RIPENING AND FEELING
MICHIGAN FREESTONE PEACHES

Thai: for flu Dogma sf M. S.
MECHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
Les-fer Rabat? Sfrong

1953

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Ripening and Peeling Michigan
Freestone Peaches

presented hg

Lester Robert Strong

has been accepted towards fulfillment

of the requirements for

M. So degree in FOOd TeChnOlogr

C W
Major ptflssor

Inn: June h: 1953

 

RIPENING AND FEELING MICHIGAN FREESTONE PEACHES

By

Lester Robert Strong

A THESIS

Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE

,Department of Food Technology

1953

Tee4.8
S 9:23

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express his gratitude to
Dr. C. L. Bedford, for his constant supervision and
guidance throughout the entire course of this study.
The writer deeply appreciates the assistance tended
him by Mr. W. F. Robertson and Mr. R. W. Hirzel,
without which this study would not have been possible.
Grateful acknowledgement is also due the secretaries
of the Horticulture Department who assisted on the

taste panels.

INTRODUCTION

Michigan ranks high in the production of freestone
peaches grown in the United States. During the ten year
period of 1940 to 1949, Michigan produced an average of
3,607,000 bushels per year and ranked fourth in the
nation (1). The total production of freestone peaches in
Michigan in 1952 was 5,397,000 bushels, of which 628,000
bushels were processed (10). The Elberta variety consti-
tutes about 45 per cent of the total freestone peach
production in Michigan (22).

The most important factors governing the quality of
canned freestone peaches are: color, texture, flavor and
general appearance (41).

Color is probably one of-the most important factors
in peach quality. Processed peaches should have a bright,
typical, uniform color. If a green color persists in the
flesh ripening, it will carry through in the canned product
giving it a dull, unattractive appearance. Difficulty of
uniform ripening is experienced with early maturing varie-
ties, however, in the variety Elberta the green color is
the last to change to a full yellow. A uniform color will

develop, as a rule, if the fruit is allowed to ripen until
the last trace of green has left the skin.

The flesh texture of the freestone peach should be firm

but not fibrous. As ripening progresses, the peach tends tO‘

become softer and more fibrous. Part of this investigation
was devoted to determining the proper ripening method for a
firm textured peach.

Flavor is an elusive characteristic and difficult to
classify because of considerable variations in taste occurr-
ing between individuals. Flavor is not only dependent to a

large extent on the variety, but also on the maturity at
which the fruit was harvested and the method of ripening
used.

The general appearance of the canned freestone product
is important in consumer acceptability. The ease with which
the fruit is pitted and the method used to peel the fruit
determines to some extent the raggedness of the canned pro-
duct. The general appearance of the fruit and sirup is
dependent to a very large degree upon the harvest maturity
and the method of ripening.

This investigation, made during the 1952 season, was
concerned with the two major systems of peeling freestone
peaches - steam and hot lye solution. In addition, this
study deals with the harvest maturity and ripening con-
ditions required for canned Elberta and Halo Haven peaches

of the best quality and appearance.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The quality of canned peaches is dependent to a large
extent upon the maturity of the fruit at the time of pick-
ing (4,12,33). There have been several investigations to
determine the optimum time for harvesting freestone peaches
for processing and fresh market. Because the data collected
in such investigations is limited to a certain area, as a
result of variable effects.of climatic and soil conditions,
the recommendations are reliable only in that area (45).

The optimum time for harvesting as outlined by Culpepper (14)
is that "short clearly defined period in which the fruit is
firm enough to undergo processing, without disintegrating,

and yet have sufficient flavor to be palatable."
Harvest Maturity

Variations in the composition of fruit at a given
stage of maturity are greatly influenced by the nutritional
balance in the trees and the load and vigor of the trees (14).
Moon et a1 (28) investigated the composition of peaches
grown on thinned trees and trees not thinned. He found no
consistent effects upon the date of maturity as a result of
the thinning. The fruit from the thinned trees was consis-
tently higher in total solids, soluble solids, and total

sugars, at all stages of maturity. The fresh fruit from the

thinned trees was distinctly superior in sweetness, in
balance between sweetness, acidity, and astringency, and in
fullness and appeal of flavor. No difference was found in
the texture of the flesh between the two types of trees.

Blake et a1 (8) in an experiment with trees of high
and low vigor, found that the fruit from the low vigor trees
was smaller, firmer at the same stage of maturity and ripened
more uniformly than the fruit from the more vigorous trees.
To combat this lack of uniformity, Coe (12) recommended
different color standards and pressure tests for trees in
various stages of vigor. Caldwell and Culpepper (11) found
that rain during the ripening period caused the flesh to
soften without the development of a full peach flavor.

Many investigations have been made to determine methods
for establishing the maturity of peaches. These methods in-
clude pressure tests, ground color, tenderometer, per cent
blush, per cent pit browning, and soluble and total solids.

Pressure Test. Addams et a1 (2) in 1930 found that the
cell walls of the peach consist of an intimate combination
of cellulose and protopectin. As the fruit ripens the cell
walls became thinner resulting from the changing of proto-
pectin into pectin. The above authors found that the
decrease in turgidity of the peach closely follows the de-
crease in protopectin and cellulose in the cell well. To
measure the firmness of the peach, Magness and Taylor (24),

in 1925, developed a pressure tester. This instrument has

been modified for use on apples, pears, and plums, as well as
for peaches (18). One of the first variations was made by
Blake (6) who used a needle having a diameter of .032 inch
which was recommended for immature fruit. Blake (8) reported
that by using a pressure tester of the Magness and Taylor
type, with a 0.187 inch plunger, he was able to get a decrease
in resistance of the peach flesh which closely paralleled the
results found by Addoms et a1 (2). Culpepper and Caldwell (14)
felt that this resistance to pressure by the peach flesh was

a good index of firmness, and therefore, canning quality.
Measurements by pressure testers are of limited value alone in
determining the maturity because of uneven ripening and wide
differences in the various parts of a single fruit. For ex-
ample, with a 0.437 inch diameter plunger on peeled surfaces,
pressure test measurements on individual Elberta peaches have
been observed to differ by as much as 16 pounds between suture
and cheek (35). Haller (19) stated that maturing fruit ripens
first at the shoulder opposite the suture, then along and
opposite the suture and lastly on the cheeks. Blake (7)
stated that in tests between the .187 inch and the 0.312 inch
plunger, the larger plunger more accurately recorded slight
differences in texture. Heller (18) also has pointed out that
the higher the temperature at the time of the test the lower
the reading will be. Heller and Smith (20), using a 0.312 inch
diameter plunger, have reported that Elberta peaches testing

16 pounds or more on the pared cheeks or 14 pounds or more on

the pared suture should be considered immature. Many in-
vestigators (6,8,12,18,29,47) advocate the use of both the
flesh firmness and undercolor in determining the maturity

of the peach. Neubert and Veldhuis (33) found that the

fruit should attain a ground color of 75 per cent yellow
color and test four pounds with a 0.437 inch plunger to
obtain processed peaches of choice quality and good flavor.

Ground Color. Ground color or undercolor has been

used as an index of maturity for freestone peaches for both
the fresh market and for processing (8,12,15,17,29,31,35,40).
Neubert et a1 (31) states that "when the green undercolor
has changed to a straw yellow and the fruit has just begun
to soften, Pacific Northwest peaches are at the optimum

stage of maturity for canning.” When the fruit of any
variety enters the ripening stage, the green undercolor
usually changes from.the shade of green immature fruit to

a greenish white or yellow and finally to a clear cream or
orange yellow. Veldhuis and Neubert (45) state that more
important than having a typical peach color, is that the
color is uniform and bright. Neubert et a1 (35) pointed

out that although in actual practice ground color is the

most useful index to maturity, it will vary from year to
year in the same district.

The ground color of peaches has been measured by

several color charts (ll,12,25,35,47). Haller and Harding (17)
found that the apple color chart developed by Magness et a1 (25)

was more satisfactory than the color chart devised by Coe (l2).

Tenderometer. The tenderometer is an instrument which
measures the shearing force necessary to cut through a sub-
stance. The original use for the tenderometer was to
determine the tenderness of peas (26). A modification of
this instrument has been used to obtain reliable results
in measuring the firmness in cooked apple slices treated
with calcium choloride (16). A high degree of correlation
was found by Lee and Oberle (23) between the Ballauf plunger-
type pressure tester, the tenderometer readings, and organe-
leptic tests with fresh peaches.

Flesh Color. Van Blaricom and Musser (44) recommended
harvesting peaches for processing in South Carolina when
the flesh color of the yellow varieties has just begun to
turn from green to yellow. Both Neubert et a1 (35) and
Coe (12) found that the flesh color is more highly developed
than the skin color in the early stages of maturity, but
they are nearly equal when the fruit is fully ripe. A
fairly high degree of negative correlation was obtained by
Willison (47) between flesh color and flesh firmness.

Per Cent Blush. Observations made by Crawford (13)
and Snyder (39) showed that the increase of blush percentage
was dependent upon the exposure of the peach to the sun, and
gave no indication of maturity.

Pit Browning. Neubert et a1 (35) state that pit color
is an excellent supplement to undercolor and flesh firmness

in judging actual maturity. Snyder (39) stated that the

oxidation of the pit cavity provided a fairly constant index
of maturity. The above authors hesitated to set precise
standards of maturity by the pit cavity color, however, the
same authors stated that the appearance of brown color on at
least five per cent of the pit surface was necessary to assure
a sufficient maturity to develop a good flavor during ripen-
ing.

Size and nggh_. The grower is especially concerned with

 

the size and weight of the fruit. Bigelow (5) reported that
between the time of the June drop and the time of market
ripeness the peaches increased in weight nearly eight times,
from 9.51 to 73.59 grams per peach. The same author also
stated that the increase in the weight of the peach was pro-
portioned to the increase in total solids. Neubert and
Veldhuis (33) reported an increase of 10 per cent in yield
for every three days the fruit was left on the trees. Coe (12)
found that in the four weeks prior to harvest, the diameter
of the peach increased by 39 per cent and the volume increased
over 125 per cent. Mc Munn and Dorsey (27) reported an in-
crease in weight from 47.8 to 93.7 per cent of the peaches
that were above 2.5 inches in diameter during the last week
before optimum maturity. Fisher and Britton (15) found an
increase of nearly 25 per cent in volume of Elberta peaches
in British Columbia.

The size and weight is of importance to the processor as

well as the grower. Neubert and Veldhuis (33) found that 100

fruits which required four days to ripen packed five more
number two and one-half cans than 100 fruits picked six

days earlier. Van Blaricom and Mhsser (43) stated that twice
as much labor was required to process peaches of 2-inch dia-
meter than fruit which was 2.5 inches in diameter.

Texture. Many authors (2,3,7,18,35) stated that the
texture of the canned fruit became softer as the fruit
approached ripeness at harvest. To a certain extent, the
firmer fruit required a longer ripening period than fruit
which was less firm. Neubert (35) has shown that a peach
which requires eleven days to ripen was undersirably firm
as compared to one which required only three days to ripen
and was of a soft texture. In work done in 1940, 1941, and
1942 by Neubert et a1 (31), a wider range of three to four-
teen days to ripen was found to produce a product of good
texture.

Flavor. Neubert et a1 (35) reported that for optimum
flavor in canned or frozen peaches, the fruit required six
days or less to ripen. The above authors also found that
there was no advantage to leaving the fruit on the tree
until it was three days or less from canning ripeneess.
Neubert etlal (31) in another study found that there was an
improvement in flavor as the maturity of the fruit advanced
until only about six days were required for ripening, and
when less than three days were needed the flavor became

somewhat mild. Culpepper and Caldwell (14) found that as

10

ripening progressed there was a tendency for the total sugars
to increase rather steadily throughout the ripening period up
to five or six days past the shipping stage, after which they
remained constant. During this time there was a decrease in
the acid and total astringency. The above authors recommended
that the fruit be left on the tree as long as possible and yet
be firm.enough to process. Van Blaricom and Musser (44) gave
as the ideal situation in South Carolina the picking of peaches
when tree ripe. This, however, entails a handling problem.and
for this reason their recommendation was to pick the peaches
when the flesh color was beginning to turn but before the
fruit was soft ripe.
General Appearance. Neubert et a1 (31) found no differ-
ence in the appearance of the canned fruit or sirup that could
be attributed to the maturity at harvest.
Soluble Solids. Moon et a1 (28) found that fruit from
thinned trees was consistently higher in soluble solids, total
solids and total sugar than fruit from unthinned trees.
Allen (3) found that the soluble solids tend to increase with
the coloring and softening of the fruit, although the changes
during the period are not always consistent and the differences
are not very great. It has been found by most investigators
(3,4,9,13,14,35) that there is an increase in soluble solids

as the fruit ripens. The above authors also point out that

the range is so narrow that soluble solid percentages are

unreliable as a guide to maturity. Bigelow (5) states that

11

.the increase in solids is proportional to the increase in
water through the life of the peach and therefore, the
changes in percentage of solids are small.

