Activity 1.6 Factors affecting mango quality...Nguyen Van Phong, Nguyen Khanh Ngoc, Peter Johnson...

Activity 1.6Factors affecting mango quality

Nguyen Van Phong, Nguyen Khanh Ngoc, Peter JohnsonSOFRI

15 October 2019

Improving smallholder farmer incomes through strategic market development in mango

supply chains in southern VietnamAGB/2012/061

© Griffith University 2018 2

Introduction

Aim and purpose Identify and document relevant farm practices that are currently contributing to

quality loss Conduct additional primary research, using in market observations, to examine

product quality captured at street market stalls, in small retail outlets and within arepresentative sample of high end retail markets

Supplement observational data with qualitative interviews with buyers in retailgrocery to understand quality issues, the causes and the impact on price and salesvolume

Identify critical control points (CCP) that will impact quality based on current bestpractice knowledge.

Conduct fruit monitoring trials from farms to retailers and assess for quality loss atCCP along the chain. Identify types, causes and scale of losses


Background

Fruit ‘quality’ is a concept encompassing sensory properties (appearance, texture, taste andaroma), nutritive value, mechanical properties, safety and defects. Altogether, theseattributes give the fruit a degree of excellence and an economic value (Abbott, 1999)

In the mango chain from the grower to consumer the term ‘quality’ takes on differentmeanings. However, in each step of this chain, and the economic relevance of the variousquality traits is largely variable.

Benchmarks are used as a tool for controlling variations in the terms of quality

The quality of mango are influenced by many factors such as pre-harvests, harvest andpostharvest practices. After harvest, quality of mango can not be improved deteriorationfrom this point is known as postharvest losses.

A post-harvest loss is normally defined and measured as the amount and value lost fromwhat the fruit as a first grade could have achieved compared to its final sale price

The activity 1.6 evaluate factors affecting fruit quality benchmarks was conducted in order toIdentify relevant farm and chain practices that are currently contributing to quality loss


Desktop review

(i) Practical manual of Postharvest handling of mango in Vietnam, published byAgricultural publisher, 2017

(ii) Project report - Evaluation of agribusiness research and development opportunities for tropical fruit in southern Vietnam, published by Dr Robin E Roberts, 10 March 2015

(iii) Mango quality attributes and grade standards: a review of available information and identification of future research needs, published by Aldel A. Kader, 25 February 2018

(iv) The base quality standards of Hoa Loc and Cat Chu mangoes, developed by SOFRI in various projects funded by ACIAR and Tien Giang/Dong Thap provinces

(v) Project report – Establishment of the mango production procedures followed GlobalGAP standards for Cao Lanh district, Dong Thap province, by Nguyen Van Phong in 2011

(vi) Project report – Establishment of geographical indications for Dong Thap province's mango products, 2019


Method

Sketch out a general value chain model of mango to provide a structured lens through which post-harvest losses can be assessed.

Training to identify defects/symptoms and their causes (through literature review and consultation with experts)

Planning and conduct surveys for assessment and collection of defects/symptoms


Mango value chain

Dong Thap & Tien Giang

HCMC & Hanoi


No. Growers Address Mango cultivar1 Vo Viet Hung My Xuong, Cao Lanh, Dong Thap Cat Chu 2 Võ Việt Hương Tân Phát - Tân Thuận Đông - Cao Lanh City - ĐT Cat Chu 3 Huỳnh Thanh Bình Tân Phát - Tân Thuận Đông - Cao Lanh City - ĐT Cat Chu 4 Tân Thuận Đông _ Cao Lãnh City - ĐT Cat Chu 5 Võ Văn Lẫm Tân Thuận Đông _ Cao Lãnh City - ĐT Cat Chu 6 Nguyễn Văn Chánh Tân Thuận Đông _ Cao Lãnh City - ĐT Cat Chu

1. At farm gate

No. Packers Address Mango cultivar01 My xuong cooperative Cao Lanh District - ĐT Cat Chu 2. At local packers

No. Markets Address Mango cultivar1 Big C - Supermarket My Tho city Cát Chu2 Nam An store Thao Dien ward, district 2, Ho Chi Minh city Cát Chu3 Big C Supermarket Thao Dien ward, district 2, Ho Chi Minh city Cát Chu4 Ben Thanh Wet market District 1, Ho Chi Minh city Cát Hòa Lộc5 Small fruit retailer District 1, Ho Chi Minh city, near by Ben Thanh market Cát Chu6 Gift box retailer District 1, Ho Chi Minh city, near by Ben Thanh market Cát Hòa Lộc7 Coop Mart Cong Quynh street, district 1, Ho Chi Minh city Cát Chu8 Vin Mart district 1, Ho Chi Minh city Vin Mart

3. At HCMC

No. Wholesalers Address Mango cultivar1 Nga Tiên Long Biên Market - Hà Nội Cat Chu 2 pack house Long Biên Market - Hà Nội Cat Chu 3 pack house Long Biên Market - Hà Nội Cat Chu 4 Huỳnh Thị Vân Thuận Đông, Cao Lãnh city- DT Cat Chu

4. At Hanoi


Completed trainings for identifying defects/symptoms and their causes on mango

Collected defective mango at farm-gate and markets Conducted surveys for assessing post-harvest losses of

mango at farm-gate, local packers, markets at HCMC and wholesaler market at Hanoi.

