0 3% 02 at 34°F.

2,
At this storage condition the potatoes produced #5.5
color chips for 4 weeks and from the 8th week on
they produced very dark (10+) chips. Thus it can be
seen that due to some peculiar property, potatoes
could hold for only 4 weeks at this condition in
good chipping quality. Only Arenac did not produce
#10 color chips, it made #9 at the end of 20 weeks

in storage.

10% c0 3% 02 at 42°F.

2,
This storage‘condition was used in 1962-63 and 1963-
64 seasons. During both years, all the potato varie—
ties chipped darker (#6 to #10) out of storage as

the time in storage increased, and they produced
lighter chips (#5) after 2 to 4 weeks conditioning.
During the first year, Sebago had 50% spoilage and
in the 2nd year it had only 2% spoilage. Kennebec,

Arenac and Russet-rural showed some spoilage during

37

1962-63 but none in 1963—64. This may be due to the
different rooms used in the latter period.

10% c02, 3% 02 at 50°F.

At this storage condition, potatoes were kept well
for 18 weeks with minimum sprouting, Spoilage and
mold growth. By the end of 30 weeks, there was a
heavy mold growth, sprouting and spoilage. All the
varieties produced chips of #7 color or lighter,
directly out of storage, all through the 30 week
period. 2 weeks conditioning was enough to make #5

chips.
0 o O

In this storage condition, by the end of 4 weeks,
the potatoes produced #7 color chips; however, the
color darkened rapidly as the time in storage in-
creased. There was heavy spoilage in all varieties
and the experiment had to be concluded at the end of

24 weeks.

5% c0 5% 02 at 42°F.

2,
This storage condition was employed during 1962-63
and 1963-64 seasons. During both years, the potatoes
at the end of the storage period were in good horti-
cultural quality. Although they produced dark
colored chips directly out of storage, 2-4 weeks con—
ditioning was enough to produce light (#5) colored

chips which were acceptable.

38

5% c0 , 5% 02 at 50°F.

2
Kennebec, Arenac and Russet-rural produced lighter
(#4,5 to #6.5) colored chips directly out of storage.
Sebago produced a little darker chips than the other
varieties. However, at the end of 30 weeks in
storage, all of the varieties were in poor horti—
cultural condition. Sebago had undergone the
greatest spoilage (75%) had 4" long sprouts.

Kennebec and Arenac had 7%, Russet-rural had 16%
spoilage. Kennebec, Arenac and Russet rural had 6"
sprout growth each. All of them had 90% and above
mold growth. Hence, they could not last more than

30 weeks in storage.

5% c0 1% 02 at 40°F.

2.
At the condition, Emmet and Russet-arenac produced

#10 color chips starting 12 weeks in storage. By

the 24th, conditioning did not improve the color of
the chips very much. They did not have any sprouts
but there was spoilage of 10-25%. There was mold
growth on 50-65% of the area. Arenac and Kennebac
produced #10 color chips from the 18th week in
storage. Four to six weeks conditioning was necessary
to produce a #5 color chip from these varieties after

30 weeks in storage. There was 25-50% mold growth

on these two varieties and there was spoilage.

10.

39

5% c0 , 1% 02 at 50°F.

2
This experiment had to be concluded at the end of 24
weeks. The spoilage and mold growth was heavy. In
Arenac, the spoilage was 75% and in others, it was
more than 90%. The mold growth was on 100% of the
area. rAlthough few unspoiled tubers cou1d‘bexcon-
ditioned to produce light colored chips, it was not
possible to prolong storage beyond 24 weeks because

of the general horticultural quality.

5% c0 3% 02 at 40°F.

2.
The general horticultural quality was good and the
mold growth was only 0.25—1.5%.on Kennebec, Emmet
and Russet-arenac. On Arenac, there was no mold
growth and this variety was in good horticultural
quality. All the four varieties produced chips
which became darker as the time in storage increased.
At the end of 30 weeks, 4 weeks conditioning was
necessary for Kennebec and Arenac varieties to pro-
duce chips of lighter color (#5 and #6). For Emmet
and Russet-arenac, even 4 weeks conditioning did not

help in producing lighter chips.

5% co 3% 02 at 40°F. and low humidity (80-85%).

2)
In this condition, all the four varieties were void
of mold growth or spoilage, but looked shrivelled

due to loss of moisture from the tubers. At the end

11.

12.

40

of 30 weeks storage, all the four varieties had
sprout initials showing. Arenac, Emmet and Russet-
arenac chipped darker as the length of storage in-
creased. It took 4-6 weeks for Arenac and Russet—
arenac after 30 weeks storage, to produce #5 color
chips. Emmet did not condition to produce lighter
chips. Kenebec variety produced colored chips (5.5
to 7.5) lighter, directly out of storage than all

the other varieties. Two weeks conditioning was suf-

ficient to produce #4.5 to #5.0 color chips.
0
Control at 34 F.

There was no sprouting at the end of 28 weeks in
storage. There was more than 40% spoilage, 50% each
in Kennebec and Sebago, 40% in Arenac and 75%.in
Russet—rural. Russet—rural and Kennebec started pro—
ducing #10 chips from 8th and 12th weeks in storage
respectively. After 30 weeks in storage all the

varieties were in unconditionable state.
0
Control at 40 F.

This storage was employed during all three years.
The most consistant result was that the varieties
chipped darker (#8 to #10) out of storage, as the
length in storage increased, and reached a peak by
8-18 weeks in storage and showed a decrease in dark—

ness (6.5—8) by the end of 30 weeks storage. Arenac

41

in 1962-63 did not follow this pattern but it fol-
lowed during 1963-64 and 1964-65 seasons. All three

years there was no spoilage.

13. Control at 50°F.

All the varieties produced chips from 4.5 to 5 color
rating, directly out of storage up to 24 weeks,

after which the experiment was concluded due to poor
horticultural quality of the tubers. All the tubers
were soft due to loss of moisture. Rehnebec had 1.5"
long sprouts and 0.5% spoilage. Emmet had 17" long
sprouts and 7% spoilage, Arenac had 15" sprouts and
5% spoilage and Russet-Arenac had 29" long sprouts
and 5% spoilage. _Russet—Arenac had 3%, Emmet and

Arenac 2% each and Kennebec had 1%.mold growth.
Moisture loss.

Kennebec and Sebago varieties were evaluated for moisture
loss during 1962-63, Kennebec and Arenac during 1963-64
and Arenac only, was evaluated during 1964-65.

The design of the rooms in which the storage tests were
conducted was such that the humidity was varient in each
condition. The average humidity in all the controlled
atmosphere rooms, except haskolite (5% C02, 3% 02 at
40°F. and low humidity) in 1964-65 season, was 90-92%.
During 1962-63 season, it was seen that Sebago lost more

moisture than Kennebec, but in 1963—64 and 1964-65, the

42

loss at the end was about the same depending on the room
conditions. In 1962-63, Kennebec lost 6.21% moisture at
the end of 32 weeks at 5% coz, 5% 02 at 40°F. In 1963-64
experiment, it lost 1.54 moisture at the same atmosphere
conditions. The rooms in these two years were different.
In 1962—63, it was the Metal room whereas in 1963-64, it

was the Haskolite room.
General horticultural quality.