Total Solids. Neubert et a1 (35) found that there was
a general tendency toward an increase in total solids until
four to six days after the shipping ripe stage, then a slight
decline occurred in the soft ripe fruit. Culpepper and
Caldwell (14) obtained similar results.

Pitting_and Peeling. Poor peeling can generally be
attributed to improper ripening or storage. Neubert et a1 (35)
reported that in the maturity range covered by their studies
with Washington grown peaches no differences were found in
the freeness of the pits or the ease of the removal of the

skins after steam peeling.
Ripening

After harvesting the peaches at the maturity, the pro-
cessor must have the correct conditions to ripen the peaches
to the right stages of color, flavor, peeling quality, etc. .
Neubert and Veldhuis (32) found 75° F. to be ideal for ripen-
ing Washington grown Elberta peaches. They reported also
that small lots did not ripen at the same rate as those
ripened in large commercial lots. This, they felt, was the
result of greater emanations of gases in the larger lots.
Color development was retarded considerably when the fruit

was ventilated.

12

The above authors also stated that peaches ripened at
65° F. required a longer time to attain a yellow color.
Peaches ripened at 85° F. and 950 F. were difficult to steam
peel. Temperatures of 31°, 37°, and 45° F. did not improve
the canning quality of peaches (46). Heller and Harding (17)
state that one day at 700 F. is equal to two days at 60° F.,
four days at 50° F., eight days at 40° F., or sixteen days
at 32° F. when the respiratory rate is used as an index of
maturity.

Wilt loss or reduction in weight resulting from water
loss during ripening is frequently a source of economic loss
to the processor of freestone peaches (35). It has been es-
tablished (31) that some of this wilt loss may be recovered
in the can, and that generally as the wilt loss increased the
per cent of weight recovery also increased. Under conditions
similar to those of commercial operations (35), gross wilt
loss as high as 22 per cent was found in peaches requiring
nine days or more to ripen after harvest.

Heller (21) has written and published an excellent and
complete digest of recent contributions to the knowledge of
physical and biological phases of handling, transportation

and marketing of peaches.

13.

Processing

The position of the pitting operation in the processing
procedure depends upon the section of the country and the type
of peeling operation in use. Van Blaricom and Musser (44)
stated that most Eastern packers pit the peaches before peel-
ing them. One objection to this method is that the peeling
loss is greater (48). Woodroof (48) also stated that in
Georgia, firm.peaches for canning should be pitted before
being peeled with lye.

Peaches may be peeled in several different ways. These
methods include hand peeling, dipping in hot water or steam,
acids, alkalis, by freezing (44) or by the so-called explosion
method (9).

Woodroof (50) found that a dilute solution of hydrochloric
acid could not be used in the peeling operation because a small
residue left on the flesh gives the fruit an undesirable flavor.
He also stated that hydrochloric acid corroded the machinery
and was quite difficult to work with;

Taylor (44) in 1937 patented a process for peeling peaches
by freezing the peach to a depth just below the skin and then
thawing the peach just through the skin. The skin was removed
by abrasion. Woodroof et al (48) found that it was difficult
to adjust the thawing properly to remove the peel.

The explosion method advocated by Brown (9) uses a temper-

ature between 212° - 250° F. with .2 pounds of pressure and

an immediate reversal in temperature and pulling a vacuum of

14

25 to 27 inches of mercury. This is accomplished by heating
the fruit in a retort with steam followed by turning off the
steam and rapidly forcing cold water into the retort. Skins
were removed with little waste by this method in studies by
Woodroof (48). Hand peeling is slow and was claimed to in-
crease the chances of introducing micro-organisms (49).

The peeling of freestone peaches by steam is the common
commercial practice on the West Coast (30,35). Lye peeling
was proven unsatisfactory in the Pullman area in Washington
by Mottern and Neubert (30). They found that lye peeling
resulted in an inferior product because even with a citric
acid rinse, the peaches lost flavor because of lye pene-
tration. It was also found that spraying hot lye on the
peaches caused a rough surface regardless of the gentleness
of the spray. Crawford (13) reported no difficulty in steam
peeling Elberta peaches grown in Michigan in 1950.

The peeling of peaches with a hot lye solution is advo-
cated to be better than the steam peeling methods for
Eastern grown Peaches (44,48,50). The commercial canneries
in South Carolina found that peaches only occasionally peeled
satisfactorily by steam (44). Woodroof (50) found the lye
did not penetrate the flesh as did hydrochloric acid because
of its alkalinity and the slight acidity of the peaches.
Steam peeling, which partially cooked Georgia peaches, ad-
versely affected the flavor, while lye peeling was found to

be successful when a boiling hot two per cent solution was

15

used (48). Lye peeling is followed usually by a one to two
minute dip in a five-tenths per cent hydrochloric acid
solution or a two per cent citric acid solution. The acid
neutralizes the film of weak alkali left on the surface of
the washed peach, and thus retards browning and prevents
the peach from becoming slick while peeling. In addition,
citric acid is one of the natural acids of peaches and it
does not impart a foreign taste to the fruit as happens
with some of the other acids (48).

Recently, wetting agents as an aid in the lye peeling
of peaches have been investigated (38). Van Blaricom.(44)
found their greatest use in speeding up the capacity of lye
peeling machines, but because the amount of lye needed was

not reduced, he deemed their use questionable.

  

23*
event ... ~36 15—"
. x9. othclofficxt‘

Eda. .60.?SUIUF

.3 “lax-w. add no J

. -.-. .1

9‘: I~ t

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The Hale Haven and Elberta peaches used in this in-
vestigation were obtained from 11-year old trees on the
Blood Farm.near South Lyon, Michigan. The trees were

selected for uniformity of size, vigor, and fruit load.

Harvest Maturity

To obtain peaches of suitable range in maturity,
the fruit was picked on alternate days. Only two pick-
ings were made from each tree to minimize the effect of
fruit removal on the rate of growth or ripening of the
peaches. Approximately 100 pounds of fruit was obtained
for each maturity lot. The fruit was then transported to
the laboratory at East Lansing.

The wide range of maturity on the trees made it
possible to obtain more than one maturity for ripening at
each harvest. A 40-fruit sample was selected at random
from each maturity lot for detailed measurements and des-
criptions. The remainder of the lot was placed in the
ripening cabinets after the number of peaches and weight
of each lot was determined.

The following fruit descriptions were made on the 20
fruits taken from.each maturity lot: weight, ground and

flesh color, per cent blush, pit browning and pit

17

pigment, pressure test, ring size, circumference, diameter,
split pits, soluble and total solids, and pH.

Weight. Each peach was weighed to the nearest gram.

Ground Color. The ground color was recorded as a
number determined by the apple color chart developed by
Magness et al (22).

Flesh Color. The same color chart as above was used
to determine the flesh color.

Per Cent Blush. The per cent of distinct red blush
based on the total peach was estimated.

Per Cent of Pit Brownigg. The percentage of pit cavity

 

which turned brown was estimated.

Pit Pigment. The shade and intensity of the red pigment

 

surrounding the pit cavity was noted.

Pressure Test. The pressure tests were made using a

 

Ballauf plunger type tester with a 0.312 inch diameter plunger
on peeled surfaces of the cheeks, suture and the side opposite
the suture, and the readings were recorded.

Tenderometer. All readings on the tenderometer were made

 

in pounds per square inch and read on the number two scale
except when the fruit became very soft and then it was read
on the number one scale. Peaches from the representative
samples were cut into halves, quarters, slices and three-
eighths inch dices. The methods used for placing the samples

in the chamber are as follows:

18

1. Halves. Six whole peaches were halved and pitted.
Oneéhalf at a time was placed in the chamber cup down. The

readings from the halves were averaged for each peach.

2. Quarters. Six whole peaches were quartered and
pitted. Two quarters were put longitudinally in the chamber
at a time with the skin side up. This was repeated for
peeled fruit and the readings were recorded.

3. Slices. Whole peaches were halved, pitted and
sliced into twelfths. Samples of 150 grams each were
weighed out and placed in the chamber of the tenderometer.
Peeled slices were used and the process repeated. This,
however, was discontinued for the unpeeled slices in the
last harvest because of the softness of the flesh.

4. Dices. Fruits that had been used for the fresh
fruit measurements were put through a potato cutter having
three-eighths inch square openings in the face plate. The
use of unpeeled fruit had to be discontinued in the last
harvest because of the softness of the fruit.

Ring Size. The size of each fruit was measured with the
use of a standard fruit inspector's size gauge.

Circumference. The circumference was measured to the
nearest centimeter, at the point of greatest transverse cir-
cumference.

Diameter. The maximum diameters from suture to back,
from stem to apex and from cheek to cheek were measured to

the nearest centimeter.

19

Split Pits. The per cent of split pits was calculated

 

on the total number of fruit harvested.

Soluble Solids. The per cent soluble solids was deter-
mined with an Abbe refractometer. For this purpose the
sheared fruit from the tenderometer was collected and the
clear liquid expressed through a double layer of cheese cloth.

Total Solids. A vacuum oven was used to determine the

 

total solids of the fruit. The determination was according
to the A.O.A.C. procedure on a 25 gram sample (37).

Pit Loss. The pit loss was determined by weighing the
pits after they were removed from the peaches.

Skin Loss. The skin loss for the steam peeled peaches

 

was determined by weighing the skins which were removed.
The skin loss for the lye peeled peaches was determined by
the difference in weight before and after the lye peeling
process.

25! The pH was determined by a glass electrode Beckmen
pH meter.

Ripening. The fruit was ripened in a cabinet held at room
temperature. The humidity was developed by confinement of the
water vapor emanating from the fruit and controlled by means
of a vent.

The temperature range during the ripening of the Hale
Havens was 68° F. to 840 F. with an average of 77° F. The
relative humidity ranged from 50 to 70 per cent and averaged

62 per cent. The temperature range during the ripening of

20

the Elbertas was 65° F. to 84° F. and the relative humidity
ranged from 48 to 77 per cent with an average of 66 per cent.

Processing. The fruit was considered ready for pro-

 

cessing when it was soft, fully colored, and easily peeled.

As each lot reached processing ripeness, the loss in weight
was determined. Two methods of peeling were used - steam
peeling and lye peeling. For the steam peeling the individual
peaches were halved, pitted, and the halves placed cup down

on aluminum sheets. The halves were steamed for 60 to 90
seconds, cooled by a water spray and the skins slipped off

by hand.

The procedure followed in lye peeling was to dip the
whole peaches in a one and a half per cent lye solution at
200° s 3° F. for two minutes. The lye used was a commercial
product containing 94 per cent sodium hydroxide, two per cent
sodium carbonate and four per cent inert materials. The
peaches were allowed to drain for ten seconds and then sprayed
with cold water. When the peels were completely off, the
peaches were dipped in a two per cent citric acid solution
for one minute and then reweighed. The peaches were then
halved. Other than being halved before lye peeling, the
procedure for the halves was identical to that of the lye
peeled whole peeling method.

The prepared halves were accurately weighed into number
two tin cans, specially lacquered for peaches, to 14% ounces,

siruped with hot (180°-l90° F.) 40 per cent sucrose solution,

21

exhausted in boiling water for seven minutes, sealed and pro-
cessed in boiling water for 20 minutes and water cooled. The
canned samples were stored at 55° F. for approximately six

months before being opened and evaluated.
Ripening Studies

Fruit Selection. The peaches used in the ripening study
were obtained from the same orchard as those for the harvest
maturity study. The fruit was sorted to obtain as uniform a
maturity as possible within each lot. The peaches were
placed under the several ripening conditions within four
hours after picking.