Key results


Fruit setting

Flowering

Induce Flowering

PacloTreatment

Pruning

Harvesting

30-35 days 45-60 days

25-30 days

25-30 days

85-90 days

Young fruit

Fruit bagging35-49 AFS

Spray for preventing fruit falling28-35 AFS

FertiliserSpray Bo 2times

SNPK 70

Bud stimulation by using GA3, fertiliser & water supply

Cultivation practices

Figure 2: The flowering induction cycle of mango (vs Hoa Loc & Cat Chu)


Items Percentage(%)

Items Percentage(%)

Bagged/unbagged Bagged/yellow bag

Minor defects

1st grade 47.05 Lenticel spotting 2.32nd grade 19.41 Insect damage 2.33rd 21.17 Sooty mould 1.75Overripe 12.35 Under skin browning 1.17

Quarantine defect Skin browning 1.17Scale No Wounds 1.17Fruit fly No Misshapen 0.59

Major defects Unidentified issues 0.59Abrasion 16.5 Harvest damage 1.17Over ripe 12.23 Total fruit audited 170Sapburn 6.47 Total defects (3rd grade) 21.17Undersize/small fruit 8.8 Out of grade 32.35

Post-harvest losses at farm gate


Defects identified at farm gate


VC Level Current technology Types of loss

Farmers

• Harvesting – harvest pole• Field collection – baskets

and plastic crates• Sorting, grading and

packing• Field collection and

transport – none

Immature, overripe, abrasion, sapburn, harvest damage (bruise, punch).

Collectors/traders/exporters

• Transport – trucks, all sizes• Ambient temperature

receival go-downs • Basic mechanised handling

lines (desap, washing tank or washing machine)

• Hot treatment• Refrigerated stores

Sapburn, physical damages, chilling injury, rot diseases, dehydration.

Post-harvest practices & types of losses


Items Percentage(%)

Bagged/unbagged Bagged/yellow bag1st grade 53.112nd grade 46.89Quarantine defectScale NoFruit fly No

Major defectsAbrasion 34.46Sapburn 5.08Undersize/small fruit 3.39

Minor defectsSkin browning 0.56Wounds 1.13Total fruit audited 177Cumulative defectsTotal defects 34.46Out of grade 32.35

My Xuong Cooperative key results


No. Markets VarietiesProcess

reject fruit (%)

Fruit rots Sapburn Dehydration Immature

appearance Overripe Bruising Note

1 Big C - Supermarket Cát Chu 1-5 x dehydration (20-30 %)

2 Nam An store Cát Chu 5 – 10 x x x

rejected fruits sold as frozen pieces; anthracnose some times during year

3 Big C Supermarket Cát Chu 1-5 x x4 Ben Thanh Wet market Cát Hòa Lộc 1-5 x x5 Small fruit retailer Cát Chu 5 – 10 x x6 Gift box retailer Cát Hòa Lộc 5 – 10 x x mangoes no a big line

7 Coop Mart Cát Chu 5 – 10 x x x x

rejected fruits sold as frozen pieces; purchase every day (20-30kg)

8 Vin Mart Vin Mart x x significant dehydration Overall 5-10 4/8 5/8 5/8 1/8 2/8 1/8

Ho Chi Minh City key results


No.

Packer/GrowerMango

var.

1st grade (%)

2nd grade (%)

3rd grade(%)

Fruit rots(%)

Sapburn(%)

Abrasion(%)

Bruising (%)

Overripe fruit(%)

Total defects

(3rd grade)(%)

1 Nga Tiên Cat Chu 43.94 40.73 15.33 2.75 90-95 60-70 2.29 13.50 15.332 pack house Cat Chu 42.44 44.77 12.79 2.33 90-96 60-70 1.74 12.79 12.79

3 pack house Cat Chu

100 (small size

<250gr) 0.61 95.00 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.004 Huỳnh Thị Vân Cat Chu 2.00 2.00 0.00

Ho Chi Minh City results observed


Pre-harvest: fruit bagging – improved disease management

Harvest: harvesting technique, and field packing/grading, transportation, sap management

Local packers: post-harvest diseases control HCM: controlled ripening, cool chain management

Future research


Most of the works for this activity have been implemented and the results also obtained as the schedule. However, monitoring the post-harvest losses at identified CCPs have been not completed due to finish of mango season in the scope of value chain registered by the project.

Conclusion

Activity 1.6 Factors affecting mango quality...Nguyen Van Phong, Nguyen Khanh Ngoc, Peter Johnson...

Documents

Transcript of Activity 1.6 Factors affecting mango quality...Nguyen Van Phong, Nguyen Khanh Ngoc, Peter Johnson...