The general horticultural quality of the potatoes was de-
termined by evaluating the product as regards to sprout

growth, spoilage and mold growth.

1. In 1962-63, Kennebec variety remained in storage at

5% CO 5% 02 and 40°F. air controls for 36 weeks

2,
without any spoilage or mold growth. In all other
storage conditions, there was spoilage. At 10% C02,
3% O2 and 34°F. it was heavy (75%) and at the same
gas levels and 42°F, it was the least (8%). Sebago
and Arenac also responded the same way as Kennebec.
Russet-rural responded to the conditions differently.
In addition to spoilage, it had mold growth in 34°F.

air controls and at 10% C0 3%.02 and 42°F. In 5%

2)
C02, 5% 02 at 42°F condition, there was no molds, no
sprouts and no spoilage but there were some sunken

spots on the potatoes.

43

In 1963-64, Sebago and Russet-rural did not have any
sprouts or spoilage at 10% C02, 3% 02 at 40°F. and
5% C02, 5% 02 at 40°F. Storage conditions. Kennebec

and Arenac at 10% C0 3% 02 and 40°F. storage had

2,
some sunken spots on the tubers. Under these spots
1/32" of the tuber was black. In Kennebec it was
most noticeable. 90% of Kennebec had these sunken
spots whereas Arenac had only 10%.

At 5% C02, 5% 02 and 40°F, all the four varieties
held for 30 weeks without any defects in horti-
cultural quality. At 40°F. air controls, Kennebec
and Sebago were beginning to sprout whereas Arenac
and Russet-rural showed no signs of sprouting. At
50°F C02, 5% 02 the sprouting in all the varieties
was heavy. The mold growth was more than 90%. The
spoilage was heavy in Sebago, up to 75%. In general,
at this storage level the horticultural quality was

poor. At 10% c0 3% 02 and 50°F, the horticultural

2)
quality was found to be the same as that for 5% C02,

5% 02, but the sprout growth and spoilage was less.

In 1964-65, at 40°F. air, all the varieties were
void of any mold growth, Sprouting or spoilage. At

5% C0 1% 02 at 40°F. there was 25% Spoilage in

2)

Russet-arenac, 10% spoilage in Kennebec and Emmet

and only 5% spoilage in Arenac. Although there was

44

no sprouting there was mold growth: heavy on Russet
Arenac (65%) and least on Arenac (25%). In 5% C02,
3% 02 at 40°F. there were no sprouts or spoilage.
There was very slight (0.25%) mold growth on Kennebec
and Emmet, and 1.5% mold on the Russet Arenac
variety.

In the low humidity condition at 5% C02, 3% 02 and
40°F., there was no spoilage or mold growth. Heavy
shrivelling made the tubers a little soft for touch.
The sprouts were just emerging on all varieties. In
50°F. controls there was heavy (15") sprouting in
Emmet, Arenac and Russet Arenac varieties. In
Kennebec sprouts were only 1.5" long, There was

some mold and growth and spoilage. In 5% C0 1% 02

2)
at 50°F. storage all the potato varieties were in
poor horticultural condition, at the end of the 30 week

storage period. Although sprouting was less than 1",

there was heavy mold growth and spoilage.
Mold susceptibility of different varieties.

In 1962-63 experiment only Russet rural variety had mold
at the end of the storage period. It had 5% mold in 40°F.
air controls, where as at 34oF. air control and at 5%

€02, 5% 02 at 40°F. storage conditions it had 2% mold
growth only.

In 1963-64 season, mold growth was noticeable only at

50°F. controlled atmosphere conditions. Russet rural

45

had 100% mold growth at both 10% C0 3% 02 and 5% C0

2’ 2’
5% 02 conditions. Arenac and Kennebec had 5% mold growth
at 10% C02, 3% 02 conditions and 90% mold growth at 5%
C02, 5% 02 conditions. Sebago variety had 95% mold
growth at 5% C02, 5% 02 and 100% at 10% C02, 3% 02.

In 1964-65, mold growth was 100% on Kennebec, Arenac,
Russet Arenac and Emmet varieties at the end of 30 week
storage period at 5% C02, 10% 02 atmosphere at 50°F. At
5% C02, 1% 02 and 40°F. atmosphere there was 65% mold on
Russet Arenac, 50% each on Kennebec and Emmet and only
25% on Arenac. At 50°F. controls there was slight mold
growth. Only 3% mold was seen on Russet Arenac and less
than 2% on all other varieties. .

It was observed that in all varieties, Russet rural and

Russet-Arenac were most readily susceptible to mold

growth under favorable mold growth conditions.
Flavor evaluation.

In the 1962-63, taste panel was conducted several times
to evaluate a suitable score sheet. This sheet was then
used in conducting a taste panel, once each in 1962—63
and 1963-64 experiments. Chips of #7 or better color
were used. The chips were from four week conditioned
potatoes. These potatoes were in storage, 16 weeks in
1962-63, 12 weeks in 1963—64 and 1964-65 experiments, be—

fore conditioning. In 1964-65 experiment the author

46

only evaluated the chips and recorded the results. With
1962—63 and 1963-64 tests, one commercial chip sample
was used, so that the chips made in the laboratory can
be compared with a standard available in the market at
that time.

In 1962-63 experiment it was seen that, Kennebec stored
at 40°F. both with and without controlled atmosphere con-
ditions produced chips better in flavor than the chips
available in the market at that time of the year.
Kennebecs from 10% C02, 3% 02 at 40°F. storage had crisp-
ness nearly equal to that of the commercial sample.
Sebago at 40°F. air controls produced the most unac—
ceptable chip. In 1963-64, Arenac stored at 10% C02, 3%

0 and 50°F., and Kennebec stored at 10% C02, 3% 02 and

2
40°F. produced chips better both in flavor anc crispness
than the commercial sample available at that time of the
year. Kennebec and Arenec stored at 50°F. with 5% C02,
produced chips better in flavor and nearly equal in
crispness to that of the commercial sample.

In 1964-65, it was seen that Arenacs stored at 5% C02,
3% 02 and 40°F. were better in flavor and crispness.

Controls at 40°F. and.5% C0 1% 02 at 50°F. stored

23
samples produced better flavored chips but lacked in

crispness.

VI. SUMMARY

A study, using controlled temperatures and modified
gas levels of Carbon dioxide and oxygen has been made to
store potatoes for chipping. The study was carried on for
three years and the following varieties were used: Kennebec,
Arenac, Sebago, Emmet, Russet Rural and Russet Arenac.
Various temperatures from 34°F. to 50°F. and combinations of
gas levels, carbon dioxide from 5% to 10% and oxygen from 1%
to 5% were used.

A chipping test where the slice thickness, the frying
time, temperature and fat were constant, was carried out.

In addition an experiment to determine the moisture
loss in potatoes at different storage conditions was con-
ducted. The general horticultural quality was determined by
noting the mold growth, sprout growth and decay.

A flavor evaluation test was carried out for the
chips. The results indicate that Kennebec and Arenac potatoes

could be stored at 5% c0 5%02 levels at 40°F., for 30

2,

weeks and could produce #5 color chips after 2 weeks
conditioning.