RipeninggMethods. The peaches were ripened in cabinets
equipped with fans tocontrol the humidity which is supplied
by the fruits themselves. The heat was furnished by automatic
heat units built into the cabinets and connected to an auto-
matic cut off. The temperatures used were 75°, 85°, and 95° F.
with a high and moderate humidity for each temperature.

Processing. One tray of peaches of each maturity was
removed from each cabinet over a period of three to six days,
respectively. An attempt was made to remove the fruit about
one day before comparable fruit held at 75° F. under conditions
of high humidity had reached processing ripeness. The second
and third trays were removed on two and four days later, res~

pectively.

22

After the fruits were removed from the cabinets, and
weighed, to determine the wilt loss, all the lots were
compared for color and processed as in the harvest maturity
study. Observations were made on the pitting, peeling, and
general character of the fruit.

The following determinations or calculations were made
after ripening or after the cans were opened and the peaches
were evaluated: Calculated and actual yields, total loss,
net loss, pit loss, and product evaluation.

Taste Panel. A taste panel composed of five to seven
judges was held to evaluate all the samples processed. The
score was based on a maximum of five points for an excellent
rating and one point for a poor rating.

Product Evaluation. The drained weight was determined
using the procedure outlined in the United States Standards

for Grades of Freestone Peaches (39).

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Fresh Fruit Measurements

The results obtained from the fresh fruit measurements
have been averaged from the 20 fruits used in the sample
and recorded in tables 4, 8, and 9 for the Elbertas.

Because it was impossible to use the same fruit for
measurements throughout the harvest period the usual error
of sampling was introduced. Within the limits of this error
it was possible to calculate the average changes made in the
fruit during the harvest period.

Weight. The overall increase in weight for Hale Haven
amounted to 25 per cent covering the eight-day period.
There was little gain in the riper peaches after the sixth
day of the study or three days before processing. The
greener peaches could have been harvested for commercial
production on the eighth day of the study and ripened for
six days.

Elberta showed an increase in weight of 86 per cent
over the 12 day harvest period. There was no increase in
growth after the sixth harvest was made. From.the data
given there was a decrease in weight after this date.

The difference in the increase in weight between the
two varieties during the harvesting periods was mostly a

result of the different lengths of the harvesting periods.

24

The Elbertas had a longer harvesting period and therefore
showed a greater range of weight increase.

The grower and the processor are interested in obtaining
the highest yield possible. Because of the variability in
the maturity of the peaches in 1952 it is difficult to give
the optimum time for harvest on a weight basis.

Ground Color. The ground color for the Hale Havens
progressed steadily throughout the maturity period ranging
from 2.4 to 4.1 on the apple color chart.

For the Elbertas the range was somewhat lower, 2.3 to
3.8. Although ground color is important as a measure of
maturity, the variability between seasons, orchards, or even
between trees is so great that it is impossible to set a
reliable standard for harvesting based on such a factor alone.

Flesh Color. The flesh color score in both Hale Havens
and Elbertas was higher than the score given for skin color,
being 2.7 to 4.2 and 2.5 to 4.0, respectively, becoming more
yellow as the period advanced. From tables 2 and 5 it can be
noted that the coefficient of variation becomes less as the
harvest period advances, that is, the standard deviation and
the mean grow farther apart.

Per Cent of Blush. The estimated per cent of blush for
Hale Haven ranged from 24 to 93 per cent with a steady in-
crease throughout the maturity phase.

The per cent of blush on Elberta was not quite so intense

as the Hale Havens. The shade and intensity increased with

25

the length of the harvest period ranging from 12 to 64 per
cent.

0n the basis of this increase in blush of both varieties,
it might be assumed that the amount of blush is directly re-
lated to the maturity. It is, however, not an index of the
maturity of the fruit but the amount of sunlight the peach
has received as some immature green peaches had a high degree
of blush. .

Ring Size and Circumference. The ring size of the Halo
Haven peaches increased from 2.1 to 2.7 inches or about 28
per cent during the harvesting time. The circumference of

the Halo Havens increased by about 13.5 per cent.
The Elbertas increased in ring size from 2.3 to 2.9 for
an increase of 26 per cent with a steady upward increase.

These two measurements alone gave very little indication
of the maturity of the fruit.

Pressure Test. As the Hale Havana and Elberta peaches
advanced in maturity, the flesh became progressively softer.
It was found that the flesh at the suture and the opposite
side of the suture were less firm.than the cheeks in both
varieties.

Many authors (6,8,12,18) advocate the use of both ground
color and pressure tests as a measure of maturity. It is
shown in tables 2 and 5 that although the coefficient of
variations are quite mederate for the ground color, it is

quite high for the pressure test, especially towards the

26

latter part of the harvesting season. This would indicate that
even though the ground color and pressure test are used as
indices of maturity, they may not be closely related.

Diameter. The suture and cheek diameters for the Hale
Haven peaches increased by 16 per cent and the longitudinal
diameter increased by 13 per cent.

The Elberta peach had a suture diameter increase of 24
per cent, the longitudinal diameter 18 per cent, and the cheek
diameter 25 per cent.

It was observed from the data that the increase in the
size of the peach in the final stages of ripening came in the
suture and cheek diameter rather than the longitudinal dia-
meter.

Pit Browning. The pit browning increased progressively
from no pit browning at the beginning of the harvesting study
to a maximum of 66 per cent for the Halo Havens and 63 per
cent for the Elbertas. Although there was a general increase
in pit browning, the increase was too variable to use as an
index of maturity.

Pit Pigment. Pigmentation of the pit cavity was not as
intense in the Hale Havens as in the Elbertas. The red color-
ation of the pit cavity progressed from very light to light
medium in the Hale Havens, whereas it progressed to a full
medium in the Elbertas. There was no indication that this
could be used as the measure of the maturity of the fruit.

Split Pits. The percentage of split pits was inconsistent

 

and in no way correlated with either variety of fruit or time

of harvest.

27

Tenderometer. The tenderometer readings for the Hale

 

Haven peaches on the unpeeled halves, quarters, slices, and
cubes decreased 41, 59, 56, and 70 per cent respectively and
80, 89, 57, and 59 per cent, respectively, for the unpeeled
peaches. The tenderometer readings on the ripe peaches
harvested on the last harvest day decreased 46 per cent for
the unpeeled halves and 72 per cent for the peeled halves
during the harvesting period (table 1). It was impossible
to get readings with the unpeeled slices and cubes because
of the softness of the flesh and the packing of the skins on
the grid.

The same general trend was followed with the Elbertas.
The tenderometer readings on the unpeeled halves, quarters,
slices, and cubes decreased 59, 77, 75 and 80 per cent, res-
pectively (table 4). 0n the peeled peaches it was 87, 90,
and 90 per cent, respectively.

The correlation coefficients for Halo Havens between the
pressure test, using a .312 inch plunger, and the tenderometer
are very high except for the unpeeled quarters (table 3). The
correlation between the .437 inch plunger pressure tester and

the tenderometer is high in all cases except the peeled halves
and peeled quarters.

The correlation coefficients for the Elbertas between
the pressure tests using a 0.312 inch plunger and the tendero-
meter are high in all cases except with the peeled quarters.

These results show that by using peeled and-pitted halved,

28

quartered and sliced peaches the tenderometer may be used
as a means for determining maturity.

Soluble Solids and Total Solids. Both the soluble and
total solids with the Hale Havens showed a slight increase
in the first three harvests and then a decrease to the
original value. The increase in soluble solids was from
11.6 to 12.9 per cent and the increase in total solids was
from 12.6 to a maximum of 13.8 per cent.

The soluble solids in the Elberta studies showed a
decrease during the first five harvests and then began to
increase and the soluble solids of the last harvest did
not attain the value of those of the first three harvests.

The narrow range reported in both varieties is similar
to the results found by Neubert et a1 (33) and the soluble
solid content cannot be assumed reliable as an index of
maturity.

23. 'While the pH increased with the increase in
maturity of the Hale Havens from 3.58 to 3.80 the pH
varied from 3.55 to 3.60 for the Elbertas.

Wilt Loss During Ripening. The wilt loss for the Hale
Havens varied from 1.2 to 13.3 per cent of the initial weight
for the peaches ripened at room temperature. The wilt loss
for those lots ripened at higher temperatures ranged from
15.7 to 38.6 per cent (table 7).

The range for the wilt loss of the Elbertas was from

0.6 to 19.1 per cent during the ripening at room temperature

29

(table 8). It was obvious in both varieties studied that the
wilt loss varied directly with the length of the ripening
period.

Pit Loss. The pit loss decreased as the fruit became
more mature before harvest in each of the freestone varieties.
_The range was from 11.2 to 6.2 per cent and 14.1 to 6.6 per
cent respectively, for the steam and lye peeled Hale Havens.
The pit loss for the Elberta peaches was from 13.4 to 6.1
per cent and 13.4 to 6.2 per cent respectively, for the
steam and lye peeled fruit. No significant difference was
found between the two methods of peeling with either variety.
A positive correlation was found between the wilt loss and
pit loss in both varieties (figures I and II).

Skin Loss. The fully matured peaches peeled easily, The
skin loss for the steam peeled halves of Hale Havens ranged
from 4.2 to 11.0 per cent of the ripened fruit, while the
calculated skin loss for the lye peeled whole peaches ranged
from 0.0 to 11.0 per cent.

The skin loss of the Elberta variety ranged from 3.4 to
6.7 per cent of the ripened fruit for the steam peeled halves
and from 0.0 to 6.8 per cent for the lye peeled whole peaches.

The calculated loss of skin for the lye peeled peach
halves varied from 3.2 to 15.3 per cent. The higher average
loss for the lye peeled halved peaches was a result of the loss
of flesh from the pit cavity and the cut surfaces. The lower

skin loss values for the lye peeled peaches were obtained on

30

the peaches having the higher wilt loss. This decrease was
probably a result of a reabsorption of water by the flesh of
the wilted peaches during the successive immersions in a hot
lye solution, water and dilute citric acid (table 7). The
correlation between wilt loss and skin loss for the steam
peeled peaches was 9.099 and the same losses Showed a
negative correlation of -.560 for the lye peeled fruit.

Zlglfi, The calculated yields were determined by sub-
tracting the pit and skin loss from.the weight of the peaches
used. The actual yields were determined from the difference
between the original weight and the ingoing weight of the
peaches.

The calculated yields for the steam peeled Hale Havens
ranged from 79.9 to 88.7 per cent with an average of 85.27 per
cent and 81.2 to 92.0 per cent with an average of 87.92 per
cent for the lye peeled fruit (table 7). A highly significant
difference was found in yields between the two methods of
peeling with Hale Haven peaches (table 10).

The actual yields for the steam peeled Elberta peaches
varied from 80.6 to 90.2 per cent of the original weight with
an average of 86.25 per cent; for the lye peeled whole fruits
from 84.1 to 90.9 per cent, with an average of 86.89 per cent;
and for the lye peeled halved peaches 71.5 to 85.5 per cent,
with an average of 80.8 per cent. No significant differences

were found between the steam peeled and lye peeled

31

whole peaches, however, the yields of the lye peeled halved

Elbertas were significantly lower (table 11). The yield of

the steam peeled fruit showed a negative correlation with the
wilt loss (figure IV).

The calculated and actual yield for the steam peeled
Elbertas were similar but the actual yields obtained for the
lye peeled fruit was significantly lower than the calculated
yields.

Total Loss. The total loss includes the wilt loss, pit

 

and skin loss and the difference between ingoing and drained
weights of the canned peaches.

The total loss for the Hale Havens ranged from 20.2 to
40.3 per cent of the original weight with an average of 26.33
per cent and 17.8 to 34.0 per cent with an average of 23.68
per cent respectively for the steam and lye peeled fruit
(table 7). No significant difference was found between the
two methods of peeling but each showed a high positive corre-
lation between total loss and wilt loss (figures V and VI).

The total loss for the Elbertas, based on the actual
yield, ranged from 18.6 to 37.8 per cent with an average of
25.5 per cent for the steam peeled halves; 13.0 to 30.7 per
cent with a mean of 21.7 per cent for the lye peeled whole
peaches and; 23.7 to 34.4 per cent with an average of 28.4
per cent for the lye peeled halved peaches (table 8). The
calculated total loss was significantly lower than the actual

total loss for the lye peeled halved peaches. The actual

32

total loss for the lye peeled halved peaches was significantly
higher than the actual total losses for the steam peeled halved
and lye peeled whole peaches (table 11).

