Effect of Mechanized (Self-Propelled or Shaker) vs. Hand Harvest on Fruit Quality of Blueberries (Vaccinium Corymbosum L.) in Postharvest

Lobos, Germán; Moggia, Claudia; Retamales, Jorge B.; Sánchez, C.

doi:10.17660/actahortic.2014.1017.14

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As an alternative to hand harvesting, portable hand-held shaking devices (e.g., H model, BEI Inc., South Haven, MI, USA [24] and pneumatic limb shaker (Campagnola SRL, Bologna, Italy) have been used to harvest fresh market quality fruit onto a small, manually positioned catch frame [15][16][17]. However, the hand-held shaker such as the H1 berry stripper which weighs~2.4 kg has two major problems that limit its adoption: low harvest capacity and potential worker fatigue and injury.…”

Section: Mechanical Harvesting Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The BEI H1 berry stripper was attached to a long handle and weighed 4 kg as shown in Figure 6. Also, a Campagnola hook shaker on a long pole [17] that weighed 1.5 kg (not shown) has been evaluated in Chile for harvesting blueberries . The blueberry impact recording device (BIRD) sensor (a).…”

Section: Impact Measurements Blueberry Drop Tests and Bruise Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Attempts have been made to harvest blueberries with semi-mechanical harvesting systems [15][16][17][18]. In these studies, hand-held, vibrating shakers (e.g., Model H1, BEI Inc., South Haven, MI, USA) and Hook Shaker (Campagnola SRL, Zola Predosa-Bologna, Italy) were used to detach blueberries from the plant and two portable fruit catching frames placed around two plants were used to collect the fruit (Figure 2).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Holding the shaker by one hand made it difficult for a worker to use it continuously for a long period [15]. The hook shaker used in Chile [17] engaged one cane at a time limited harvest efficiency not much greater than the level achieved by hand harvesting. In a recent nation-wide grower survey conducted as part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Agriculture and Food, Specialty Crop Research Initiative Project No.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Applying New Technologies to Transform Blueberry Harvesting

Takeda

Yang

et al. 2017

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The growth of the blueberry industry in the past three decades has been remarkably robust. However, a labor shortage for hand harvesting, increasingly higher labor costs, and low harvest efficiencies are becoming bottlenecks for sustainable development of the fresh market blueberry production. In this study, we evaluated semi-mechanical harvesting systems consisting of a harvest-aid platform with soft fruit catching surfaces that collected the fruit detached by portable, hand-held, pneumatic shakers. The softer fruit catching surfaces were not glued to the hard sub-surfaces of the harvest-aid platform, but suspended over them. Also, the ergonomic aspect of operating powered harvesting equipment was determined. The pneumatic shakers removed 3.5 to 15 times more fruit (g/min) than by hand. Soft fruit catching surfaces reduced impact force and bruise damage. Fruit firmness was higher in fruit harvested by hand compared to that by pneumatic shakers in some cultivars. The bruise area was less than 8% in fruit harvested by hand and with semi-mechanical harvesting system. The percentage of blue, packable fruit harvested by pneumatic shakers comprised as much as 90% of the total, but less than that of hand-harvested fruit. The ergonomic analysis by electromyography showed that muscle strain in the back, shoulders, and forearms was low in workers operating the light-weight, pneumatic shakers that were tethered to the platform with a tool balancer. The new harvesting method can reduce the labor requirement to about 100 hour/hectare/year and help to mitigate the rising labor cost and shortage of workers for harvesting fresh-market quality blueberries.

show abstract

Section: Mechanical Harvesting Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Impact Measurements Blueberry Drop Tests and Bruise Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Applying New Technologies to Transform Blueberry Harvesting