The results also indicate that high CO with low 0

2 2

levels causes poor horticultural quality of product.

47

48

It was found that the mold susceptibility of potatoes

varies with variety and the storage conditions.

VII . CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the results the following conclusions
were arrived at.

1. It appears that there is an order to mold suscepti-
bility according to variety. Russet Rural and Russet—Arenac
are most susceptible, Sebago follows next, with Kennebec and
Arenac, having the minimum susceptibility.

2. At 34°F. the potatoes produced light colored (#5)
chips after 4 weeks storage. By the 8th week they began to
produce dark (#10) colored chips. The potatoes suddenly go
out of condition between 4 and 8 weeks storage and cannot be
held in storage after 20 weeks. This was found with both
10% C02, 3% 02 and 5% C02, 5% 02 atmosphere conditions.

3. At 5%.C02, 5% 02 and 50°F. potatoes can be stored
for 18 weeks and produce light colored (#5 to #6) chips
directly out of storage.

4. At 40°F. air storage potatoes can be stored for 24
weeks, to produce acceptable (#5, #6) chips after two to six
weeks‘conditioning.

5. At 40°F. and 5% C02, 5% 02, Kennebec and Arenac
varieties could be stored for 30 weeks with minimum loss in
horticultural quality and produce #5 color chips after 2

weeks conditioning.

49

50

6. Kennebec variety stored at 5% C0 3% 02 and at 80-

2,
85% relative humidity for 30 weeks, produces #5 color chips
after 2 weeks conditioning.

7. From the study of various controlled atmosphere con-
ditions it was found that CO levels above 5% in combination

2

with low oxygen cause poor horticultural quality.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brownell, L.E., Gustafson, F.G., Nehemias, J.V., Isleib, D.R.
and Hooker, W.J. 1957: Storage properties of gamma
irradiated potatoes. Food Tech. 11, 306-312.

Burton, W. G. 1953: The storage of ware potatoes in Great
Britian. Dept. of scientific and industrial research.
Food Invest. Leaflet. 16.

Burton, W. G., 1958: European potato J. _lhg. pp. 47—54.

Denny, F.E. 1941: Carbon-dioxide prevents the rapid iné
crease in the reducing sugar content of potato tubers
stored at low temperature. Contr. Boyce Thompson
InSt. _]_._2_, 79-84.

Fuller, H.J. 1963: General Botany, Barnes and Noble Inc.,
New York, N.Y.

Heinze, P.H. 1961: Effect of storage on potato quality.
Potato handbook VI, 32-36.

Heiligman, F. 1964: Radiation sprout inhibition of potatoes.
Fourteenth Natl. potato Util. conf. report. U.S.D.A.
Ag. Res. Service. ARS—74—30. .

Kirkpatrick, M.E., Heinze, P.H., Craft, C.C., Mountjoy, B.M.
and Faltko, C.E. 1946: French frying quality of
potatoes as influenced by cooking methods, storage
conditions and specific gravity. U.S.D.A. tech. Bull.
1142.

Kroner, W. and Volksen, W. 1950: Die Kartoffel, Second Ed.,
Johann Ambrosius

Kushman, L.J. 1958: Changes in chipping qualities of
Russet Sebago potatoes during and after Shipment
from Alabama to Wisconsin. Proc. Prod. and Tech.
Division of Potato Chip Inst. Intern. pp. 6-8.

Lampitt, L.J. and Goldberg, N. 1940: The composition of the
potato. Chem. and Ind. 18, 748-761.

51

52

Miyamoto, T., Wheeler, E.J. and Dexter, S.T. 1958: Venti-
lation of chipping potatoes during the conditioning
period. Amer. Potato J. 35, 778—783.

Phillips, W.R. 1952: Potato Storage, Canada Dept. of Agr.
Pub. 882.

Schwimmer, S. and Burr, H.K. 1959: Structure and chemical
composition of potato tuber. In W.F. Talburt and
O. Smith (Ed.) Potato Processing. The AVI publishing
Co., Westport, Conn.

Shallenberger, R.S. 1956: Browning reaction in potato
chips. Ph.D. thesis. Cornell University.

Smith, 0. 1959: Progress in Potato Chip Research. Proc.
Prod. and Tech. Division of Potato Chip Inst. Intern.

pp. 3-6.

Smith, 0. 1964: Recent research of value to the potato chip
industry. Proc. Prod. and Tech. Division of Potato
Chip Inst. Intern. pp. 2-4.

Smith, 0. 1965: Progress in potato chip research. Proc.
Prod. and Tech. Division of Potato Chip Inst. Intern.

pp. 2-5.

Smith, 0. and Davis, C.O. 1964: Some factors influencing
potato chip color. Potato Chipper. 2;, 6. pp. 86-
94.

Thompson, N.R. 1959: Potato varieties. In W.F. Talburt
and O. Smith (Ed.) Potato Processing. The AVI
publishing Co., westport, Conn.

Thompson, N.R. 1964: Personal Communication.

Tomkins, R.G. 1960: The Storage of Produce. Ditton lab.
misc. paper No. lg,

APPENDIX

54

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1. Storage conditions and their sources used during
the study.

1. 1962-63

No. Room Gas Level Temperature Source

1. Concrete 10% C02 3% 02 42°F. Tectrol burner

2. Metal 5% CO2 5% 02 42°F. Tectrol burner
and water
scrubber

3. Haskolite 5% C02 5% 02 42°F. Tectrol burner
and water
scrubber

4. Tile 10% CO2 3% 02 34°F. Tectrol burner

5. Control 0.04% co2 21% 02 34°F.

6. Control 0.04% C02 21% 02 42°F.

7. Control 0.04% C02 21% 02 74.5°F. (room temperature)

2. 1963-64

1. Concrete 10% C02 3% 02 50°F. Tectrol burner

2. Metal 5% C02 5% 02 50°F. Tectrol burner
and water
scrubber

3. Haskolite 5% CO2 5%02 40°F Tectrol burner
and water
scrubber

4. Tile 10% C02 3% 02 40°F. Tectrol burner

5. Control ..0.04%C02 21%.02. 40°F.

3...l964t65

11 Room NO. 0 Tectrol

4 5% C02 1% 02 40 F generator

55

 

 

 

Table l. (Con't.)
3. 1964-65
No. Room Gas Level Temperature Source
2. Room No. 0 Tectrol
5 5% C02 1% 02 50 F. generator
3. Room No. 0 Tectrol
9 5% C02 3% O2 40 F. generator
(low humidity)
4. Room No. 0 Tectrol
10 5% C0 3% 0 40 F. generator
2 2
5. Room No. 0
11 0.04% C02 21% 02 50 F.
6. Room No. 0
12 0.04% C02 21% 02. 40 F.

 

56

Table 2. A score sheet for evaluation of potato chips.

 

 

1 __——
’—

 

Evaluation of Potato Chips

Evaluate the flavor acceptability, crispness and
flavor characteristics using the following scales.

