Paper · 2017 · IOSR Journal of Environmental Science Toxicology and Food Technology

Changes in Postharvest Qualities of Stored Fresh Maize (Zea Mays L.) at Tropical Ambient Condition

I. B. Oluwalana; M. O. Oluwamukomi; A. A. Badejo; et al.

9
claims
14
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The effect of passive modified atmosphere packaging on some postharvest qualities of stored fresh maize was investigated at tropical ambient temperature (282 C) and 80% RH. Changes in the appearances of husk, silk and kernel, kernel firmness, weight and microbial growth were monitored. Freshly harvested yellow maize (FHYM) served as control. Results showed that packaging film greatly affected the appearances of the husk, silk, kernel and kernel firmness compare to the control sample. The highest weight loss was observed in dehusked maize while the maize samples in packaging film had the least weight loss. Lactobacillus sp., Micrococcus liteus, Streptococcus sp., Serratia marcescens, Bacillus sp. and Saccharomyces cerevisiae were the bacteria isolated from the stored fresh maize while the suspected fungal include Rhizopus stolonifer, Penicillium notatum and Fusarium sp. Higher bacteria counts were observed in samples packaged with 25 and 30 m LDPE while the least was found in unpackaged undehusked maize. The current packaging conditions had no impact on the shelf life of fresh maize.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Packaging film affected the appearances of husk, silk and kernel compared with the control.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
packaging filme0
Outcome
appearances of the husk, silk, kernele0
Comparator
control samplee0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize (Zea Mays L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–68 · show in text ↑
e0

“packaging film greatly affected the appearances of the husk, silk, kernel and kernel firmness compare to the control sample”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 364–487 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Packaging film affected kernel firmness compared with the control.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
packaging filme0
Outcome
kernel firmnesse0
Comparator
control samplee0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize (Zea Mays L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–68 · show in text ↑
e0

“packaging film greatly affected the appearances of the husk, silk, kernel and kernel firmness compare to the control sample”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 364–487 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dehusked maize had the highest weight loss.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
dehuskede0
Outcome
weight losse0
Direction
higheste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest weight loss was observed in dehusked maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 489–543 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Maize in packaging film had the least weight loss.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
packaging filme0
Outcome
weight losse0
Direction
leaste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the maize samples in packaging film had the least weight loss”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 550–611 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Several bacterial taxa were isolated from stored fresh maize.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Outcome
Lactobacillus sp., Micrococcus liteus, Streptococcus sp., Serratia marcescens, Bacillus sp. and Saccharomyces cerevisiae were the bacteria isolatede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Lactobacillus sp., Micrococcus liteus, Streptococcus sp., Serratia marcescens, Bacillus sp. and Saccharomyces cerevisiae were the bacteria isolated from the stored fresh maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 613–788 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rhizopus stolonifer, Penicillium notatum and Fusarium sp. were suspected fungi in stored maize.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Outcome
suspected fungal include Rhizopus stolonifer, Penicillium notatum and Fusarium sp.e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize (Zea Mays L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–68 · show in text ↑
e0

“the suspected fungal include Rhizopus stolonifer, Penicillium notatum and Fusarium sp.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 795–881 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Samples packaged with 25 and 30 m LDPE had higher bacterial counts.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
25 and 30 m LDPEe0
Outcome
bacteria countse0
Direction
Highere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize (Zea Mays L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–68 · show in text ↑
e0

“Higher bacteria counts were observed in samples packaged with 25 and 30 m LDPE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 882–960 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Unpackaged undehusked maize had the least bacterial counts.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
unpackaged undehuskede0
Outcome
bacteria countse1
Direction
leaste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the least was found in unpackaged undehusked maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 967–1017 · show in text ↑
e1

“Higher bacteria counts were observed in samples packaged with 25 and 30 m LDPE while the least was found in unpackaged undehusked maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 882–1017 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The current packaging conditions had no impact on fresh maize shelf life.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
current packaging conditionse0
Outcome
shelf lifee0
Direction
no impacte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The current packaging conditions had no impact on the shelf life of fresh maize.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1019–1099 · show in text ↑

storage · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 9 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.