J. agric. Engng Res.

(2001) 79 (3), 299}305

doi:10.1006/jaer.2001.0704, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on
PH*Postharvest Technology

Compensation for Water Loss in Vacuum-Precooled Cut Lily Flowers

Tadhg Brosnan; Da-Wen Sun
FRCFT Group, Department of Agricultural and Food Engineering, University College Dublin, National University of Ireland, Earlsfort Terrace,
Dublin 2, Ireland; e-mail of corresponding author: dawen.sun@ucd.ie

(Received 26 July 2000; accepted in revised form 6 February 2001; published online 23 April 2001)

Vacuum cooling is a widely used rapid cooling method for vegetables. However, the inherent weight loss limits
its use in other areas of the horticultural industry. In the current study, cut white lilies (¸ilium 0white elegance')
were vacuum cooled in pilot-scale equipment with di!erent treatments to reduce weight losses. The vase life of
the cut #owers was monitored following the cooling treatments for two procedures: cold stored and unstored
#owers. The results show that by spraying adequate water on the cut #owers prior to vacuum cooling, weight
loss can be eliminated. Spraying water also improves the cooling rate leading to lower temperatures. It was
found that vacuum cooling is e!ective for extending the vase life of cut #owers especially when stored #owers are
sprayed with water before cooling.
 2001 Silsoe Research Institute