1. Flavor 3. Flavor
Acceptibility 2. Crispness Characteristics
Use Hedonic scale Use Hedonic scale Use the Flavor

Attribute scale

 

Hedonic scale:

9 Like extremely 1. Burnt

8 Like very much 2 Acrid
(pungent)

7 Like moderately 3 Rancid

6 Like a little 4 Bitter

5 Neither like nor dislike 5 Bland

4 Dislike a little 6 Sweet

3 Dislike moderately 7 Caramel like

2 Dislike very much 8 ‘Medicinal

l Dislike extremely

The score sheet should look like:

 

Sample Flavor
number acceptibility Crispness characteristic(s)

57

Table 3. Relation between National Chip Institute color
numbers and their color and acceptability.

 

 

 

Color
Inst. Number Color Acceptability
1 White Not preferred
2 White Not preferred
3 Dull White Moderately acceptable
4 Whitish Yellow Slightly acceptable
5 Light Golden Highly acceptable
Yellow
6 Golden Yellow Slightly acceptable
7 Brownish Yellow Not acceptable
8 Brown Slightly unacceptable
9 Dark Brown Moderately unacceptable

10, . Very Dark Brown. Highly unacceptable

 

 

0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 AmnoHvommHouw mo #50
..moN¢ EOOH okuocoo

 

 

mxmm3 0 UoCOHuHUCOO
mxom3 v 00COHDHUCOU

m
.0 0.0 mxmm3 N cmCOHuHGCOO

00

 

Am Tmmuoum 00 050
umv..momv EooH Hoods

O
CD
0
CO
0
[\
O
[\
0
KO
0
Ln

 

 

wxmmz 0 vwcofluflpcou
mMmmB v UTGOHDHUCOO
mxmm3 N cmGOHuHUCOU

 

58

O
O
H
O
(1)
OO
0‘ 0CD
Ln
(1)

m.m o.s o.m Amumv ommsoun mo ago
..moem soon onsaoxnmm

+
O
H
O
0‘
O

 

 

mwa3 0 pmcomuflccoo
mxwo3 0 GmCOHuflwcoo
mxmm3 N UTCOHDHUCOU

5&0

 

+0H +0H 0.0 Am mmmuoum mo poo

m ode..moem soon mane

O
0‘
In
In
C
In

 

 

o.m 0.4 o.m 0.0 0.4 o.m Aowspmnmmsoa soomv
.mom.es um Honusoo

 

om 0H NH m e o mmmnoun :4 wrong

 

0 m w m N H H0385: mcflamfimm

 

.m0IN0mH How mumflum> omnmccmx mo mwuoom mafiumu HOHOU .0 magma

 

59

 

 

 

 

0.> m m mxwmz 0 UGCOHDHUCOO

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.m mxmw3 v pmcoauavcoo
0.0 m m 0 0 0.0 0.0 m.m 0 0 memB N ©0COHuflpcoo
.m m.m o.m o m 0.0 o.m o m m.s o.m ommnoun «0 poo
.moov um Honucoo

mxmoB 0 wocofluwwcoo

0.0 0.0a 0.5 mxmw3 v GTGOAquCOU

0 m 0.0 0.0 mxom3 N ©0COHDHUCOO

+0H 0.0 mmmnoum mo #50

.movm um Houucoo

0.0 m.¢ 0x003 0 vmcofluflvcou

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.m 0.0 0.0 mxmw3 0 Umcofluflpcoo

m.m o 0 0.0 o.m o.m o.> 0x003 N pwcofluflpcoo

6O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.o o.o o.m o.m o.m o.m o.m o.o o.o o.m Am-oHv oomsouu no use
..moNv Eoon wumuocou

0.5 0.0 mxmm3 0 Umcofluflccoo

m.m 0.5 0.m 0.m 0.0 0.5 mxow3 0 Uwcofluflwcoo

.0 0.0 0.0 0.m 0.m m.h 0.0 0.0 mxwm3 N 00:0fluflpcoo
.0 0.0a 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 h 0.0 0.h 0.0 A0 m0muoum mo uoo
-mv..m0me soon Hmuoz

mMmmB 0 omCOHuHGCOU

0.0 mxmw3 0 vmcofluflccoo

0.0 0.0 m 0 mxmm3 N cmCOHDHGCOO

+oa ++oH o.oa o.o m.m o.n o.m Amino mmmnoun 00 050

..movm Eoou muflaoxmmm

mxmmB 0 Umcofluflncoo

0.5 mMmmB w cwCOHuHGCOU

0.0 0.0 0.0 mxmm3 N mmGOHuHGCOU

+0H 0.0a 0.0a 0.0 0.0 0 0 Am mmmuoum mo #50

10H04.m00m Eoou mafia

0.0 0.0 0.0 0 m 0.0 0.0 0 m Amnsumuwm609 Eoomv

.m00.0b um Houpcoo

om mm mm em on 0H NH m a o ommwouu ea nxmms
oH m m A o m e m m 4 H0025: msfladsmm

 

 

.m0IN00H How >umeum> 000300 00 mmuoom 0caumn HOHOU .m manna

 

61
000

0.0a
0.0a

LOO

mxwwz 0 owcofiuflvcou
mem3 0 00:0Huflpcoo
mxwmz N wmcofluficcou

 

0 CDCDI‘

Ln

0.0a

030(1)

0

OO
0 m5

0

mmmuoum mo #50
.moov um HOHDCOU

 

0.0

0.5
0.0a

mxmm3 0 vwcofluflwsoo
mwaB 0 cwcofluflocou
mxwm3 N pmGOHUHUGOO

 

0.0H

+0H

wmmuoum mo #50
.movm pm Houucoo

 

LnLOO
PLOP
OLOO
hkOkO
00
[\oo

OO
(\\O

OO
50

wxmw3 0 Umcofluflwcou
mxmms 0 Owcofluflvcoo
mxwm3 N pmcofluflvcoo

62

 

AmFOHV mmmuouw 00 use
..mOVm Eoou wumnocoo

 

 

Olnuw
hxo

mxwm3 0 cmCOHuHGCOO
mxmm3 v chOHuflUCOU
0x003 N UwCOHuHUCOO

 

0 000
thm

CD
0
(I) (13ka

O 00
\OF
0 CO

I\
[x
O
[x
O
I!)

mmmuouw mo udo
Amlmv «.movm Eoou Hmuwz

 

 

mxmmS 0 pmcofluflocou
wxwm3 v cmGOHuHUcoo
mxmmB N UmCOHuflccoo

 

Amlmv mmmuoum 00 use
..mo¢m Eoou muHHOMmmm

 

 

CO
000

nxmoz o omsoeuaosoo
mxmmS 0 vmcoflpflpcoo
mxmm3 N 00COHDHUCOU

 

O
03
O
0
O
0

Am m0muoum mo uso
loav..ovm Boon mafia

 

 

0.0 wnsumummEmB Eoomv
.mOm.vh um Houucoo

 

0m

Nm 0N 0N 0N 0H NH

0 0 mmmnoum CH mxmmz

 

CA

N H H0955: 0GHHmEmm

 

.MGINOGH HON \AHOHHMNV UMCOH‘ MO WQHOUm UCHHNH .HOHOU .0 OHQMH.