Takeda

Yang

et al. 2017

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although pruning increased the number of marketable fruit, the selective removal of blue fruit remained a challenge. Studies with 'Meadowlark' and 'Farthing', two SHB cultivars from the University of Florida blueberry breeding program, have shown the potential for repeated harvests by commercial harvesters instead of hand harvest [5,7,8].The use of harvest aids such as handheld shakers is a low-cost option compared to more costly OTR harvesters, and handheld shakers were shown to reduce labor costs by increasing blueberry harvest efficiency [9,10]. Takeda et al [11] found that harvesting blueberries with handheld shakers in conjunction with a portable, soft catch surface frame resulted in less bruise damage than commercial OTR harvesters.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Harvest of Southern Highbush Blueberry with a Modified, Over-The-Row Mechanical Harvester: Use of Handheld Shakers and Soft Catch Surfaces

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fresh market southern highbush blueberries are typically hand-harvested which requires an extensive labor force over a relative short period of time. With rising production costs and labor availability issues, interest in mechanical harvesting options is increasing. In 2017, an over-the-row (OTR) harvester was modified to reduce purchase cost while making hand labor more efficient. The picking heads were removed and dual worker stations were added on each side of the unit. Handheld olive shakers were suspended at each station. Experimental catch plates were installed on one side of the OTR harvester and soft, inclined surfaces over the rigid conveyors on both sides. 'Meadowlark' and 'Farthing' blueberries were harvested with this system and compared to those manually harvested by a commercial harvest crew. Samples from each harvest method were then commercially cooled and mechanically harvested fruit were commercially packed to determine packout data. Fruit firmness, bruise severity and composition were determined after one day at room temperature (22 • C) and after seven and fourteen days of storage at 1 • C. Average packout was very high for mechanically harvested fruit, 87% for 'Meadowlark' and 91% for 'Farthing'. Initial firmness of both cultivars was lower for mechanically harvested fruit (208 g/mm) than hand-harvested fruit (243 g/mm). Fruit from the three treatments softened during storage, and although 'Meadowlark' remained firmer than 'Farthing' during storage, there were no differences due to catch surfaces. Hand-harvested fruit had no severe bruising (>20% of cut surface area) at harvest, increasing to 2% after seven days, while mechanically harvested fruit from both fruit collection surfaces had 3% initial severe bruising that increased to 22% during storage. 'Farthing' had slightly higher soluble solids content and significantly higher total titratable acidity compared to 'Meadowlark'. Additional modifications must be made to the next-generation OTR harvester to further reduce blueberry harvest and handling impacts.Agriculture 2020, 10, 4 2 of 15 shipments of blueberries from Mexico into the United States during this early season is reducing wholesale prices received by Florida blueberry growers. From 2009 to 2016, U.S. blueberry exports have remained flat (approximately 18,145 metric tons), while U.S. imports during that same period almost tripled [2]. SHB cultivars have historically been softer than northern highbush blueberry (NHB) (V. corymbosum) cultivars, limiting SHB to hand-harvest for fresh market. SHB are only mechanically harvested during the latter part of the season when it is no longer economical to harvest by hand. Mechanically harvested fruit may either go to the fresh or processed market depending on the cultivar and condition of the fruit. To reduce labor costs, blueberry growers in Florida, in other production areas across the United States and in major blueberry producing countries (e.g., Australia, Canada, Chile, and Poland), are increasingly showing interest in adopting mechanic...

show abstract

Why measuring blueberry firmness at harvest is not enough to estimate postharvest softening after long term storage? A review

Moggia

Lobos

2023

Postharvest Biology and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of Mechanized (Self-Propelled or Shaker) vs. Hand Harvest on Fruit Quality of Blueberries (Vaccinium Corymbosum L.) in Postharvest

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Applying New Technologies to Transform Blueberry Harvesting

Applying New Technologies to Transform Blueberry Harvesting

Harvest of Southern Highbush Blueberry with a Modified, Over-The-Row Mechanical Harvester: Use of Handheld Shakers and Soft Catch Surfaces

Why measuring blueberry firmness at harvest is not enough to estimate postharvest softening after long term storage? A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About