1. Introduction It is the inherent problem of water loss during the

Fresh fruits, vegetables and ornamental crops are liv-
ing tissues and will begin to deteriorate following harvest.
So as to maintain quality and extend shelf life, they are
cooled immediately after harvest. This process is de"ned
as precooling (Brosnan and Sun, 2001), which removes
the "eld heat immediately after harvest (Nonnecke, 1989).
Precooling is a critical part of the proper temperature
management process (Nowak & Rudnicki, 1990; Turk
& Celik, 1993). There are di!erent precooling techniques
available for vegetables and cut #owers in the horticul-
tural industry. At present, forced-air cooling, cold room
cooling and to a lesser extent vacuum cooling are the
principal techniques for the precooling of freshly har-
vested cut #owers.
Vacuum cooling is a rapid cooling technique exten-
sively used for cooling some agricultural and food prod-
ucts (Thompson & Rumsey, 1984; Sun & Wang, 2000,
McDonald & Sun, 2000; McDonald et al., 2000). Recent
research includes vacuum cooling of cut da!odils (Sun
& Brosnan, 1999). The results show that vacuum cooling
of dry da!odils was successful with an average cooling
time of 65 s. However, as a result of the vacuum cooling,
weight losses were encountered in the #owers which is
undesirable when trying to extend their postharvest life.
0021-8634/01/070299#07 $35.00/0
cooling process that has restricted the wider use of
vacuum cooling. Vacuum cooling is achieved by the
evaporation of moisture from the produce. Since the
evaporating moisture is seen as the primary refrigerant
(ASHRAE, 1994), the quantity of heat removed from the
product is directly related to the amount of water evapor-
ated o! the product surface. Therefore, the greater the
temperature drop required, the larger is the weight loss.
Theoretically, a product with a speci"c heat capacity of
4 kJ/kg K and a heat of vaporization of 2)4;10 kJ/kg
would lose 1% moisture for each 63C reduction in tem-
perature (Barger, 1961). However, the weight loss is also
a!ected by many factors. Fordham and Biggs reported
that temperature reductions averaged 5}5)53C for each
1% weight loss, regardless of the product cooled
(Fordham & Biggs, 1985). Prevention of moisture loss is
of fundamental importance for the retention of fresh
produce quality, as any reduction in moisture content
will lead to shrivelling, wilting, and loss of consumer
appeal (Hackett et al., 1987). Consequently, ways of pre-
venting or restricting this loss were investigated with
some success in the vacuum cooling of fresh vegetables
such as lettuce (Nonnecke, 1989; Sun, 1999). One particu-
lar technique is by spraying water onto the product
before it is placed into the cooling chamber (Sun
299  2001 Silsoe Research Institute
300 T AD H G BR O S NA N; D A - W EN S UN
& Lecoq, 1999); thus the free moisture evaporates during
cooling, resulting in product-temperature reduction. Turk
and Celik (1993) demonstrated that when the produce was
vacuum precooled to 23C in packaging having good va-
pour permeability, weight losses were reduced to 1)5}2%.
In spite of these contributions, little research has been
conducted on techniques to control the weight loss of cut
#owers during vacuum cooling. This is the purpose of the
present work.
2. Materials and methods
Untreated cut white lilies (¸ilium &white elegance')
were used in the experiments. The #owers were received
directly from a local grower and transported from
the cultivation area to the refrigeration laboratory
within 2}3 h. All the #owers were harvested at the same
stage of development which is when the "rst #ower is
fully coloured but not yet open (commercial harvest
stage).
The vacuum cooler used was a specially designed pilot-
scale research model as described in Sun and Brosnan
(1999). It consists of many components, which include
two vacuum pumps, a vacuum chamber, instrumenta-