 

00m

00
[\(D

(\CO

CO
FKD

wmeB 0 cmcoHUHUCOU
wxmmB v wmcofluflpcoo
mxmw3 N Cmcofluflwcoo

 

0 0000

O

O
00

OO
00 0000

O

O OO

(1)

C
CD

m0mu00m 00 use
.moov pm HOHDCOU

 

LOKO
CDLO

mMmmB 0 cmGOAUHOGOU
mxme 0 UmCOHuHUCOO
wmeS N waOHuflccoo

 

+0H

+0H

+0H

O
[\

w0muoum 00 use
.mowm um Houucoo

 

OOO
(DQ'O

COO
0000

QC)
\OCD

OO
l\\0

LOO
\OLfi

Gun
00

mxmm3 0 wmcofluflocoo
mxwm3 v Umcofluflocoo
mxmm3 N Omcofluwvcoo

64

 

0.0

AMIOHV wmmuoum MO USO
..moNv Eoou muwuocou

 

 

CDkaO

OO
\OKO

0x003 0 omsofluaodoo
mxoma e omcoeueodoo
wxmmz N UmGOHuHUCOO

 

O.w

00 (DBKD

mmmuoum mo USO
A0100..moN¢ Eoou Hmuwz

 

 

nxmos o nonoauaodoo
nxmos e omsoasaosoo
axons m omnoaoaosoo

 

+0H

A0100 m0mnoum mo #50
..movm EOOH wuflaoxmwm

 

 

0x003 0 omsoauaosoo
mxmms d owcoeueosoo
ux003 N omsoauaosoo

 

+0H

Am m0muoum mo ago
IOHV..mo¢m Eoou mafia

 

 

AmusumnmmEmB Eoomv
.mOm.v> um Houucoo

 

0m

NH

mmmuoum CH mxmms

 

0H

H0355: 0CHHmEmm

 

 

.m0uN00H Mom mpmflum> Amusmlummmsm mo mmuoom 0CHDMH HOHOU .5 THQMB

 

65
as;

COO

0050

CO
[\CD

00
mm

.130
l‘kO

mmeB 0 Uwcofluflwcoo
mxmm3 0 vaOHUHUCOU
mxmmB N Umcofluflccoo

 

+OH

O
[\

mmmnoum 00 use
.mO0w um Honucou

 

0.0

0.5
0.0H

0.0a

mxme 0 Umcofluflccou
mxmw3 v UTCONDHCCOO
mxwm3 N Umcofluflvcoo

 

++OH

0.0a

+OH

+0H

m0mnoum 00 use
.mowm um Houucoo

 

inuso
oxmxo

000
(\00

mm
\Dl\

OO
[\5

mxwm3 0 Omcofluflwcoo
mxme 0 UmCOHuH0COU
mxmm3 N cwcoauflncou

66

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o. o o o o o o.o o o o m o.m Amuoav mmmnonn no 050
..hoom Eoou mpmnocou

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 mxmmz 0 00COAuH0GOO

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 mxmms 0 00COHDH0COU

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 mx003 N Umcofluflccoo

o. o m.o m m o.m m.m o.m o.m ommnoun no 050
Amrmva.moom Eoou Hmumz

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 mxmmz 0 Umcofluflpcoo

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 mxmmB 0 Umcofluflpcou

0.0 0.0 m.0 0.n 0.0 m.m mxmmB N 00:0Huflpcoo
o.m o.s m s o.m o.m o o o.m Amnmv mmmuonn no 050
..moov Eoon wuflaoxmmm

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 mx003 0 vwcofluflccoo

0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 mmeS v wwcofluflocou
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 mxmm3 N UmGOHquCOU
o.oH o 04 m o o.m o.o o.o o.m Am ommnouu no 050
loav..m00¢ Eoou mafia

Om em ma NH 0 m o ommwoum CH 0x003
OH s o m e m m H sages: msaamsmm

 

 

.v0um00a Mom Nuwflum> omnwccmm mo mmuoom

0CHumu HOHOO .0 magma

67

 

\OKO

OLOO
LOLOLD
COLD
[\Pfi‘
l\\o<i‘

QO

mxmw3 0 QwCOHuHGGOO
mxwa 0 UwGOHuHUCOU
mxwm3 N Cmcofluflwcoo

 

G) \OVI‘LO
0 000
0 000

O
(D
O
0
O
1‘
CD

0.0 0.0

m0mnoum mo #50
.moov um HOHDGOU

 

an'd‘

OO

\OKD

OLOO
Lnd'V
COLD
LnLnd'
L000
000
LnLnLn

mxmm3 0 00:0HDHUCOU
mx003 v vmcowuflocou
mxmmz N 00c0HuH©coo

68

Table 9. Color rating scores of Arenac variety for 1963—64.

 

 

Sampling number 1. 2 3 4 5 6 _7

 

Weeks in storage 0 3 6 12 18 24 30

 

Tile room 40°F.,(10-3)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Out of storage 5.0 5.5 7.0 9.0 10 0 9.0 7 0
Conditioned 2 weeks 5.0 5.0 7.0 7.5 8.0 7.0
Conditioned 4 weeks 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.0
Conditioned 6 weeks 5.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Haskolite room 40°F.,(5-5)

Out of storage 5.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8 0 7.0 7 0
_Conditioned 2 weeks 5.0 4.0 6.0 5 5 7.0 5.0
Conditioned 4 weeks 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0
Conditioned 6 weeks 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.5
Metal rOOm 50°F.,(5-5) \

Out of storage 5.0 '5.0* 5.5 4 5 6.5' 5.0 6 O
Conditioned 2 weeks 4.5 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0
Conditioned 4 weeks 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0
Conditioned 6 weeks ' 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
ConcreterOOm 50°F.,(10-3)

Out of storage‘ 5.0 5.5 5.5 6.0 7.0 7.0 6.0
Conditioned 2 weeks 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5 0
Conditioned 4 Weeks 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0
Conditioned 6 weeks 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0
Control at 40°F. ' .

Out of storage 5.0 9.0 6 5 7 0 7.0 7 5 8 0
Conditioned 2 weeks 6.5 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Conditioned 4 weeks 6.0 6.0 7.0 5.0 7.0
Conditioned 6 weeks 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.5

 

69

Table 10. Color rating scores of Sebago variety for 1963—

 

 

 

64. x. . -
Sampling number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Weeks in storage 0 3 6 12 18 24 30

 

Tile room 40°F.,(10—3)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Out of storage 5.0 6.0 5.5 8.0 10.0 8.0 8.
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 5.0 7.0 8.5 8.0 7.
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 7.0 6.0 6.5 7.
Conditioned 6 wks. , 5.0 8.0 6.5 7.0
Haskolite room 40°F.,(5-5)

Out of storage 5.0 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.0 7.5 6.
Conditioned 2 wks. 6.5 6.0 8.0 5.5 6.0 6.
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 8.0 7.0 5.0 6.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 6.5 5.0 5.0
Metal room 50°F.,(5-5)

Out of storage 5.0 5.5 7.0 6 0 7.0 7 0 5
Conditioned 2 wks. 6.0 4.0 5.5 7.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 6.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 4.0

Concrete room 50°F.,(10-3)

Out of storage 5.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 7.5 6
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 6.0 5.5 6.5 8.0 8.
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 8.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0
Control at 40°F.