Net Loss. The net loss includes the wilt loss and the
difference between the ingoing and drained weights of the
canned peaches.

The net loss for the Hale Havens ranged from 8.3 to 28.0
per cent of the original flesh weight with a mean of 13.78
per cent for the steam peeled whole peaches and 7.0 and 26.6
per cent with an average of 13.81 per cent for the lye peeled
halves. No significant difference was found between the steam
peeled halved and lye peeled whole peaches. A high positive
correlation was found between the wilt loss and the net loss
in each case.

The net loss for the Elbertas ranged from 8.5 to 30.2
per cent of the original flesh weight, with a mean of 12.95
per cent for the steam peeled halves; 7.1 to 18.6 per cent
with an average of 11.57 per cent for the lye peeled whole
and 5.8 to 15.9 per cent with an average of 10.46 per cent
for the lye peeled halved peaches (table 9). No significant
difference was found between the three types of peeling
operations, and there was a high correlation between the wilt
loss and the net loss for the three methods (figures VII and
VIII).

Drained Weight. The drained weight average for the steam

peeled halves was 13.49 and 14.45 ounces for the lye

Table

HARVEST MATURITY MEASUREMENTS

 

 

 

Hale
Date of
Measurement 8/18 8/20 8/22
Weight (gms.) 114 93 99
Ground Color (Avg.) 2.5 2.7 2.7
Blush (per cent) 55 41 58
Shade of blush Med. Med. Med.
Ring size (in.) 2.5 2.4 2.4
Circumference (cms.) 19.5 17.9 18.5
Pressure test (lbs.)
Back 12.1 13.5 9.3
Suture 11.7 14.1 10.9
Cheek (Avg.) 13e7 1508 12.2
Diameter (cms.)
Suture 5.9 5.4 5.7
Longitudinal 4.9 4.6 4.8
ChBOk 5e? 5e4 5.6
Flesh COIOP 5e4 2e7 3e1
Pit browning (%) 0.5 1.0 19.5
Pit pigment Very Very Light
Light Light
Split pits (per cent) .30 10 5
Tenderometer
Halves Not Peeled 60.5 56.0 55.3
Peeled 36e6 40e0 34e1
Quarters Not Peeled 86.9 77.9 61.2
Peeled 53.3 51.2 48.8
Slices Not Peeled 117.6 122.0 96.0
Peeled 86.6 91.0 80.0
Cubes Not Peeled 114.3 99.0 96.0
Peeled 84.3 77.0 68.3
Soluble Solids (R.I.) 11.6 11.9 12.9
Total SOlidS 13e4 13e8 13e8
pH 3.58 3. 3.6

 

e .437" plunger
b Flesh too soft

a Small green peaches

d Green peaches
e Riper peaches

l

BASED ON AVERAGE OF TWENTY FRUITS

 

 

 

Haven
‘Harvest
8/24 8/26 8/269 a/20° 8/2 6d a/22°
140 130 148 67 95 133
3.6 3.7 4.1 2.6 3.0 3.6
79 78 93 24 46 76
Med.to Med.to Dark Light Med. Med.to
dark dark to Med. dark
2.7 2.7 2.7 2.1 2.4 2.7
20.6 20.7 20.9 16.3 18.0 20.5
5.3 6.1 2.0: 14.9 10.1 9.8
5.8 5.68 1.58 14.1 9.3 7.6
7.8 7.8 2.0 16.7 12.4 11.9
6.2 6.3 6.4 5.0 5.5 6.1
5.1 5.0 5.2 4.2 4.6 5.1
6.3 6.2 6.4 4.8 5.5 6.2
4.1 3.9 4.2 2.7 3.3 3.7
15.0 39 66 O 37 22
Light Light Light Very Light Light
to Med. to Med. to Med. Light
10 5 35 O 5 30
4208 35.2 32e8 "" 39.0 59.7
32.8 7.5 9.7 --- 9.7 16.2
62e9 3506 24.3 """"" 57e7 48e3
37.7 6e0 llegb "" 8.2 16.5
79e0 51e8 ’-""" """" 63e5 62e0
62e8 37e3 15e0b """' 53.0 47e0
65.0 34.8 ---- --- 57.5 54.5
57e3 54e3 12e8 "" 41e3 37e8
12.2 11.4 11.7 --- 12.1 12.5
12 e6 15e2 12 e9 """"' """"" 13e2
5.5 5e7 3e8 """' 5065 3e62

 

—-e-—--—

35

mmomH

 

 

 

00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0..0
«xv: 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0..0 000 ...000
00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0..0
01:. 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0..0 poz ...o000
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0.0..0
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0.00.0 0.0 .uuopneea
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 .00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 0.0..0
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0.0..0 0.2 .000000
nepeaonepnea
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0..00
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 000000000000
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .00000
0.0Eov 0000800Q
00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0000. 00.00
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 0.000
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0 00.00
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 .00000
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0.00
Acme: vau. 095mmohm
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.0aov..c.0.0ssos00
00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 .000 0000
00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 .00000 000.00
00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0.0000 0000.0
0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0.000 .0 .000
00\0 00\0 0m\0 00\0 00\0 00\0 00\0 00\0 .000 00.0000

 

0ae>em 000m

9:00 mom I hu005002 noeom no
00:050050002 no £0000000> no 0:000090000

0 .0000

36

 

 

000. sun: 000. 1.1. 000. 000. 000. 000. .00000
000. 1:1: 000. nuun 000. 000. 000. 000. 0.0000 00.00
000. :z:: 000. 1:1: 000. 000. 000. 000. 0000

0.0.00 000.0

pm 09 095mm 0.0%.
000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. .00000
000w 0000 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 0.0000 0.000
000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 0.00

 

 

00000m voaoom poz voaeom 000000 002 00000& 000000 002 cofloom 000000 poz
00250 0000Hm 00000010 mobaem
00n0s0 m0n.o

000050000Coa 0000 ensueonm

 

nobwm 000m

uedad> nopeEonovnea one
apnea enummonm neczpem mucowo0mueoo :0000000000

0 eHQdB

.310

\(‘l‘

37

 

 

 

 

Table
HARVEST MATURTTY MEASUREMENTS
Elberta
Date of
Measurement 8/50 9/1 9/5 9/5
Weight (gms.) 90 110 139 120
Ground Color (Avg.) 2.5 2.7 2.7 5.5
Blush (per cent) 12 21 26 55
Shade of blush Light Light Light L1 ht
Med. Meg.
Ring Size (in.) 203 205 2.7 2.6
Circumference (cms.) 17.5 18. 20.2 19.4
Pressure test (lbs.)
BaCk 23.1 14.7 14.4 1201
SUturO 21.6 1500 14.4 1208
Cheek (Avg.) 22.7 16.6 16.0 14.9
Diameter (cms.)
Suture 504 5.9 6.3 600
Longitudinal 4.8 5.2 5.4 5.2
ChOOk 5.1 505 602 508
Flash OOIOP ‘205 208 500 5.5
Pit browning (per cent) 0 4.0 7.5 7.5
Pit pigment Very Light Light Light
Light Med.
Split pits (per cent) 0 5 5 15
Tenderometer
Halves Not Peeled 74 63 71 59
Peeled 54 44 47 42
Quarters Not Peeled 100 90 97 84
Peeled 61 55 74 52
Slices Not Peeled 165 110 117 90
Peeled 153 111 89 77
Cubes Not Peeled 156 108 94 87
Peeled 109 85 87 84
SOIUblO SOlidS (ReIe) 13.5 13.1 1306 1204
Total SOlidS 1505 1509 1309 13.7
pH 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.5

 

I .457” plunger
b Riper peaches
G Green peaches

4

BASED ON AVERAGE OF TWENTY FRUITS

38

 

 

 

Harvest
b 0 b
9/7 9/9 9/11 9/7 9/11 9/11
'155 '172 155 159 152 155
5.6 5.4 5.5 5.8 2.8 5.8
52 25 40 42 50 54
Mad. Iliad. Med 0 Niedo Light Med.
Dark Dark Med. Dark
2.7 2.8 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.9
20.0 21.4 21.7 21.0 20.8 21.5
11.5 8.8 4.1a 5.78 15.1a 2.58
11.2 8.4 2.6a 4.48 12.2a 1.7a
14.4 12.8 5.4a 7.58 20.5a 4.0a
5.5 5.7 5.7 5.5 6.5 6.7
5.5 5.8 5.7 5.6 5.5 5.7
5.9 5.4 6.5 5.5 5.5 5.4
5.5 5.6 4.0 4.0 5.5 5.9
18 55 55 54 57 51
M86. 0 Med 0 Med 0 Med 0 Light med 0
5 5 15 20 5 10
48 45 51 55 58 50
21 25 9 10 24 7
55 55 28 54 45 25
45 42 10 10 22 7
85 74 41 --- 50 ---
54 56 25 19 48 12
79 50 51 ~-- 52 27
65 55 15 14 45 11
12.4 12.2 12.9 12.7 12.5 12.8
15.0 15.8 14.2 14.8 15.1 14.4
5.5 5.55 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5

 

39

 

 

 

 

Table
COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION OF MEASUREMENTS
Elbertas
Harvest Date 8/50 9/1 9/5 9/5
Days to Ripen 17 15 9 7

Weight (gms.) 57.00 10.58 15.28 10.58

Ground Color (avg.) 17.00 16.00 16.47 14.00

Ring 312. (in.) 5.70 3.95 5032 4.71

Circumference (cms.) 5.07 5.60 4.60 5.79
Pressure (lbs.)

Back 12.90 8055 11.22 15.50

Suture 15.62 8.54 8.95 9.50

Cheek l 11.97 7.17 14.12 12.48

Cheek 2 10.00 10.00 10.00 9.14

Flesh color 16.85 15.45 11.26 15.26
Diameter (cms.)

Suture 5.87 5.54 5.15 5.54

Longitudinal 6.20 4.65 4.14 2.95

Cheek 5.68 4.24 5.67 4.06

Tenderometer

Halves, Not Peeled 8.20 26.00 15.72 24.41

Peeled 15.89 20.09 12.19 51.28

Quarters, Not Peeled 20.54 15.48 15.55 24.65

Peeled 15.58 12.58 15.59 18.19

Slices, Not Peeled 5.02 9.54 15.69 5.55

Peeled 8.40 7.64 5.84 7.90

Cubes, Not Peeled 2.45 5.02 11.56 10.54

Peeled 4.50 2.70 8.00 4.45

 

5

 

 

 

 

09 PEACH MATURITY - PER CENT
917 9/7 9/9 9/11 9/11 9/11
8 2 5 6 5 5
12.96 11.72 19.54 12.80 15.07 15.92
15.70 =11.60 15.02 15.20 12.70 15.55
4.90 5.99 4.87 5.55 5.25 10.27
4.51 5.54 4.61 4.04 4.72 5.50
25.42 59.91 27.65 57.88 47.70 49.20
26.65 47.94 41.69 61.87 85.26 68.42
25.87 71.52 25.80 40.01 58.11 59.88
21.06 61.55 29.85 52.81 65.06 77.58
15.21 7.84 10.14 12.90 9.54 10.57
5.10 4.92 7.56 5.08 5.87 5.09
4.62 4.96 5.46 4.98 5.44 5.44
4.05 5.46 5.54 5.24 7.61 8.05
25.27 25.60 59.16 22.50 20.90 15.26
66.55 62.40 59.50 41.58 94.41 19.61
25.11 16.84 27.99 25.22 20.51 26.65
60.86 41.04 70.16 60.56 87.50 14.92
20.1 -""" 6.05 5.53 4022 a.--
6.25 22.65 14.45 5.60 5.57 6.85
5.19 --- 6.95 5.24 2.65 11.27
7.66 7.00 6.52 15.56 5.25 5.22

 

41

 

ammo mom. mnm. 0mm. moo. 0mm. m0m. mmm.
00m. mom. 0N0. 0mm. 00m. 000. mbb. mom.
mam. arm. mam. Ham. mom. mmbw mom. bflme

unapsm
A.m>0V xoeno

96.0

 

 

 

0.0..0 0.0..0 poz 0.0..0 0.0..0 poz 0.0..0 0.0..0 poz 0.0..0 0.0..0 0.2
00950 00000m anophdzd ne>00m
. ..0560 000.0
nopefion00n09 9009 enamuonm
.00.:00

00500> 9090E0n00nee 0:0
00009 ehsumenm noospom 00:000009000 c00000onhoo

o OHDdB

42

Table-

Effect of Harvest Maturity on Wilt Loss,
Net Loss, Drained

 

 

Hale
Pit Loss Skin Loss Yield

Days

1:. 0 W1 1t St 0 am Lyee St 6 am Lyee St 6 am Ly:
Ripen Loss Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled
%

12 15.5 8.0 9.6 5.2 2.1 85.8 88.5

108 10.8 7.9 8.9 4.4 5.1 87.7 88.0
8 10.5 7.7 7.2 5.1 1.5 87.2 91.2
6 5.4 8.5 7.0 5.7 5.2 86.0 86.8
5 7.4 5.6 6.6 5.5 5.5 85.8 89.8
4 5.5 5.5 9.6 5.5 5.1 87.9 85.5
5 4.2 5.2 7.1 5.5 5.8 87.2 89.1
2 1.5 5.5 9.5 11.0 5.0 82.7 87.7
1 1.2 5.5 7.5 8.0 9.0 85.7 85.7

112 55.5d 11.2 11.2 7.5 0.0 81.5 88.8
9 22.3 9.5 10.2 5.5 0.7 84.1 89.1

15.