tion, control valves and a control panel. The instrumen-
tation includes a vacuum pressure transducer with digital
display and "ve T-type welded tip/polytetra#uoroethy-
lene (PTFE) insulated thermocouples with a diameter of
0)2 mm. All the experimental data were recorded auto-
matically using a LabVIEW data acquisition system that
includes SCXI2+ (Signal Conditioning eXtensions for
Instrumentation) 1000, 1100, 1200, and a personal com-
puter. The weights of the samples were recorded using
a digital weighing balance (Sartorius, ¸P5200P Goettin-
gen, Germany) with an accuracy of 10\ g.
Prior to cooling the #owers, stems were recut to
a length of approximately 600 mm and defoliated
150 mm from the stem end. The cut #owers were cooled
from an initial stem temperature of 22)53C (standard
deviation of 1)28) to 53C or for a "xed cooling period of
10 min in the vacuum cooler. The stem temperature was
recorded as this is the most di$cult part of the plant to
cool and also because measuring the #ower temperature
(i.e. petal temperature) is di$cult without damaging the
thin fragile membrane of the petals. Figure 1 shows the
arrangement of the thermocouples in the #ower prior to
cooling in the vacuum cooler. The required storage tem-
perature for cut lilies is 1}23C (Rij et al., 1979) but the
"nal stem temperature of 53C was chosen as the stem
temperature lags behind the #ower temperature during
the cooling process. By setting the stem temperature at
this level, chilling injury of the #owers and leaves will be
more or less avoided (Gao et al., 1996).
Fig. 1. Arrangement of the thermocouple positions in the yower
prior to vacuum cooling
In commercial precooling operations, the temperature
at the seven eighths cooling time is seen as the most
practical value because the product temperature at this
point is acceptably close to the required storage or trans-
portation temperature (Wills et al., 1998). The seven
eighths cooling time is the time required to reduce the
temperature di!erence between the product and the stor-
age temperature by seven eighths. Consequently, #owers
are usually cooled to the temperature at seven eighths
cooling time with the remaining temperature reduction
achieved in cold storage (Thompson et al., 1998). There-
fore, at the seven eighths cooling time a temperature of
approximately 53C, +(initial temperature (22)53C) minus
the storage temperature (23C)) multiplied by one eighth
plus the storage temperature equals 4)63C, is reached (Rij
et al., 1979). The "xed time period is also chosen because
the advantages of the rapid cooling associated with vac-
uum cooling would have reduced signi"cantly if the cool-
ing time was longer than 10 min under these particular
laboratory conditions. In separate experiments, individual
cut #owers were cooled in an industrial refrigerator with
a mean air temperature of 3)53C in approximately
17$1 min, hence it would be more di$cult to advocate
the use of vacuum cooling technique as a suitable
precooling method for cut #owers if the cooling period
exceeds 10 min.
After vacuum cooling, the cut #owers were subjected
to two di!erent regimes: (1) unstored i.e. placed in a vase
immediately after cooling and evaluated at room condi-
tions; and (2) cold stored i.e. stored at 3)53C for 24 h
following cooling and then displayed and assessed at
 CO M PEN S A TI ON F O R W A TE R LO S S I N CU T L I L Y FL O W ER S 301

Table 1
Di4erent cooling procedures applied to the cut 6owers

Treatment Regime after vacuum cooling

(a) Vacuum cooled dry (10)* i.e. unwetted (1) Unstored: #owers displayed at room conditions
(b) Water sprayed prior to vacuum cooling (10)
(c) Water absorption during vacuum cooling (2) Cold storage of #owers at 3)53C for 24 h prior to display
(i) uncovered (10) (ii) covered (10) at room conditions

*Number of replications shown in brackets; note: "nal chamber pressure in vacuum cooer"2)5 mbar.