Out of storage 5.0 9.5 8.5 9.0 9.0 9 0 7.
Conditioned 2 wks. 8.0 7.0 8.5 7.5 5.0 5.
Conditioned 4 wks. 6.0 8.5 6.0 8.0 6.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 7.5 7.0 7.0

 

70

 

Table 11. Color rating scores of Russet—Rural variety for
1963—64.
Sampling number 1 2 3 4 5 6

 

Weeks in storage 0 3‘ 6 12 18 24 30

 

Tile room 40°F.,(10-3)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Out of storage 5.0 5.5 7.0 9.0 10.0 9.0 8.
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 5.0 7.0 6.5 8.0 7.
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 6.5 6.0 5.0 6.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 6.0 5.0 6.0
Haskolite room 40°F.,(5-5)

Out of storage 5.0 7.5 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 '8.
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 5.0 8.0 6.0 7.0 6.
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 6.5 5.0 6.0 6.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0
Metal room 50°F., (5-5)

Out of storage 5.0 6.0 5 5 6 0 5.5 5 0 6
Conditioned 2 wks. 4.5 4.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 5.
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0
Concrete room 50°F.,(10—3)

Out of storage 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5 0 6.0 6
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.0 5.
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
Control at 40°F.

Out of storage 5.0 8.5 7.5 8.0 7.5 7 0 7
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 6.0 8.5 8.0 6.5 6.
Conditioned 4 wks. 6.0 6.0 5.0 6.0 8.
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 6.5 5.0 6.0

 

71

Table 12. Color rating scores of Kennebec variety for 1964-

 

 

 

 

65.
Sampling number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Weeks in storage 0 6 12 18 24 30

 

Room 4 40°F.,(5—1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Out of storage 5.0 7 0 9.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 7.0 8 5 6.5 6 0
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.5 6 0 6.0 5 0
Conditioned 6 wks. 4.5 5.0

Room 5 50°F.,(5—l)

Out of storage 5.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7 5
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 6.0 5.0 7 0
Conditioned 4 wks. 4.5 5.0 5.0 5 0
Conditioned 6 wks. 4.0 5.0

Room 9 40°F.,(5—3)LH

Out of storage 5.0 7.0 6.5 5 5 7.5 6 5
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 5.0 4.5 5.5 4.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.5 5.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 4.5 5.0 4.0 6.5

Room 10 40°F.,(5—3)

Out of storage 5.0 7.5 7.0 8.5 10.0 8.5
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.5 5.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 4.0 4.0 4.5 7.0

Room 11 50°F., air control

Out of storage 5.0 5.5 6 5 5.0 5 0
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 5.5 4.5 5 0
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.5 4.0 5.0

Conditioned 6 wks. 4 5 5.0

Room 12 40°F. air control

Out of storage 5.0 8.0 7.5 8.5 6.0 6 5
Conditioned 2 wks. 6.5 4.5 8.5 6.0 6.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 4.0 4.5

 

Table 13. Color rating

72

scores of Arenac variety for 1964-65.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sampling number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Weeks in storage 0 6 12 18 24 30
Room 4 40°F.,(5-1)

Out of storage 5. 6.0 9.0 10.0 8 5 10.0
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 6.5 9.0 7.0 6.0
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.5 6.5 5.5
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Room 5 50°F.,(5—1)

Out of storage 5. 6.5 6.5 5.5 7.5 7.5
Conditioned 2 wks. 4.5 5.0 5.0 6.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 4.5 5.5 4.5 6.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 4.0 6.0 5.0

Room 9 40°F.,(5—3)LH

Out of storage 5. 7.0 6.0 6.0 10.0 7.5
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 5.5 6.5 7.0 6.0
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.5 5.5 5.0 7.0 6.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0
Room 10 40°F.,(5—3)

Out of storage 5. 7.0 7.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
Conditioned 2 wks. 6.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 7.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 6.5 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.0 5.0
Room 11 50°F. air control

Out of storage 5. 5.0 6.0 5.0 4.5
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0

Conditioned 6 wks. 4.5 4.0 5.5

Room 12 40°F. air control

Out of storage 5. 7.0 6.5 8.0 8.0 7.5
Conditioned 2 wks. 7.0 6.0 5.0 6.5 5.0
Conditioned 4 wks. 6.0 5.0 5.5 5.0 6.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 6.0

 

73

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 14. Color rating scores of Emmet variety for 1964-65.
Sampling number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Weeks in storage 5 6 12 18 24 30

o
Room 4 40 F.,(5-l)
Out of storage 5.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 7.0 9.0 9.0 7.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 6.5
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 6.0 8.5 6.5
Room 5 50°F.,(5-l)
Out of storage 5.0 5.5 7.0 6.5 7.5
Conditioned 2 wks. 5 0 5.5 7 5 6.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 4 5 5.0 5.0 5.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 4 5 7.0 5.0
Room 9 40°F.,(5-3)LH
Out of storage 5.0 7 0 7.5 6 5 9.0 7.5
Conditioned 2 wks. 6.0 7.0 7.0 8.5 7.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.5 5.5 5.5 7.5 7.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 6.0 5.5 4.5
Room 10 40°F.,(5-3)
Out of storage 5.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 9.0 10.0
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.5 7.5 6.5 8.0 7.0
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 6.0 8.0 7.0 6.5
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.5 5.0 5.0
Room 11 50°F air control
Out of storage 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.0
Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 6.0 6.0 5.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.5 5.0
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 6.5
Room 12 40°F air control
Out of storage 5.0 7.5 8.5 9 5 7.5 8.0
Conditioned 2 wks. 6.5 8.5 9.5 7.0 8.5
Conditioned 4 wks. 6.5 8.5 9.5 7.0 8.5
Conditioned 6 wks. 5.5 5.5 5.5 9.0

 

74

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 15. Color rating scores of Russet Arenac variety for
1964-65.

Sampling number 1 2 3 4 5 6

weeks in storage 0 6 12 18 24 30

Room 4 40°F.,(5-1)

Out of storage 5. 7.5 10.0 10.0 10.0 10+

Conditioned 2 wks. 6.0 5.0 8.0 8.0 6.0

Conditioned 4 wks. 5.5 6.0 7.0 8.0 6.5

Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0

Room 5 50°F.,(5vl)

Out of storage 5. 7.5 7.5 7.0 9.5

Conditioned 2 wks. 5.0 5.5 8.0 7.0

Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.5 5.0 6.5

Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 6.0 5.0

Room 9 40°F.,(5-3) LH

Out of storage 5. 8.0 9.0 6.5 8.5 8.0

Conditioned 2 wks. 7.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 8.0

Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.0

Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Room 10 40°F.,(5-3)

Out of storage 5. 7.0 9.0 10.0 9.5 9.0

Conditioned 2 wks. 6.5 8.5 8.5 7.0 7.0

Conditioned 4 wks.. 5.0 6.5 6.5 6.5 7.0

Conditioned 6 wks. 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0

Room 11 50°F. air control

Out of storage 5. 6.5 7.0 6.0 4.5

Conditioned 2 wks. 7.0 6.0 6.5 5.0

Conditioned 4 wks. 5.0 5.0 6.0

Conditioned 6 wks. 5.5

Room 12 40°F. air control

Out of storage 5. 8.0 8.0 10.0 8.0 8.5

Conditioned 2 wks. 7.5 8.0 8.5 8.0 5.5

Conditioned 4 wks. 7.0 5.0 5.0 7.5 5.5

Conditioned 6 wks. 5.5 5.0 5.0

 

75

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 16. Per cent Moisture loss (cumulative) for Sebago
and Kennebec varieties for 1962-63.

