Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-5lx2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T10:48:06.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quality of potatoes in relation to soil and season II. The colour of the cooked potato*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. G. Wager
H. G. Wager
Affiliation:
Low Temperature Station for Research in Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Cambridge, and Department of Scientific and Industrial Research
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Samples of potatoes were collected in three successive seasons from a wide range of soil types and their liability to stem-end blackening determined.

Variety and season of growth affected the amount of stem-end blackening which developed.

All soil types gave samples with a wide range of stem-end blackening, but the average amounts of blackening in samples from different soil types were shown to differ significantly. Samples from fen, blackland, sand, gravel, limestone and chalk blackened more than those from skirt, silt, warp, clay and boulder clay.

The pH of the expressed sap of tubers was independent of the type of soil in which they were grown, but dependent on variety and locality of growth. No evidence that the pH of the tubers influenced the amount of stem-end blackening pigment was obtained.

The yellowness of the flesh of tubers showed an approximately normal distribution. Slight evidence for an effect of soil type on the amount of yellow pigment was obtained.

The work described above was carried out as part of the programme of the Food Investigation Board of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , July 1946 , pp. 214 - 221
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1946

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Brandreth, B. (1937). J. Nat. Inst. Agric. Bot. 4, 193.Google Scholar
Caldwell, J. S., Brunstetter, B. C., Culpepper, C. W. & Ezell, B. C. (1945). Canner, 100, nos. 13, 14 and 15.Google Scholar
Cowie, G. A. (1942). Ann. Appl. Biol. 29, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Findlay, W. M. (1928). Scot. J. Agric. 11, 339.Google Scholar
Monthly Weather Reps., Lond., 1943.Google Scholar
Nash, L. B. (1941). Amer. Potato J. 18, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, W. H., Salaman, R. N. & Brandreth, B. (1934). J. Nat. Inst. Agric. Bot. 3, 408.Google Scholar
Pollard, A., Kiesir, M. E., Crang, A. & Wallace, T. (1944). Ann. Rep. Long Ashton Exp. Sta. Bristol, England, 1944, 184.Google Scholar
Rieman, G. H., Tottingham, W. E. & McFarlane, J. S. (1944). J. Agric. Res. 69, 21.Google Scholar
Robertson, I. M. & Smith, A. M. (1931). Biochem. J. 25, 763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, O. & Nash, L. B. (1940). Amer. Potato J. 17, 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, O. & Nash, L. B. (1941). Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 38, 507.Google Scholar
Smith, O.Nash, L. B. & Dittman, A. L. (1942). Amer. Potato J. 19, 229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tottingham, W. E., (1939). Amer. Potato J. 16, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tottingham, W. E., Nagy, R. & Ross, A. F. (1936). Amer. Potato J. 13, 297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tottingham, W. E., Nagy, R., Ross, A. F., Marek, J. W. & Clagett, C. D. (1943). J. Agric. Res. 67, 177.Google Scholar
Wager, H. G. (1945). Biochem. J. 39, 482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wager, H. G. (1946). J. Agric. Sci. 36, 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, T. & Wain, R. L. (1943). J. Minst. Agric. 50, 425.Google Scholar