room conditions. Within these regimes di!erent treat- 3. Results and discussion
ments applied to the cut #owers were: (a) vacuum cooled
dry i.e. unwetted; (b) water sprayed prior to vacuum 3.1. =eight loss
cooling; and (c) water absorption during vacuum cooling.
In water spraying, #owers were directly and uniformly Table 2 summarizes the weight loss for the di!erent
sprayed with distilled water using a laboratory sprayer. cooling treatments de"ned in Table 1. The results show
Approximately 5 ml of water was sprayed onto each that the dry-vacuum-cooled #owers gave the greatest
sample examined using this procedure. The water ab- weight loss among the four vacuum-cooling treatments
sorption technique comprises both covered and un- with an average recorded weight loss of 5)4% with a stan-
covered methods. The covered method entails placing the dard deviation of 0)96% and a standard error for an
stem of the #ower into a graduated cylinder containing average of 0)33. This is because the evaporated water is
distilled water and then placing the cylinder with the supplied by the #ower structure itself. As there is no
#ower into the vacuum chamber where the #ower is external supply of moisture available, the water loss is
cooled. In this method, evaporation of the surface water directly proportional to the weight loss and hence to the
in the cylinder is prevented by plugging the mouth of the temperature reduction.
cylinder with an impervious material, hence the water Spraying the cut #owers with water prior to cooling
temperature remains constant. In the uncovered proced- gave the best results with no loss of fresh weight, since the
ure the cylinder is not plugged thus allowing vapour water activity a of a wetted surface is equal to one
U
evaporation to occur. For comparison, #owers were (Campanone et al., 1995). Consequently, the free water
cooled in a refrigerator at 3)53C and an average air#ow available evaporates o! the plant surface thereby reduc-
rate of 0)01 m/s until they reached the required storage ing weight loss in the cut #owers during cooling. How-
temperature and were then displayed at room conditions ever, when the volume or mass of water applied to the cut
following storage for 24 h. Untreated cut #owers dis- #owers was very small and failed to completely wet the
played at room conditions were used as controls. Table 1 entire surface of the #ower, weight losses were recorded.
summarizes all the di!erent procedures examined. For example, if only a small volume of water was applied
In all the experiments, the thermocouples were in- ((5 ml) a weight loss of 1}3% was recorded. For com-
serted into the stems of the samples at various positions parison, the weight loss of the refrigerator-cooled cut
to a depth of 3}4 mm prior to cooling. All the samples
were weighed dry, prior to cooling and immediately after
cooling to determine the weight loss. The percentage Table 2
weight loss was expressed as the weight change divided Weight loss encountered during vacuum cooling for di4erent
by the unsprayed initial fresh weight. The vase life of the treatments
cut #owers was measured when the #owers were dis- Treatment Weight loss, %
played in distilled water at room conditions of 20$23C,
with natural window light and 40$5% relative humid- Average S.D.
ity similar to those in experiments by Shelton et al. (1996).
The termination of the vase life was based on the objec- Vacuum cooled dry 5)4 0)96
Water sprayed 0 *
tive assessment of a panel of three potential consumers Absorption
on the following criteria (Sun and Brosnan, 1999): (a) the (i) Covered 4)46 1)30
condition of the #oral material; (b) the #owers' colour; (ii) Uncovered 2)80 1)68
and (c) the turgidity and appearance of the leaves and Refrigerator cooled 5)26 0)23
stem.
302 T AD H G BR O S NA N; D A - W EN S UN
Table 3
Comparison of the vase life of the 6owers following the di4erent treatments
Treatments
Average
Vacuum cooled dry (unwetted) 9)6
Water sprayed 11
Absorption cooling
(i) Covered 10)8
(ii) Uncovered 10
Refrigerator cooled * *
Control 9)5
#owers was evaluated, giving a weight loss similar to dry-
vacuum-cooled treatment with an average value of 5)26%
with a standard deviation of 0)23 and a standard error of
0)1. This is due to the need for an extended cooling period to
remove the "eld heat from the #owers, and therefore the
#owers are exposed to the conditions within the refrigerator
for a longer period, thus resulting in increased moisture loss
and subsequently greater weight losses.
The weight loss by the covered absorption treatment
was intermediate, with an average value of 4)5% and
a standard deviation of 1)3. The slight reduction in weight
loss may be due to the water absorbed during cooling. The
cut lilies only absorbed 1}2 ml of water during cooling,
hence this treatment may be more bene"cial to #owers
that can absorb and release moisture more readily i.e.
#owers with less protective structures such as less cutin
and wax content on the surface (Milburn, 1979). For the
uncovered treatment the temperature reduction of the
lower parts of the stem is very rapid due to the free water
available for evaporation, while the remainder of the
#ower is cooled at a rate similar to dry cut #owers hence
some weight loss is experienced. The reduced weight losses
recorded for uncovered absorption ranged from 0% to
4)5% with an average of 2)8%. This is because of a slight
absorption of water and may also be due to the formation
of some ice crystals on the part of the stem submerged in
the graduated cylinder adding to the weight of the #ower
following cooling. The variation in weight loss "ndings
may be attributed to the fact that the #ower samples used
in the experiments were not all of exactly the same weight
and size hence the surface area di!ered giving various
cooling rates and weight losses.
3.2. <ase life evaluation
The vase life of the cut #owers is of vital importance to
the #oricultural industry. As consumer awareness and