10315.5 9.5 11.1 4.7 0.0 86.0 88.9
93 50.0 10.5 11.0 7.6 0.0 81.9 89.0
9 29.1 11.2 14.1 8.9 4.7 79.9 81.2
58 8.4 7.1 5.9 4.2 1.1 88.7 92.0

 

0 0400‘”

Green Fruit.

Ripened at 85° F., moderate humidity.
Ripened at 850 F., high humidity.

Wilt loss on lye peeled peaches is 15.7.

Lye peeled whole peaches.

43

7

Pit Loss, Skin Loss, Yield, Total Loss,
Weight and Flavor Score

 

 

Haven
Total Loss Net Loss Drained Weight Flavor Score
St eam Lyee St 6 am Lyee St 69011 Lyee St 6 am Lye
Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled
% % % % oz. 02. avg. avg.
27.4 24.1 15.4 14.0 14.5 14.4 1.77 2.55
22.5 22.9 11.5 12.0 14.4 14.5 2.88 5.00
22.7 19.9 11.5 12.0 14.4 14.5 5.22 5.55
22.5 22.9 9.2 10.5 14.1 15.9 4.22 5.88
21.7 20.9 9.5 11.5 14.2 15.9 4.44 4.55
19.8 20.9 8.4 7.0 14.1 14.5 4.22 4.44
20.6 18.1 8.5 8.2 15.9 14.0 4.11 4.00
26.0 20.5 8.9 10.8 15.4 15.5 5.55 5.67
24.5 26.9 10.2 10.9 15.2 15.1 5.55 5.22
40.5 54.0 28.0. 26.6 15.5 15.5 2.00 1.78
51.1 21.4 18.7 12.2 15.0 15.0 2.00 1.67
27.3 22.8 15.6 19.1 14.6 14.9 2.67 2.67
54.4 51.5 21.7 25.8 15.7 15.4 1.55 2.00
54.4 51.5 20.2 18.1 15.8 16.1 1.67 1.67
20.2 17.8 9.8 10.5 14.5 14.1 5.89 4.00

 

44

' Table
Effect of Harvest Maturity on Wilt

 

 

Elberta

Skin Loss Yield

Steam Lye Lye Steam Lye

Days Peeled Peeled Peeled ‘Peeled Peeled

to Wilt Halves Whole Halves [Halves Whole
Ripen Loss Act? Caleb Act? C 10?

4 4 4 2 4 4 i
17 11.7 6.7 0.0 5.2 80.7 81.2 84.1 86.9
19 19.1 7.6 0.0 5.6 80.6 79.0 85.1 86.6
15 15.8 5.6 6.4 10.2 78.4 85.5 85.2 87.5
15 16.0 6.4 0.0 5.5 85.2 84.6 87.4 90.0
9 6.2 5.4 2.4 7.1 89.1 88.7 87.2 88.7
11 9.6 5.0 2.1 12.2 84.9 87.2 89.7 89.5
7 5.5 4.8 5.4 11.5 89.4 87.4 85.4 87.5
9 7.0 4.6 2.4 8.2 85.8 87.2 88.4 89.4
12 11.7 6.1 .9 5.2 85.0 85.8 88.5 88.9
8 6.5 5.1 5.1 7.8 89.0 87.8 87.5 89.6
9 4 8.5 5.0 2.4 7.0 87.9 87.7 88.0 89.8
10 9.9 5.7 1.9 7.6 86.1 86.8 80.8 90.9
2 2.5 6.7 4.0 10.5 87.6 86.9 85.0 88.6
6 5.0 5.4 4.0 8.9 85.2 88.5 87.5 89.7
8 7.5 6.1 2.7 9.1 87.5 87.6 89.7 90.8
6 6.2 4.2 5.5 9.5 88.9 89.4 89.0 88.8
8 7.6 5.5 1.9 7.0 88.1 88.0 89.5 90.6
5 4.6 5.6 5.4 14.2 86.4 88.5 84.0 87.1
5 0.6 6.1 6.8 15.5 90.2 87.6 84.9 86.4

 

Actual Yield
Calculated Yield
Actual Total Loss
Calculated Total Loss

QaOU'N

8

Loss, Skin Loss, Yield, and Total Loss

45

 

 

Yield Total Loss

Lye Steam Lye Lye

Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled

Halves b H lves d Whole Halves d
46.9 0.1.. Act. 0.1.. Act? 0.1. Act? 0.1..

% 7% 75 5% %

83e7 83e7 30e1 29o? 25e7 ‘-'” 26.0 17e2
85.5 85.5 54.1 55.4 25.7 24.5 27.6 27.6
80.6 79.8 51.4 55.0 27.5 29.4 52.6 55.5_
85.4 92.1 57.8 57.2 28.0 25.8 50.0 22.6
78.8 84.7 20.9 20.9 21.7 20.5 26.8 21.5
78.7 79.6 28.1 26.0 24.7 24.6 52.4 51.6
76.2 88.5 21.5 25.4 25.9 21.9 27.1 15.5
85. 5 85.8 26.4 25.1 22.6 21.7 25. 5 26.9
85.9 84.8 26. 5 26.5 22.0 21.5 27.5 26.5
71. 5 84.7 22.1 25.2 14.7 --'- 54.4 22.0
85. O 86.1 25.1 25.5 15.0 21.5 25.7 22.7
84. 0 85.4 25.2 24.6 50.7 21.6 25.0 25.8
78. 8 74.1 20. 6 21.5 21.8 18.1 26.5 25.6
74o 7 84e8 27.2 22e1 20e5 "" 33e1 25e5
82.0 84.6 24.0 25.8 25.2 22.2 50.9 27.9
85.6 84.7 21.4 20.9 20.6 20.8 26.4 25.4
85.2 86.1 22.1 22.2 20.5 19.1 24.1 26.6
78.5 79.4 25.8 22.0 24.0 21.0 50.1 29.1
77.9 78.5 18.6 21.2 2205 21e0 30e2 29e6

 

~—_—

'———-

Table

Effect of Harvest Maturity on Pit Lose

 

 

Elberta
Pit Loss Net Loss
Days
to Steam Lye Lye Steam Lye Lye
Ripen Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled
Halves Whole Halves Halves Whole Halves
76 %

17 12e1 13e1 13.1 13e1 """"' """'"“
19 15.4 15.4 12.9 18.4 15.6 14.5
15 11.5 10.5 10.0 50.2 18.6 15.9
15 10.5 10.0 7.9 24.5 17.4 16.0

9 7.4 8.9 8.2 10.5 9.7 6.9

11 7.8 8.4 8.2 14.4 15.1 15.1

7 7.8 9.1 7.9 11.5 11.8 4.6

9 8.2 8.2 8.0 15.2 10.1 11.8

12 10.1 10.2 12.0 15.1 11.7 15.1

8 7e1 7e5 7e5 11e8 -'-' 6e7

9 7.5 7.8 6.9 12.0 12.0 9.9

10 7.5 7.2 7.0 12.7 15.4 10.6

2 6.4 7.4 7.7 8.5 7.1 5.8

6 6.1 6.5 6.5 10.5 8.6 9.1

8 6.5 6.5 6.5 11.6 15.7 15.7

6 6.4 7.7 5.8 11.0 10.5 11.0

8 6.7 7.5 6.9 11.1 10.4 10.4

5 6.1 7.5 6.4 10.8 8.7 9.4

5 6.5 6.8 6.2 8.9 7.5 8.1

 

2 Input of 11 oz.

9
Net Loss, Drained Weight, and Flavor Score

 

fi—

Drained Weight Flavor Score

 

St e am Lye Lye St eel Lye Lye
Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled Peeled
Halves Whole Halves Halves Whole Halves
OZe oz. oz. CV8. avg. avg.
a a
14.5 12.1 12.1 2.55 2.55 2.55
14.6 15.5 15.2 2.66 2.55 2.55
15.8 15.8 14.2 2.16 2.50 2.67
15.5 14.5 14.5 2.66 2.66 2.67
15.9 14.0 14.4 5.16 5.55 5.50
15.8 15.7 14.0 5.16 5.16 5.17
15.6 15.8 14.6 5.66 4.00 4.00
15.6 15.8 15.8 5.50 5.85 5.67
14.5 14.5 14.5 2.55 ---- ----
15.7 11.48 14.5 5.50 5.55 5.55
14.0 14.0 14.5 5.66 5.85 5.67
14.1 14.0 14.4 5.55 5.55 5.50
15.6 15.8 14.0 5.67 5.50 5.50
15.6 10.6a 15.9 4.55 4.50 4.55
15.8 15.6 14.1 4.15 4.55 4.55
15.8 14.0 14.5 5.85 5.85 5.67
14.0 14. 14.5 4.00 ---- ----
15.6 14.0 15.8 4.00 4.00 4.55
15.5 15.5 15.4 5.50 5.55 5.17

 

48

56065050050 650050 0

50065556050 .

.oa.6.0550 56665556050 050050 44

 

 

0000. .000. nu: nun 156.0 05.45 04.05 .6. 5005.; 0.65.60
0550. 0500. us: In- 00.0 50.05 06.05 m .565 5.2
6000. 08.. an: un: 100.5 00.00 00.00 6 .665 5.5.6
500.: 0056.: 40.6 00.4 4465.6 00.60 60.00 m 05.5»
0000.: moo. 50.6 00.0 4405.000 00.0 00.0 m 5.65 0590
0566. 0000. nu. In. 00.5 «5.0. 05.0 a 6.65 550
00000& 00000m m0 R 0500> .mk0 .w><

.55 88.50 .6566 .0 .2 0.5..0 0.5..0

n h 00uo0005m e0mfi0m ehA £0000

 

0000 0003 £003 :0000005500 000 0000050> Mo 000h0mn¢

00>0m 000m :0 hp055902 u00>50m no vacuum

00 00309

49

0060000050 06005056050 050050 0*

 

 

 

00:000005Q 0:00505cw5m *

500000 0

MWmmfidono 0

00.0 00.5 0000.65 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 60.00 0 05050

65.0 00.5 0000.00 50.0 nun 00.0 nu: 00.0 0:. 0 0000 6500

nun 1:: 00.0 05.0 nu- 60.0 nu- 00.0 us: 0 0000 050

Ill mHoH *mH.n NwofiH Ill NOowd III mwonH II! .No pflwdmg Uofladha

nun nu: 05.0 00.05 nun 60.55 nun 00.05 nu: 0 0000 002

00.0 06.0 0000.0 60.00 00.00 00.00 66.50 00.00 00.00 0 .095 50000
05 00 00500 .000 mo500 m0o0 00500 .000. 00500
OQQWQsH 05m Okrfldm Oh.“ OHOHE Chg UWHOOW 509W

 

dpnonam no h0505002 pmobpmm 00 acouum

HH oanaa

50

mafiaaaannOo panHMHanm hanmam **

69*

 

*5>¢. mom.
**mn>.l III
«game. sun
**m¢©. III

«we. ono.
**mom.l III
**§mb. It:
$.0th . It...

