Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:02:32.333Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the storage of potatoes: I. Changes in composition during storage in clamps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

E. M. Crook  and
D. J. Watson
E. M. Crook
Affiliation:
Rothamated Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
D. J. Watson
Affiliation:
Rothamated Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Changes in the percentage of dry matter, sugars, starch and nitrogen present in Arran Banner and Majestic potato tubers during storage in clamps until July or later were studied in two seasons. In the first season, the ascorbic-acid content and the distribution of nitrogen between three fractions (insoluble, soluble coagulable, soluble non-coagulable) were also determined. In the second season, weighed samples of tubers were introduced into the clamps, so that changes in absolute amounts of the different constituents present in the tubers or sprouts could be measured. The effects of removing or retaining the soil cover on the clamps after early April were compared.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 38 , Issue 4 , October 1948 , pp. 440 - 457
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1948

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

Barker, J. (1931). Rep. Food Invest. Bd., Lond., p. 86.Google Scholar
Barker, J. (1934). Rep. Food Invest. Bd., Lond., p. 133.Google Scholar
Barker, J. (1936a). Rep. Food Invest. Bd., Lond., p. 174.Google Scholar
Barker, J. (1936b). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 119, 453.Google Scholar
Barker, J. (1937). Rep. Food Invest. Bd., Lond., p. 175.Google Scholar
Barker, J. (1938). Rep. Food Invest. Bd., Lond., p. 193.Google Scholar
Barker, J. & Wallace, E. R. (1946). J. Pomol. 22, 189.Google Scholar
Conway, E. J. & O’Malley, E. (1942). Biochem. J. 36, 655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denny, F. E. & Thornton, H. C. (1940). Contr. Boyce Thompson Inst. 11, 291.Google Scholar
Hanes, C. S. (1936). Biochem. J. 30, 168.Google Scholar
Harris, L. J. & Olliver, M. (1942). Biochem. J. 36, 155.Google Scholar
Karikka, K. J., Dudgeon, L. T. & Hauck, H. M. (1944). J. Agric. Res. 68, 49.Google Scholar
Lampitt, L. H., Baker, L. C. & Parkinson, T. L. (1945). J. Soc. Chem. Ind., Lond., 64, 18.Google Scholar
Müller-Thtogau, H. (1882). Landw. Jb. 11, 751.Google Scholar
Neuberger, A. & Sanger, F. (1942). Biochem. J. 36, 662.Google Scholar
Pett, L. B. (1936). Biochem. J. 30, 1228.Google Scholar
Rolf, L. A. (1940). J. Agric. Res. 61, 381.Google Scholar
Smith, A. M. & Gillies, J. (1940). Biochem. J. 34, 1312.Google Scholar
Street, H. E., Kenyon, A. E. & Watson, G. M. (1946). Ann. Appl. Biol. 33, 1.Google Scholar
Van Der Plank, J. E. (1936). Biochem. J. 30, 457.Google Scholar
Zilva, S. S. & Barker, J. (1938). Rep. Food Invest. Bd., Lond., p. 199.Google Scholar