W

weeks in

storage 12 16 20 24 28 32

K-T 79 .66 .04 .63 .93

S—T 04 .61 .27 .21 .01

K—H .99 .53 .37 .29 .46 4.48

S-H .92 .35 .46 .67 .02 3.13

KrM .88 .60 .43 .84 .23 5.26 6.01 6.21

S—M .36 .56 .18 .41 .81 3.02 3.24 3.42

K—C .56 .90 .98 .44 .98 2.10 2.35 2.61

S—C .07 .21 .68 .43 .01 5.21 5.21 5.31

K-74.5 .27 .78 24.22 27.73

S—74.5 .33 10.52 31.36 34.85

 

K—Kennebec

S—Sebago

T-lOOA),

C-10% C0

2)

2’

3% 02 at 34°F.
H-5% c02, 5% 02 at 34°F.
M—5% C0

5% 02 at 42°F.

3% 02 at 42°F.

74.5°F. - air control.

76

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 17. Per cent moisture loss (cumulative) for Kennebec
and Arenac varieties for 1963—64.
Weeks in storage

Condition 3 6 12 18 24 30
K-T 0 0.48 0.92 1.13 2.05 2.05
A—T 0 0.61 9.96 0.96 0.96 2.48
K—H 0 0.50 0.77 0.96 0.96 1.54
ArH 0 0.96 1.90 1.90 2.48 3.24
KeM 0 4.71 5.42 8.72 13.40 28.46
A—M 0 0 1.41 4.30 10.48 20.76
KEC 0 0.61 0.61 3.81 8.57 15.24

Legend

K- Kennebec
A- Arenac

Storage levels
T 10% C02,
H— 5% c0 , 5% 0 at 40°F.
2 2 o
M— 5% C02, 5% 02 at 50 F.
C 10% C02, 3% 02 at 50°F

3% 02 at 40°F.

77

Table 18. Moisture loss (cumulative) for Arenac variety for

 

 

 

 

1964-65.

Weeks in storage 12 18 24 30
A-4 .0 4.80 5.77 6.67
A—5 .77 4.47 11.32 13.88
A—9 .88 5.66 7.55 10.37
A—lO .88 2.88 3.84 5.77
A—ll .43 1.89 8.49
A-12 .92 3.70 3.70 4.26

Legend

A— Arenac o

5- 5% C02, 1% 02 at 50°F.

9- 5% c02, 3% 02 at 40°F.
and low R.H. of 85%.

10— 5% C02, 3% 02 at 40°F.

11- Control at 50°F.

12- Control at 40°F.

78

name oaos seesaw
noaaoen ans
mucoumm oz

.mwum mnu 00
mm so oaos usmaam
Anonv ommaaoon mom

muooumm oz

UHOE oz
muomw cmxcsm 050m
musoumm oz

UHOE oz
omaaonn she
musoumw oz

UHOE oz

Apou amenmpomnv
ooaaoen sow
musoumm oz

to:

UHOE oz
ooaaoen sod
muooumm oz

0HOE oz
00mHHomw RN
masoumm 02

0a05 oz
m0maflomm OZ
0cflusoumm
u£0HHm >H0>

UHOE oz
ooeaodn mom
mpsoumm oz

UHOE oz
Auou HMHkuova
ooaaoen she
mwsonmm oz

UHOE OZ
ooHAomu mom
musoumm oz

UHOE oz
:6:

00mHHomm x00

musoumm oz

UHOE oz
mmmaflomm oz
masonmm oz

UHOE oz
ooaflonn mom
wusoumw oz

UHOE 02

Anon Hmanmuomnv
oneaoon ans
musoumm 02

so:

0HOE oz
noeaomn mom
musoumm oz

0HOE oz
m0maeomm $0
musoumm oz

GHOE oz
m0maflomm 02
ex mucoumm

UHOE oz
ooflaomu Ame
musoumm oz

UHOE oz
Aamflumuomn
maumOEv
toaeomn she
mpsoumm oz

.movm
um Houucoo .0

No

00 XOH
Eoon

mumuocou .0

.mome no
am .m

. m
some um o

an A8 so
Eoou Hmumz .m

. m
w seem an o

am .moo am
EOOH

moaaoxumm .m

. m
amoem um . o

am .Noo sea
Eoou mafia .H

 

Handmuummmsm

omcmu<

o0mnmm

omnwccwm

mcoeuwwcoo

 

CH wxwm3 0m 00 UOAHTQ m0muoum 00

0:0 050 um muflamsv amusaasofluuom Hmumcmw

.m0IN00H

.0H mHQME

79

.mxmm3 0N haco ume wasoux

.mxmm3 ON ch0 ummH wasoot

 

UHOE oz
wHQmQQHQUCD
wuwnsu umom

musonmm em

UHOE X0
Umaflomm *N
a»
0CHusoumm utmflam

uses 02
wanmmmHLUCD
muwnsu umom
musoumm sh

UHOE OZ
mmmaflomm 02

v
:A
0cflusoumm unmflam

GHOE oz
manmmmflnocb

mumnsu umom
mpsoumm =0.N

0HOE oz
m0mHHomm 02
:Nm
modusoumm unmflam

GHOE oz
THQMQQH£OCD
wnmnsu uwom

musoumm =N

UHOE oz
Tmmaeomm oz

:Nm
0cHusoumm unmflam

xomomoVF
um Houucoo

.mon
um Houucoo

80

 

00mHHomm oz

UHOE oz
0CHuCoumm oz

mwnm «Cu
00 sooa so 6H0:
$0 omHHomm

.smh.H
CumCmH DCOHmm .>m

mmnm Tau

mo x00H Co 0H0:
XQH UmHHomm

:@

£p0CmH usonmm .>¢

CHOE Dz
mmmHHomm oz
masonmm oz

UHOE OZ
mmmHHomm oz
0CHuCoumm oz

mmmHHomm oz

0H0: oz
0CHuCoumm oz

mmum may
00 Ah so 6H0:
xm.o oeseodm

=m.H spasms
usoumm .>¢

mmum may

no moo so oHos
as ooHHoCm

:0 spaces
psoumm .><

UHOE oz
00CHHomm oz
musoumm oz

.mnmnsu

mzu mo XOH Co
Co myomw CmMCCm
UHOE 02

an ommHHomm
0CHusoumm oz

m0MHHomm oz
usonmw ou
0CHCCH0TQ umsb

mmum wnu

mo NCOH so use:
xm.mH omHHoCm
=m Cumcma
usoumm .><

mem 03“

no she so use:
ans ooaaomm

=4 sumdoe
usoumm .>€

UHOE oz
000HHomm oz
musoumm oz

000HHomm oz
CHOE oz
usonmm

ou 0CHCCH00m

mmum mnu
00 *0 Co CHOS
$0.H UmHHomm
:4 Canada
usonmm .>¢

mmum wnu

mo .80 C0 302
ms ooaaomm

=0 somsma
usonmm .>¢

UHOE oz
m0mHHomm oz
munchmw oz

.xomem

mm3 Comm 0:» HmCCC

Honda 00 =~m\H

.nnmssu may «0 moo

UHOE oz
T00HHomm oz
0CHuCoumm 02

Co muomm meCsm
mum3 THTCB

CHOE oz
mmmHHomm oz
0CHuCOHmm oz

.mooe

um HOHHCOU .m

.moom
pm No x...