aoauuacmmoo pamofimfizmfim

Haspo<

\mmmaasoaao
*mn>.u *mom.u m caofiw
mom. nun R mmoq qum
**mom. nun w mmoq pfim

**mom. nua.uo pnmfiog oosfiunn

 

 

 

¢$n¢>. nu- sfinmb. uuu 2*wom. us: R mmoq uoz
wwo. mam. «mom. *xmpm. **m>m. *goam. m anon Hapoa
.904 .oaao .po4 .oaao .po4 .oaao
n nobwmm n oHoma n coawom
voHoom aha veaoom aha adopm
dpnonam

anon pH“; spa: nofipaflopaoo

NH oHndB

13
11
Per Cent
Pit Loss
7
5

 

Figure I
Hale Haven Peaches

Harve s t Matu rity

 

 

Regression Lines of Pit Loss on Wilt Loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"m“ "" " ; m' ’7“ "'“‘"fi
1 2
, l l
' f l
i l ' 1
1 l l u
’ .mwudu—a 4A# fl_._«
' i x
I ! ‘
. l i
\ ‘ !
3 I 1
14 l i x '1 A
l l u l
l ' /
a l /
X
x x 3‘ ,6. / ,4/
’/ / l ' L/r- -_ __.
,v 4‘ f l //r
/ / ’2']-
. “Ll / //' i
I /V l ‘
/X/ j/o// x I :
/" . x 3
o X l t
l _ __ 1___ _fi_. {
Steam peeled
a +4 +4 y = 6.03 + .lGx 5: .52
E +*** Lye peeled }
y = 7.08 +.1:>x :h 1.42 }
Lflws w 3.. WW-.- -J
5 10 15 20 2

Per Cent Wilt Loss

 

5.2

Figure 11
Elbe rta Pe ache 5

Regression Lines of Pit Loss on Wilt Loss

 

 

 

 

I ,
s l [ 7
l t
l . 1 . //
, § 3 ’/
I o x /
1 , /,/’$// " ,
5 l / / I/

 

\\
\.

11l~

 

Per Cent
Pit Loss

 

 

 

 

.a—W “an..." -wrm.-p “m

 

 

 

57_ 1 ,_-h. . -wajflw_.-u -1 "--M.
l c l l v .
I +- - ~ . Steam peeled y = 4.7 + .40): $1.11
' +~.- . 1— Lye peeled whole y = 5.8 + .34x :1: 1.32
L a .. Lye peeled halves y = 5.3 + .34x5k 2.08
5 10 15 20 25

Per Cent Wilt Loss

Per Cent
Skin Loss

53

Figure III
Hale Haven - Elberta
Harvest Maturity

Regression Lines of Skin Loss on Wilt Loss
with Lye Peeled Method

-._..._..... ._
o I I

-+ . . vHale Haven whole y 4.1/)5 - .134x :1: 2.20

‘4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\ + x A a Elberta whole y = 5.3 - .33x =|: .92
. .\"’ “Elberta halves y = 13.8 — .619); i pic;
I I ' o I
10 i.-. ,_%____\_._ _ __ .__ _ i i I
I ' I I
I I o ‘.
. \ I
' . x O\ I
I o \ I
8 ‘ Y 3 ——— \~ —~ —~ —* ——~«— —— ——
O l
I \ f
0 ° 0 ' \ I ,
I , I
I I \' I I I
x I , \. x i
4 _ fi--———\._ _
\ I I
|
I ' I
\ x I .
I \\\ \ I
I 5‘ \
4: . x. ;\ ._. "—“—““I“‘"““ - —
I \ x ‘Ix.\\r I 6\ . I
I I \ Ix"? I \ ‘ I
' I \ ’ ' \\ I I
I x x X I , \x‘-‘ I I
2" : :1 - ' _li ‘\‘-i I
. “I X k I K I i x
'. I \ I ‘ I \
I I \ - \o \_
. . \ I\
I ' I \
‘ I X \ I I
I I \ r ' I \\
I I ' \'\ ‘
l 4 L 1 ' 5 __-X3 ___ .__
5 10 15 20 25

Per Cent Wilt Loss

54

Figure IV
Hale Haven - Elberta
Harvest Maturity

Regression Lines of Yield on Wilt Loss

_ ., ,- . ..-—.- - __ __ _.___....., ...»—.. n---“ 4... a,
M
I l

 

 

w fl.“ . -_ -_ 4)..

 

 

 

l
I
— .— —. ~—_~..__L_._...—_—--

 

 

 

 

Per Cent ‘ I .
8O ‘ - j
Yield I I I
I X 3
I I
I O I
I
75 i I a;
I
70 I

 

 

 

 

-' ' *‘ - Steam peeled Hale Haven y = 87.63 — .1’I7x i 1.93
+ I we Steam peeled Elberta y = 90.03 - .45xzh 1.96

I _...-_I._ I I

A-.—-. _ ~— ——

5 10 15 20 25

.—‘...- - .wt-.-

Per Cent Wilt Loss

Per Cent
Total Loss

Figure V
Hale Haven

Ha rve s t Maturity

55

Regression Lines of Total Loss on Wilt Loss

 

 

I

 

—I

19.35 + .523xd: 2.79

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I +—°—‘—* Steam peeled y
. +* “it Lye peeled y = 18.62 + .392x'l: 3.10
I .
40 -_- fl. WWW—I..- __ .. I
I I
I
I I I
l I .
%I “i-- I_.*HMI
I I I
I I I
I I X
I I I
i .,/ I
30 _--_—._-+... -_ I- --_.-_ -_.-../ - I
I I . ” I
I I ” i
i I //’ x I
I I o /x‘/ o / I I
I x I , / / I
c I , / I
- I 4- l " I
25 - / / r I
o //,/ Ix/ I
g " I I?! / X ‘
I /I / ,9 ’ I I X
- / .,‘I f x . I
. , I 3
x I 3
I X f
I I
I_ I , -_--_- - -_ _ -I---- .-_.--j
5 10 15 20 25

Per Cent Wilt Loss

Per Cent
Total Lo 5 s

Figure VI
Elbe rta

Harve st Maturity

Regression Lines of Total Loss on Wilt Loss

 

I
I

 

 

T

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40 ‘ “—
35 I
i
X.
30' -__ ‘*
I
I
z /
25 i ,7/ xi /
x //’r
' i
I

 

 

 

 

 

 

56

20 i /
I I
Q ...-._._»—+ Steam peeled y = 17.4 + .969)! i 2-47 -
’ ++ x + Lye peeled Whole y = 21.1 + .324): i: 2.43
= I I I
i— I '- I A
5 10 15 20 25

Per Cent Wilt Loss

Figure VII
Hale Haven
Harvest Maturity

Regression Lines of Net Loss on Wilt Loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
i. r
i
!
17 L_. MW: fin, _ a _
l
15 f ,
i
/ ‘
Per Cent 13 F_-___ +__ ___+_. F l , _,. l
Net Loss
/' ' x ! §
/ x ' . 4
X // I : I l
. / I l ;
ll-jrh- 4 rd —~-~~ _4 t ~ “—4 M ed
| ,/
P {f/ X , I 1 g
l , l/// i t .
o l
I r. - z e z 1
/ ,1] i t, i
/ 1’; ‘ i _'L 4
9 / ’ ! l a i
/ . . r . . f
/ i E + H * Steam peeled y = 6.58 + .54 i
I + r i‘ r Lye peeled y = 7.43 + .49): i=1 2.40
| I 3 '
_L ’LW... l .-. ‘-_.!._ ---_-..___ _ ._...II ‘. “at...“_g__.__,m ,_ ___.__J
5 10 15 20

Per Cent Wilt Loss

25

57

:h 1.71

17

15

Per Cent 13
Net Loss

11

Figure VIII
Elberta
Harvest Maturity

Regression Lines of Net Loss on Wilt Loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

Per Cent Wilt Loss

I ,' X i ,
1 / / /
3 '. 1/ i I.
: , [/1 X // I I
a I 1.1 a: -_ --_..._‘/. _- ..._-_ a
I / , .
I / / 3
I / I 0/ I
I / o f I
I ’ / I I
I / ' .
" / / I
1 1? r14 I f “~fl’
:, / ., I
/ / o
I I I i I
g .; /
I k / / x
l_-_‘_._9L-19-1 If a”
V '
I y’ [I /
’ / >5 3
fig" ‘ ""f’ / 1 I x
I0 / ' / /
II /V°.___- “L”w L1- ;
’ f / I, i
f x/ Q, I '
r”! /0 x// i
I ’/ / o i
/°f I _ I .
fi/ ’t— w--- +--~-~ : , ——--—’- — ‘ 7 e , e- I
/ x’ ' l
A/ / ~44++ Steam peeled y = 7.03 + .708): :1: 1.94
° ' " *1 x x- Lye peeled whole y = 5.75 + .58x :1: 2.26
x / I ‘9 --‘* ' 4+ Lye peeled halves y = 5.59 + .59it 3: 2.52
x 0 i - 1 . 1-.
5 10 15 2.0 2.5

59

Figure IX
Hale Haven
'Harvest Maturity

Regression Lines of Drained Weight on Wilt Loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.
15.
Drained 14.
Weight
14.0
13.5 1%
Steam peeled y = 13.56 + .066x :1: .25
‘ ++** Lye peeled y = 13.52 + .072x :t .98
5 10 15 20 25

Per Cent Wilt Loss

60

Figure X
Elberta
Harvest Maturity

Regression Lines of Drained Weight on Wilt Loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"9"“ I ‘ F I ' , -_ I ___-_ I
I ' ‘ ' Steam peeled y = 13.48 + .041): :h .328
T '* ' “ " Lye peeled whole y = 13.51 + .061): :1: .33
I'“ ' Lye peeled halves y = 13.78 + .55): :t .31
15.5—‘—-—+;—- .- 'I'_" _ .- . __. L. V...
I I
I : o
: I X
I I
15.0 I as w , “no.1“; AIM/L- _.
/
I I i [,1 /
I I I f/ /
I I I , " /
I / /
- I ° ‘ I /.
Drémed 14.5 ------ , L % / a//_-___ - _- w
Weight ‘ a (I / ;/
. o ! / / / ‘
/ '0 / _ ’
I 0 00 o / x _/
i , /I / ‘
O . /
I// Xx/
14.OP*-+- -~/-:va—IHI~———,«o—+— // / - «we. ~w_*-
I OI? o / / [Xx/I X I:
/X +x/. is if; I '
/ - x
/ 0 x
//: OI 0 0X ‘
13.5% T IF I H
o I .‘ I
' I E . I
I ' I
’ ‘ I
I I I I
5 10 15 , 20 25

Per Cent Wilt Loss

61

peeled whole Hale Havens. No significant difference was
noted in drained weights between the lye peeled and steam
peeled Hale Havens. There was a highly significant correl-
ation between the drained weight and the wilt loss of the -
steam peeled and lye peeled peaches.

The mean drained weight for the Elberta peaches was
15.82, 14.02, and 14.22 per cent respectively for the steam
peeled halved, lye peeled whole, and the lye peeled halved
peaches. There was no significant difference between the
three methods of peeling. A medium.correlation was found
between the three methods of preparation and wilt loss
(figure IX and X).

Product Evaluation. The flavor scores based on a
possible five points for an excellent product ranged from
1.55 to 4.44 for both the steam and lye peeled Hale Havens.
The flavor scores for the Elbertas ranged from 2.16 to 4.55,
2.55 to 4.50, and 2.55 to 4.55 for the steam peeled halved,
lye peeled whole, and lye peeled halved peaches respectively.
From tables 7 and 9 it is noted that the score for flavor in
all cases increased as the time needed for ripening decreased
and that the best flavored peaches were those requiring three
to six days to ripen. Peaches requiring less than three days
to ripen were lacking in peach flavor and were given scores

similar to those requiring seven to nine days to ripen.

62

The fruit which was slightly green and difficult to steam
peel, peeled easily with the hot lye solution. These latter
peaches when evaluated, however, were less acceptable than the

riper fruit due to a greenish cast on the surface of the fruit.

. Ripening Study

The fruit descriptions for the representative samples
of peaches from each harvest lot are summarized in table 12.
The temperature and humidity ranges in the ripening cabinets
are given in table 15.