Vase life, d
Unstored Cold stored
S.D. Average S.D.
0)5 11)4 0)5
1 13)3 0)6
0 11)7 0)7
0)2 11)5 0)6
10)8 1)5
0)4 * *
sophistication are ever increasing, higher quality and
better value products are demanded to satisfy the cus-
tomer needs and hence ensure repeat purchases (Tijskens,
1995). In the experiments, the vase life of the cut #owers
was assessed following the di!erent treatments as shown
in Table 3. The results show that the water-sprayed
#owers gave the best results for both experimental re-
gimes (cold stored and unstored). The average vase life
was 11 and 13)3 d, respectively, for unstored and cold-
stored #owers. For the unstored #owers there exists no
signi"cant di!erence between the uncovered absorption
and the water-sprayed treatments; however, both treat-
ments gave 1}1)5 d longer vase life than the other treat-
ments that were examined. The greatest in#uence of the
water spraying treatment is seen for the stored regime
where the vase life of the #owers is extended by 14)1%
over the next best treatment which is uncovered absorp-
tion and 33)3% over the controls. The extension of the
vase life by this margin is considered as being bene"cial
since this is the period when the #owers are in transport.
For example, it takes 2}3 days for #owers exported from
the Netherlands to arrive in Ireland. One di$culty with
this treatment is that if excess water is sprayed on the
#owers prior to cooling, chilling injury may occur there-
by reducing the vase life of the #owers. This may be
avoided if the correct amount of water is applied and the
cooling process and the #ower temperature are carefully
monitored and controlled. The cut #owers that were
vacuum-cooled dry only and displayed at room temper-
ature gave a similar vase life to the controls with the
average values being 9)6 and 9)5 d, respectively. This is
only slightly longer than the normal vase life expected for
cut lilies of 5}9 d as indicated by Armitage (1993). How-
ever, the #owers which were vacuum cooled dry and
placed in cold storage after cooling had a vase life of
11)4 d. Freshly cut #owers were also placed in the refrig-
erator to determine its e!ect on the subsequent life of the
#owers. The average recorded vase life value for these
 CO M PEN S A TI ON F O R W A TE R LO S S I N CU T L I L Y FL O W ER S
Fig. 2. Typical cooling curves for the diwerent techniques examined. (stem 1st node before yower): , dry vacuum cooled;
sprayed before vacuum cooling; , covered absorption; , uncovered absorption; , refrigerator cooled
samples was 10)8 d. The results of the water absorption
treatment in both covered and uncovered circumstances
show no major di!erence between the two treatments for
the cold-stored regime; however, the uncovered treat-
ment gave longer vase life of approximately 1 d for the
unstored regime. The #owers cooled by the covered treat-
ment had a vase life of 10 and 11)5 d for the unstored and
cold-stored situations, respectively, with the uncovered
absorption cooling treatment having a vase life of 10)8
and 11)7 d, respectively, for the unstored and cold-stored
regimes. However, the boiling e!ect observed in the grad-
uated cylinder for the uncovered treatment, results in
large droplets spattering over the lower leaves of the
plant, which evaporate preferentially causing frostburn
spots on the product (Malpas, 1972) and gave the lower
leaves an unsightly appearance. Both water absorption
treatments have the potential to be very successful tech-
niques for vacuum cooling cut #owers that can release
and transport moisture more readily than lilies (Gao
et al., 1996). Also, the distilled water could be replaced
with a pulsing #uid hence combining both pulsing and
cooling, thus reducing the time the #owers are held by the
grower after harvest.
3.3. Cooling cycle
Figure 2 shows the comparison of the cooling curves of
the di!erent cooling treatments. The longest cooling time
and hence the slowest cooling rate was by the refriger-
ator-cooling treatment, the cooling time from a harvest
temperature of about 223C to an average storage temper-
ature of 3)53C was between 17 and 21 min with the
303
, water
average being 18)7 min. All the vacuum cooling treat-
ments examined were extremely quick in comparison
with the refrigerator-cooling treatment. The initial cool-
ing rate of the vacuum-cooling treatments was very rapid
with temperature reduction of approximately 103C in less
than 60 s. However, depending on the moisture available
for evaporation, the "nal stem temperature achieved after
the set time of 10 min is high for vacuum-cooled tech-
niques except for the water-sprayed treatment, usually
between 63C and 83C with a high value of 103C in one
case. This is illustrated by Mc Donald and Sun (2000)
who state that temperature drop ceases at a point where
there is no more free water available for evaporation.
This is evident from the cooling curves and is noted by
the levelling out of the curve. The dry vacuum cooling,
covered absorption and the uncovered absorption plots
give uneven curves once the initial temperature decrease
is reached. This unevenness is referred to as &bouncing'
(Freeman, 1984) and may be a result of small quantities
of moisture moving to the surface of the #ower causing
a small sudden decrease in temperature.
The temperature reduction for water-sprayed #owers
was very fast, although, the initial cooling rate was not as
rapid as in other treatments. This is due to the lower
temperature of the water applied and hence the lower
chamber pressures necessary for evaporation to begin;
the cut #owers stem temperature could be reduced to
2}33C in 80}110 s. As the water-sprayed #owers cool
very quickly, it is important to monitor the process
closely, since the temperature of the leaves may be re-
duced to below 23C even though the stem temperature
may be considerably higher i.e. slower cooling. Chilling
injuries may occur as a result of very low leaf and #ower
304 T AD H G BR O S NA N; D A - W EN S UN