aNOU XOH EOOH

mumHUCOU .v

.moom um

no so. .80 an
Econ Hmumz .m

.N

. .mOOAV

um No am

00 xm EOOH

muaaoxumm .m

.hoov um aNo

XM

.Noo sea
Soon wHHB .H

 

HMHDMIUmeSm

UMCTHN

000300

mepmHHm>

oQOCCmM

mCOHquCOO

 

 

CH mxmmz 0m 00

coHnmm mmmuouw mo 0C0 may um muHHms0

.¢0Im00H

HCHCDHCOHDHOC HMHTCTB

.ON wHQMB

81

 

 

 

 

 

.C0>H0 0H0 mpsoumm mo £00C0H 000u0>¢0
0000 00u0.0su_ 00w0.0Cu 00u0 000
0C0 00 Km Co 0H0: 00 RN Co 0H0: mo KN Co 0H0: 00 0H Co 0H0:
05.m momaaosm mm momsaosm so.s mmmHHoCm xm.o mmmHHoCm
=mm somsma smH =sH =m.H .soom
psonmm 000H0>< £u0C0H “sonmw .>m Cu0C0H usoumm .>¢ £u0C0H usoumm .>< 00 HOHUCOU .0
UHOE oz GHOE oz UHOE oz 0HOE oz
000HHomm oz 000HHomm oz 000HHomm oz 000HHomw 02 .0000
musoumm oz mpsoumm oz musoumm oz musoumm oz 00 HOHDCOU .m
00H0 0C0 00H0 030 0000 0:0
00 $0.H Co 0H0: 0H0: oz 00 XmN.0 Co 0H0: mo XmN.0 C0 GHOE .0000 00 N0
000HHomm oz 000HHomw oz 000HHomm oz 000HHomw 02 Km .Nou Rm
musoumm oz musonmm oz musoumw oz masonmm oz 0H# 8000 .0
0CHHH0>HH£0 >>00m 0CHHH0>HH£m >>00m 0CHHH0>Hn£m >>00m 0CHHH0>HH£m >>00m muHCHECC
CHOE oz CHOE oz UHOE oz UHOE oz 0>H00H0H 0C0
000HHomm oz 000HH000 oz 000HHomm oz 000HHomm 02 .0000 #0 N0
0CH0H0E0 0CH0H0E0 0CH0H0E0 0CHOHOE0 Rm D0.N00 *0
005m musoumm umsn musoumm umsn musoum0 umsn muCOHm0 . 0# 8000 .m
00u0 0C0 \
00H0 0C» 00 x00H Co 0H0: 00u0 0C0 00H0 0C»
00 XO0H Co 0H0: $00 000HHOQ0 mo x00H C0 0H0: mo XO0H Co 0H0: .0000 00 N0
xmo mmmaaonm =ms.o sod mmmHAoCm sod mmmssosm sa .moo an
:H £00C0H usoumm £u0C0H usoum0 :H £u0C0H udonmm 0:H £p0COH usonmm m# Eoom .N
00mm 030 00H0 0CD 0000 0C» 00H0 0C0
0o she so see: so xmm so 0H0: 00 son so sacs 0o sch so see: .mooe us No
smm mmmaaosm mm mmmHHoCm sea mmmaeomm sod mmmHHomm NH .moo am
masonmm oz mpsonmw oz musoumm oz musoumm oz 0# 8000 .H
H0HCqu0mem 00C0H< 000900 0090CC0M
00Hu0HH0> mCOHuHUCOO
.001000H

CH mX003 0m 00

00HH0Q 0000000 00 0C0 0:0 00 wuHH050

H0HCuHCoHDHon H0H0C0w

.HN 0H905

Table 22.

82

 

 

 

 

Chip flavor scores for 1962-63.
Sample # Variety Conditions Flavor Crispness
1 Kennebec 10% CO , 3% 7.8 7.2
02 at 40°F.
2 Kennebec 5% C02, 5% 7.5 6.6
02 at 40°F.
3 Kennebec 40°F. air 7.2 6.8
control
4 Sebago 10% C02, 3% 3.3 6.5
02
5 Sebago 5% C02, 5%. 5.3 3.0
02 at 40°F.
6 Commercial ---- 7.0 7.6
unsalted chips
7 Sebago 40°F. air 2.3 2.6
control
8 Arenac 10% C02, 3% 5.0 6.2
02 at 40°F.

9 Arenac 5% C02, 5% 02 5.5 6.7
10 Arenac 40°F. air 3.0 6.1
control
11 Russet rural 10% C0 , 3% 3.6 6.3

02 at 00F.
12 Russel rural 5%.C02, 5% 4.3 5.6
02 at 40°F.
*Average scores of six panelists are given.

83

*
Table 23. Chip flavor scores for 1963-64.

 

 

 

 

“—1

 

Sample # Variety Conditions Flavor Crispness

l Kennebec Control at 6.1 6.5
40°F.

2 Kennebec 5% C02, 5% 02 7.2 7.5
at 50°F.

3 Kennebec 10% C02, 3% 02 7.0 6.6
at 50°F.

4 Kennebec 10% C02, 3% 02 7.5 7.7
at 40°F.

5 Arenac Control at 4.5 4.0
40°F.

6 Arenac 5% C08, 5% 02 7.5 7.1
at 50 F.

7 Arenac 10% C02, 3% 7.8 7.6
02 at 50°F.

8 Arenac 10% C02, 3% 5.5 6.1
02 at 40°F.

9 Commercial ---- 7.2

unsalted chips

 

*
Average score of twelve panel

members given.

84

*
Table 24. Chip flavor scores for 1964-65.

 

 

Sample # Variety Condition Flavor Crispness

1 Arenac 5% C08, 1% 02 7.1 6.5
at 40 F

2 Arenac 5% C03, 1% 02 7.8 6.5
at 50 F.

3 Arenac 5% C02, é%.02 7.1 7.0
at 40°F.

4 Arenac 5%.C02, 3% 02 7.5 7.5
at 40°F.

5 Arenac Control at . 7.2 6.5
50°F.

6 Arenac Control at 7.6. 6.5
40°F.

 

*
Only the author's flavor rating given.

@Low relative humidity (80%-85%) condition.

   

               

HICH RN

(ml/1mm?

  
    

n E UNIV IBRQRIES

I)UNI/111111111171!!! mm

31293106656964

III