'Hale Havens only were used for the steam and lye peeling
studies with the various ripening conditions.

The greener fruit ripened for six days at 75° F. and
85° F. steam peeled readily. The peaches ripened at 950 F.,
although having a deep yellow color, did not peel readily.

The riper fruit steam peeled readily after three days at

75° F. and 85° F., moderate humidity, while the fruit ripened

at 85° F. high humidity and 950 F. moderate humidity, required
five days and that at 95° F. high humidity required seven days.
The skin on the highly blushed portion of the peaches was tender
and fragmented in peeling. No trouble was encountered in the
lye peeling operation.

The skin loss of the lye peeled fruit was significantly
lower than that of the steam peeled peaches and the losses
from the fruit ripened six to ten days were less than that of
the fruit ripened three to seven days. The pit loss of the

steam.pee1ed peaches ripened for three to seven days was

11

(‘I

65

significantly lower than that of the lye peeled fruit. No
significant differences were found between the pit losses of
the steam peeled fruit ripened six to ten days and the lye
peeled peaches ripened three to seven or six to ten days. No
significant correlation was found between wilt loss and pit
loss for the steam and lye peeled peaches ripened from three
to seven days or the lye peeled peaches ripened for six to ten
days.

The calculated yields of the peaches ripened three to
seven days and six to ten days were 86.08 and 87.06 per cent
respectively for steam peeling and 89.28 and 89.54 per cent
respectively for lye peeling. The yields of the lye peeled
peaches were higher than those steam peeled. There were no
differences between the respective ripening times.

No significant differences were found between the total
losses of the various treatments. However, the peaches
ripened three to seven days tended to have less total loss
than those ripened six to ten days. This was particularly
true for the lye peeled fruit. The net loss showed similar
results to that obtained for total loss. The net loss of the
lye peeled fruit ripened for three to seven days was signifi-
cantly lower than that of the fruit ripened for six to ten
days. .

A high positive correlation was found between the wilt.
losses and drained weights of the steam peeled peaches and

for the lye peeled peaches ripened for six to ten days when

Table 15

HARVEST MATURITY MEASUREMENTS

Hale Haven

 

 

Measurement 6-10 Days 5-7 Days
Weight (gms.) 99.0 150.0
Ground Color (avg.) 2.7 5.7
Blush (per cent) 58.0 78.0
Shade of blush Med. Med.-

Dark
Ring size (ins.) 2.4 2.7
Circumference (cms.) 18.5 20.7
Pressure test (1bs.)
Back 9.3 6.1‘1
SUtur. 10e9 50 6a
Cheek 12.2 7.8a
Diameter (cms.)
Suture 5.7 6.5
Longitudinal , 408 5.0
Cheek 5.6 602
Flesh color 5.1 5.9
Pit browning (per cent) 19.5 59.0
Pit pigment Light Light-
Med.
Split pits (per cent) 5.0 5.0
Tenderometer
Halves, Not Peeled 55.5 55.2
Peeled 54.1 7.5
Quarters, Not Peeled 61.2 55.6
Peeled 48.8 6.0
Slices, Not Peeled 96.0 51.8
Peeled 80.0 57.5
Cubes, Not Peeled 96.0 54.8
Peeled 68.5 54.5
Soluble solids (R.I.) 12.9 11.4
Total solids (per cent) 15.8 15.2
pH 3.62 3.7

 

a .457inch. plunger

64

55

 

 

.m
.m
.m

.m
.m

we mouse mm m.hmsm.em heaeassm swam
me oeuoe me h.mm-m.ee assesses epeeeees
em amuse m.mm mmnmm heaeassm swam
oe cease mm mmaem hpeeassm .peeeees
mm Hones he ee-ee hpaeaaem swam
we Hmume he mates assesses oeeeoeez
.ae .eo .ae .me
eweae>< emceMII. eweno>4 emcem

 

soapaesoo mafiaomam seem mom
esopuaoaSoa Hespod

compo: weasemfim noem pom
assessem opaeeaem Heseee

 

eeap.s mdaeeaem
noem you nemaem hpaoaasm use eaoaeaemaoa

ea eases

66

Table

Effect of Ripening Conditions on Wilt
Total Loss, Net Loss, Drained

Hale
(Three and Five

 

Ripening Wilt Pit Loss Skin Loss Yield
Conditions Ripened Lgss Stgam L%e Stgam Lye St%am Lye

 

75 M.H.* 5 5.5 6.5 7.0 4.7 5.5 89.0 89.5
5 10.0 6.6 7.4 5.9 5.6 89.5 89.0
75 H.H.** 5 4.2 6.5 7.6 4.5 5.8 89.4 88.6
5 5.9 6.4 7.1 4.1 5.5 89.5 89.4
85 M.H. 5 10.6 6.6 8.6 6.8 1.4 86.6 90.0
5 15.7 6.8 6.5 5.7 5.2 89.5 90.5
85 H.H. 5 6.1 6.5 6.4 10.8 2.7 82.9 90.9
95 M.H. 5 12.5 6.5 7.8 11.9 6.5 81.6 85.9
5 19.1 6.9 8.4 6.0 1.5 87.1 90.1
95 H.H. 5 8.5 5.9 7.1 12.0 5.1 82.1 89.8
5 11.6 5.7 8.4 14.6 5.0 79.7 88.6

 

* Moderate Humidity
*4 High Humidity

15

Loss, Pit Loss, Skin Lass, Yield,
Weight, and Flavor Score

Haven

Days to Ripen)

 

 

Drained Flavor
Total Loss Net Loss Weight Score
Steam Lye Steam Lye Steam. Lye Steam Lye
02. OZ. avg... avg.
2305 20.2 1301 10e3 15e4 1308 ‘ 4.16 4.00
22.8 20.6 15.5 10.7 14.0 14.4 4.66 4.00
19.5 19.9 9.0 9.0 15.8 15.8 4.00 4.16
20.6 15.9 10.7 5.9 15.8 14.5 4.16 4.55
26.7 20.9 14.7 12.0 15.9 14.5 5.66 5.67
24.5 20.0 15.1 11.6 14.4 14.8 5.85 5.85
27.0 20.8 10.9 12.5 15.8 15.6 5.85 4.00
52.7 28.5 16.6 16.0 15.9 14.0 5.00 5.16
50.2 27.8 19.8 19.8 14.4 14.4 5.50 5.67
56.7 26.2 20.5 16.9 12.8 15.5 2.85 2.55
59.1 28.6 21.2 18.5 15.1 15.5 5.66 5.00

 

68

Table-

Effect of Ripening Conditions on Wilt
Total Loss, Net Loss, Drained

Hale

(Six to Ten

 

Ripening Wilt Pit Loss Skin L038 ‘Yleld
Conditions Ripened Loss Stiam. L%e Steam, Lye Steam Lye

 

75 M.H.* 6 11.7 7.9 7.4 4.0 1.1 88.1 91.5
8 16.4 7.0 8.5 5.6 0.9 89.4 90.8
10 19.0 7.8 7.8 5.5 0 88.7 92.2
75 H.H.** 6 8.5 7.7 8.1 4.2 1.9 88.1 90.0
8 10.7 7.4 8.7 4.5 2.5 88.1 88.8
10 12.4 7.0 7.2 4.4 5.1 88.6 89.7
85 M.H. 8 26.7 8.5 9.2 4.5 0.8 87.2 90.0
10 28.7 9.2 10.6 4.5 0 86.5 89.4
85 H.H. 6 10.6 6.7 7.9 6.0 2.1 87.5 90.0
8 14.1 7.4 7.8 4.7 10.4 87.9 81.8
10 19.7 7.8 7.1 4.0 2.1 88.2 90.8
95 M.H. 8 28.5 8.6 7.5 6.4 1.6 85.0 91.1
95 H.H. 6 11.9 7.5 7.9 10.5 2.4 82.2 89.7
8 24.6 7.5 8.5 6.4 1.6 86.1 89.9
10 22.4 8.0 9.8 7.8 2.7 84.2 87.5

 

* Moderate Humidity
*4 High Humidity

16

Loss, Pit Loss, Skin Loss, Yield,
Weight, and Flavor Score

Haven

Days to Ripen)

 

Drained Flavor

Total Loss Net Loss .Weight Score
Steam L%e Steam Lye Steam Lye Steam Lye
% % % 0‘. CZe avge avg.
25.6 20.6 12.1 15.1 14.5 14.5 5.85 5.67
25.2 24.1 14.5 16.4 14.8 14.5 5.50 5.50
26.1 27.7 16.9 20.4 14.8 14.5 2.16 2.55
22.8 20.4 11.9 11.5 14.0 14.1 5.50 5.50
22.0 21.4 11.4 11.4 14.4 14.4 5.55 5.00
22.4 24.2 12.4 15.2 14.5 14.1 2.50 2.55
50.6 28.5 21.2 21.2 15.5 15.5 1.85 2.00
52.1 50.1 22.5 22.5 15.4 15.4 1.85 1.55
24.8 25.6 15.5 14.7 19.1 15.9 5.50 5.55
25.8 51.8 15.4 16.2 14.6 14.1 2.55 5.16
27.1 29.7 17.6 21.8 14.8 14.1 1.67 1.67
54.4 50.1 25.7 25.7 15.2 15.2 1.67 1.85
55.9 28.6 20.2 19.5 15.5 15.4 1.67 1.85
41.5 56.4 50.8 28.7 15.6 15.9 1.85 2.00
58.2 59.7 25.8 50.0 14.0 15.4 1.55 1.55

 

70

Table
Effect of Ripening

Analysis of Variance and

Steam Peeled Lye Peeled

5-7 Days 6110 Days 5-7 Beige-10 Days

Pit Loss % 6.59 7.72 7.48 8.24
Skin Loss % 7.52 5.24 5.25 2.21
Yield (Calculated) % 86.08 87.06 89.28 89.54
Total Loss % 27.55 28.55 22.55 27.79
Net Loss % 14.99 17.85 15.00 19.07
Drained Weight oz. 15.75 14.47 14.05 14.29
Drained Weight oz. 15.95 14.68 14.17 14.47

(Omitting 95 High
Humidity)

 

% Significant Difference

4* Highly Significant Difference

a Significant
b Highly Significant

17

Conditions on Hale Haven

Correlation with Wilt Loss

71

 

 

F L.S.D. Steaaneeled Lye Peeled
Value 5% 1% 5~7 Days 6-10 Dgys 5-7 Days 6-10 Days
15.56% .58 .78 .471 .759 b .465 .465
10.5144 2.00 2.67 .057 .114 -.506 -.228

5.81** 1.96 2.61 -.166 -.285 -.042 .120

2.54“ --- --- .455 .665b .619 3 .665b

5.444 4.12 --- .705 8 .805b .715b .805b
--- --- --- .462 .546 .411 .572 b
5.844% .58 .51 .854 b .891 b .570 .807 b

 

'72

the 95° F. high humidity samples were omitted. The drained
weights of the peaches ripened at 95° F. high humidity were
significantly lower than the peaches of the other ripening
conditions.

Apparently the tissue of the fruit ripened at this
temperature and humidity was altered, and its ability to
recover from shrinkage in the canning process was impaired.

The peaches ripened for the shortest period of time,
especially those at high temperatures, were light yellow
with an occasional greenish cast. The peaches ripened for
longer periods showed full yellow and those ripened at 850 F.
and 950 F. as the ripening time increased, developed a deeper
yellow color tending towards orange-yellow. The greatest in-
crease in depth of color was at 95° F. with moderate humidity.
The pit cavities of the fruit ripened at 85° F. and 95° F.
for the longer time developed an orange-red color and this
color tended to penetrate into the flesh. This was most
pronounced in those fruits ripened under moderate humidities.

Flavor. The peaches ripened at 75° F. attained a better
flavor than those ripened at higher temperatures. The best
flavor was attained in the fruit ripened for five days with
moderate humidity. The quality of the peaches ripened at
859 F. for the shorter periods were almost as good as those
ripened at 75° F., while those fruits ripened at 95° F. with

low humidity were lowest in flavor.

73

The greener fruit ripened at 95° F. required eight days
of ripening before the development of their best flavor,
whereas identical fruit required six days at 750 F. and 85° F.
temperatures to develop an optimum flavor.

A rapid deterioration was noted after the fruit reached
its maximum.flavor within the ripening conditions. This was
most pronounced in the greener fruit and in the fruit ripened
at the high temperatures, and was characterized by a decrease
in the intensity of the peach flavor and tendency for the
development of a musty or stale flavor.

These results indicate that the lower ripening temper-
atures are more desirable when peaches are held after the
stage of proper processing ripeness is reached.

The flavor of the steam peeled peaches was similar to
that of the lye peeled peaches in all of the ripening condi-
tions.

E3125. The characteristic flesh color of the canned
products obtained under the different ripening conditions
showed that the higher ripening temperatures yielded products
of a deeper yellow color than did the lower termperatures and
the yellow color deepened with the longer ripening periods.

A deep yellow to orange color was characteristic of the
peaches ripened at 95° F. and medium to deep yellow for the
fruits ripened at 850 F. and 750 F.

74

The ripening conditions also had a pronounced effect on
the color of the pit cavity. The higher ripening temperatures
and longer ripening periods increased the intensity of the red
color, and in the fruit ripened at 950 F. the red pigment
diffused into the surrounding tissue. There was also some
internal breakdown, characterized by a brown discoloration
of the pit cavity, in the greener fruit ripened at 95° F.
with low humidity.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This study was carried out during the 1952 season to
determine the effect of harvest maturity and ripening
conditions on steam and lye peeled canned freestone peaches.
The peaches were picked from trees of similar vigor and only
two pickings were made from each tree.

Measurements were made on a representative sample from
each lot. The major portion of the lots were placed in
specially constructed cabinets to ripen at a room.temperature
of 70° F. with a relative humidity of 60 - 70 per cent. A
few lots were ripened at 85° F. and 950 F. with a moderate
humidity. The fruit was processed when it was fully ripe
using steam and a hot lye solution as the two methods of
peeling.

The other phase of the experiment was to determine the
effect of lye and steam peeling of peaches ripened at 75° F.,
850 F. with a moderate and high humidity for each temperature.
For this purpose, peaches of two maturities were placed in
special cabinets and ripened for three and five days and six
to ten days, respectively. Both methods of peeling were again
used in the processing of these peaches.

The following conclusions can be drawn from the data ob-
tained during the 1952 season:

1. The per cent blush increased as the fruit matured,

but it did not prove to be a satisfactory index of maturity.

76

2. The use of pressure tests in conjunction with the
ground or undercolor was found to be the best index of
maturity.

5. A high positive correlation was found between the
pressure tests, using a 0.512 inch diameter plunger, and the
tenderometer using peeled halves, quarters, slices, and cubes
of peaches.

4. The wilt loss during ripening for the harvest study
was directly proportional to the length of the ripening period.

5. The flavor evaluation of the fruit increased as the
time needed for ripening decreased with a minimum of three
days as a limiting factor.

6. The ripening study showed that the best light and
bright peach color was obtained with the peaches ripened for
three to seven days. The color deepened with an increase in
the length of the ripening period and a higher temperature
and lower humidity.

7. The peaches-ripened at 750 F. with moderate and high
humidity conditions gave fruit with the best flavor.

8. The peaches which were processed while the flesh was
green to any extent could not be successfully steam peeled.
The same peaches could be lye peeled without difficulty but
a green cast was apparent in the flesh.

9. There was no significant difference between the
flavor of the lye and the steam peeled peaches harvested and

ripened under identical conditions.

10. It was determined that either steam or lye
peeling was satisfactory for the processing of Michigan

freestone peaches.

77

1.

2.

5.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agricultural Statistics, 1952. United States Printing
Office. '

Addoms, R. N., G. T. Nightingale and M. A. Blake.
Development and ripening of peaches as correlated with
physical characteristics, chemical composition, and
histological structure of the fruit flesh. II.
Histology and microchemistry. N. J. Agr. Exp. Sta.
Bu1., 507, 1950.

Allen, F. W. Physical and chemical changes in the
ripening of deciduous fruits. Hilgardia, 63581-444,
1952.

Baker, G. A. and L. D. Davis. Growth of the cheek
diameter of peaches. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.,
57:104-110, 1951.

Bigelow, W. D. and H. C. Gore. Studies on peaches:
I. Compiled analysis of peaches. II. Changes in
chemical composition of the peach during growth and
ripening. U. S. Dept. of Agr. Bur. Chem., 97:5-21,
1905.

Blake, M. A. A device for determining the texture of
peach fruits for shipping and marketing. N. J. Agr.
Exp. Sta. Cir. 212, 1929.

. Some results of flesh texture with
peaches. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. 301., 500-505, 1928.

 

, O. W. Davidson, B. M. Addoms and G. T.
Nightingale. Development and ripening of peaches as
correlated with physical characteristics, chemical
composition and histological structure of fruit flesh.
I. Physical measurements of growth and flesh texture
in relation to market and edible qualities. N. J.
Agr. EXPe Sta. Bu1e, 525, 19310

 

Brown, H. D. Explosion method peels vegetables and
fruits. Quick Frozen Foods, 6:12-50, 1944.

Brush, F. R. Oral communication, 1955.

11.

12.

15.

14..

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

25.

79

Caldwell, J. S. and C. W. Culpepper. Further studies
in the utilization of eastern freestone peaches. Fruit
Prod. Jour., 25:170-173, 1944.

Coe, F. M. Peach harvesting studies. Utah Agr. Exp.
Sta. Bu1., 241, 1953.

Crawford, A. E. The Effect of harvest maturity on the
processing quality of Elberta peaches in Michigan.
Thesis for Masters Degree, Michigan State College, 1951.

Culpepper, C. W. and J. S. Caldwell. The canning
quality of certain commercially important eastern
peaches. U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bu1., 196, 1950.

Fisher, D. V. and J. E. Britton. Maturity and storage
studies with peaches. Sci. Agr., 21:1-17, 1940.

Guadagni, D. G. Adaptation of the tenderometer for the
quantitative determination of firmness in calcium treated
apple slices. Food Tech. 4:319-521, 1950.

Haller, M. H. and P. L. Harding. Effect of storage
temperature on peaches. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bu1., 680, 1939.

. Fruit pressure testers and their practical
applications. U.S.D.A. Circ., 627, 1941.

 

. Handling'and transportation problems in
relation to the peach industry. Nat. Peach Council
Annual, 19500

 

, and M. A. Smith. Pressure test readings

as a maturity index for Elberta peaches. Preliminary
report of studies made in 1948 and 1949. H. T. and S.
Office Report No. 290, U.S.D.A. B.P.I. S.A.E. Beltsville,
Md., 1955.

 

. Handling, transportation, storage and
marketing of peaches. U.S.D.A. Bib. Bu1., 21, 1952.

 

Johnston, S. Peach culture in Michigan. Mich. Agr. Exp.
Stae CiI'Ce 5111., 177' 19520

Lee, F. A. and G. D. Oberle. The use of the tenderometer
for the detenlinstion of the firmness of lpples. peaches
and pears. Fruit Prod. Jour., 27:244:247, 1948.

1"

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

51.

32.

35.

34.

35.

80

Magness, J. R. and G. F. Taylor. An improved type of ,
pressure tester for the determination of fruit maturity.
U.S.D.A. Circ., 550, 1925.

, and Diehl et al. The ripening, storage
and handling of apples. U.S.D.A. Dept. Bu1., 1406,
1926.

 

Martin, W. M., R. H. Lueck and E. D. Sallee. Practical
application of the tenderometer in grading peas.

Canning Age, 19:140-].55, 19580

Mclunn, R. L. and M. J. Dorsey. Investigations on
delayed harvesting of Elberta peaches. Trans. I11.
Hort e 803 e ’ 68:491‘502 , 1934.

Moon, H. H., C. W. Culpepper, J. S. Caldwell, and
A. T. Myers. The effect of the load of fruit on
the trees upon compasition, flavor, and dessert
canning quality of twelve varieties of peaches.
Fruit Prod. Jour., 21:45-60, 1941.

Morris, 0. M. Peach maturity at harvest as related
to quality. Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bu1., 266, 1952.

Mottern, H. H. and A. M. Neubert. Canning soft-ripe
freestone peaches. Fruit Prod. JOur., 19:293-296, 1940.

Neubert, A. M., M. K. Veldhuis and W. J. Clore. The
effect of harvest maturity on the canning quality of
western grown Elberta peaches. Fruit Prod. Jour.,
25:292-297, 1944.

, and M. K. Veldhuis. Ripening Washington
grown Elbérta peaches for canning. Fruit Prod. Jour.,
25:557-560, 1944.

 

. Research shows
effects of maturity and storage on canned Pacific
Northwest freestones. Western Canner and Packer,
56, 9:25-55, 1944.

 

Neubert, A. M. and G. H. Carter. Factors influencing
color of canned freestone peaches. Western Canner and
Packer, 58:11:56-59, 1946.

, J. H. Schultz, C. L. Bedford and

.G. H. Carter. Processing Washin ton grown freestone

peaches. Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta. C rc., 65, 1948.

36.

37.
38.
39.
40.
41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

81

Nightingale, G. T., R. N. Addoms and M. A. Blake.
Development and ripening of peaches as correlated
with physical characteristics, chemical composition,
and histological structure of the fruit flesh. III.
Microchemistry. N.J. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bu1., 494, 1950.

Official and Tentative Methods of Analysis Assoc. of
Official Agr. Chem. 6th ed., 1945 Washington, D. C.

Olsen, I. T. Wetting agents speed chemical peeling.
Food Ind. 15 (4):51-52, 1941.

Snyder, J. C. Picking peaches for profit. Wash. State
00110 Agr. Exp. Sta. Enle, 393, 19490

Upshall, W. H. Fruit maturity and quality. ,Ont. Dept.
Agre Bu10j 447, 19370

United States Standards for Grades of Canned Freestone
Peaches, July, 1942.

Van Blaricom, L. 0. Effect of syrup density on the
flavor rating of canned peaches. Proc. Amer. Soc.
Horte 8010’ 50:229-230, 19470

_ , and A. M. Musser. Varieties of
peaches for processing. South Carolina Exp. Sta.
Annual Report, 1948.

 

________. Processing
peaches in South Carolina. S.C. Exp. Sta. Bu1.,
562, 1950.

 

Veldhuis, M. K. and A. M. Neubert. Freestone peach
varieties for canning in Washington. Fruit Prod. Jour.,

23:229-233. 1944.

. The effect of storage
on the canning quality oijlberta peaches. Fruit Prod.
JOur., 233 276-281, 1944.

 

Willison, R. 8. Studies in maturity and cold storage of
peaches. Sci. Agr., 21:624-645, 1941.

Woodroof, J. G., E. Shelor, R. S. Cecil and I. Atkinson.
Preparation of peaches for freezing. Ga. Exp. Sta.LBu1.,
251, 1947. \x . ........

{\b, \ ;§;_
. Preserving fruits for freezing.I. Peaches.
a.4Exp. SEE. Bule, 165, 19300 k‘; C \R "

. Peeling peaches with acid.1 _FruitTProd.;k
Joure, 28: 296, 1949. x \\ - '

 

 

)

2' “M13. H.H....QVK‘v w/e.
..... . . ...... a...

.

.1 .L

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7 .. _ .
13.3 -
Is

I

x . .4
a...»
_I I

..

 

 

0’3""? (19%." 3"”
5). \J H J; -.L"
I
f‘ V
"1.7.".1. C: thMZS'eliiY L
.A-V-J ° V
-fl(‘\l" C
D_H3 strong

‘0
.‘0 .L-

Q
“/72 CL"? S .

-13: a: M...

._ A? _

u / '
j! ‘ 6. (I. .‘ fl Laid-"v“. 1}

JUL 3 1

““t/ 153—me”

 

II“.
II

it: ReiRY r" a C‘ I" 7:3

UVVU

0
C-

J...-

D:se“%«,. awn ”thaw-v. -
...L‘_J .1--.;-‘ ‘..._ -~ . e.)

—

. ‘ . 1‘ J.
4 q-1 hat, “\fjf" ' 5" ..
*C-b C.‘--n .L-L‘ ~ 0‘)--€‘

/ L4" / _.

r
..-_.. _-_ 7, 77‘7.__
7*rb- ——-._.— -fi,.~7_..~4 ,, , ,
l ;

 

 

I HHHH3HHHHHHHHHIHHHHHHHIHHHHIHHHHH

 

31293 02446 6843