Fig. 3. Cooling curves at diwerent positions in the stem for the uncovered treatment; , stem end; , stem 2nd node before yower;
, stem 1st node before yower; , stem preyower; , chamber pressure

Fig. 4. Cooling curves of water-sprayed vacuum-cooled yowers with diwerent quantities of water applied prior to cooling;
, adequate water sprayed; , small quantity of water sprayed; , chamber pressure

temperatures. This was observed by the appearance of
dark blotches on the leaves and #owers, which generally
appeared only on #owers held at room temperature fol-
lowing vacuum cooling. The di$culty associated with
this technique is that if adequate water is not applied to
completely wet the surface of the #ower before cooling,
not only will weight loss be encountered but also the
cooling period will be extended and slower cooling ob-
served.
The covered absorption method gave similar results to
the dry cooled #owers. For the uncovered treatment,
better cooling rates were achieved especially for the lower
part of the #ower stem but similar cooling rates were
observed for the remainder of the plant. Evaporation
from the water surface in the container results in an
improved temperature reduction for the lower part of the
stem. Figure 3 shows the variation in temperature of this
treatment at di!erent positions in the #ower stem.
Figure 4 shows the comparison of the cooling curve of
vacuum-cooled cut #owers with di!erent quantities of
water sprayed over a cooling time of 120 s. Even though
the initial cooling rate is rapid the curve with the small
 CO M PEN S A TI ON F O R W A TE R LO S S I N CU T L I L Y FL O W ER S
quantity of water sprayed does not decline to a very low
temperature, as the moisture available is not adequate for
evaporation. The slight increase in temperature seen in the
curve with a small quantity of water sprayed after approx-
imately 20 s is the result of the #ash point (Freeman, 1984),
which is the moment when the water begins to vaporize
and evaporative cooling starts. This is not observed in the
curve for the #ower with adequate water sprayed as the
moisture counteracts the temperature-rise e!ect.
4. Conclusions
The experimental results con"rm that vacuum cooling
is a high weight loss process but the weight loss can be
reduced or eliminated by some techniques. Spraying the
#owers with water prior to vacuum cooling is the most
e!ective technique for that purpose. The absorption
treatments showed some potential to reduce the weight
loss of the cut lilies during cooling but may be more
suitable for other #owers that can absorb and release
moisture more easily. The water-spraying treatment is
also the most e!ective and best method for accelerating
the overall cooling rate of the cut #owers.
The results also show that none of the treatments have
a major in#uence on the vase life of the cut lilies held at
room temperature. However, the water-spraying treat-
ment gave the best vase life results especially for the
cold-stored #owers. This is important because the major-
ity of cut #owers are transported long distances to their
markets in cold storage containers, and vacuum cooling
would maintain their quality during storage and thus
extend their subsequent vase life.
References
Armitage A M (1993). Speciality Cut Flowers. Varsity Press,
Portland
ASHRAE (1994). Methods of precooling fruits, vegetables, and
cut #owers. In: ASHRAE Handbook, Refrigeration Systems
and Applications, Parsons R A; Brandstorm A J; Tracy
L M (eds), ASHRAE Inc. Atlanta, USA
Barger W R (1961). Factors a!ecting temperature reduction
and weight loss of vacuum-cooled lettuce. USDA, Marketing
Research Report
Brosnan T; Sun D-W (2001). Precooling techniques and applica-
tions*a review. International Journal of Refrigeration, 24(2),
154}170
Campanone L A; Giner S A; Mascheroni R H (1995). The use of
a simulation software to optimize cooling times and to lower
weight losses in fruit refrigeration. 19th International Con-
gress of Refrigeration, Vol. 1, pp 121}128
Fordham A R; Biggs A G (1985). Principles of Vegetable Crop
Production. Collins Professional and Technical, London
305
Freeman C D (1984) Cost reducing technologies in cooling fresh
vegetables. ASAE Paper No. 84}1074
Gao J P; Sun Z R; Gou K; Yan X Y (1996). Methods to
accelerate vacuum precooling of cut #owers. Transactions of
the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 12 (4),
194}198
Hackett J M; Morey R V; Thompson D R (1987). Precooling of
fresh market broccoli. Transactions of the ASAE, 30(5),
1489}1493
Malpas E W (1972). Vacuum equipment for evaporative cool-
ing. Process-Biochemistry, 7(10), 15}17
McDonald K; Sun D-W (2000). Vacuum cooling technology for
the food industry: a review. Journal of Food Engineering,
45(2), 55}65
McDonald K; Sun D-W; Kenny T (2000). Comparison of the
quality of cooked beef products cooled by vacuum cooling
and by conventional cooling. LWT*Food Science and
Technology, 33, 21}29
Milburn J A (1979). Water Flow in Plants. Longman Group
Limited, London
Nonnecke I B L (1989). Vegetable Production. pp 156}157, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York
Nowak J; Rudnicki R M (1990). Postharvest Handling and
Storage of Cut Flowers, Florist Greens and Potted Plants.
Chapman and Hall, London
Rij R E; Thompson J F; Farnham D S (1979). Handling, pre-
cooling and temperature management of cut #ower crops for
truck transportation. USDA, Lea#et No. 21058
Shelton D; Walter R; Brandl M; Mendez R (1996). The e!ects of
refrigerated controlled atmosphere storage during marine
shipment on insect mortality and cut #ower vase life. Horti-
cultural Technology, 6(3), 247}250
Sun D-W (1999). E!ect of pre-wetting on weight loss and
cooling time of vegetables during vacuum cooling. ASAE
Paper No. 99}6119
Sun D-W; Brosnan T (1999). Extension of the vase life of cut
da!odil #owers by rapid vacuum cooling. International Jour-
nal of Refrigeration, 22, 472}478
Sun D-W; Lecoq D (1999). Controlling weight loss of vegetables
during vacuum cooling by pre-wetting. Irish Journal of Agri-
cultural and Food Research, 38(2), 272}273
Sun D-W; Wang L J (2000). Heat transfer characteristics of
cooked meats using di!erent cooling methods. International
Journal of Refrigeration, 23, 508}516
Thompson J F; Kesmire R F; Mitchell F G (1998). Room,
Vacuum, Transport, and Ice Cooling, Commercial Cooling
of Fruits, Vegetables, and Flowers. Division of Agriculture
and Natural Resources, University of California, Publication
21567
Thompson J; Rumsey T R (1984). Determining product temper-
ature in a vacuum cooler. ASAE Paper No. 84}6543
Tijskens L M M (1995). A generic model on the keeping quality
of horticultural products, including in#uences of temper-
ature, initial quality and quality acceptance limits. 19th Inter-
national Congress of Refrigeration, Vol. 2, pp 361}368
Turk R; Celik E (1993). The e!ects of vacuum precooling on the
half cooling period and quality characteristic of iceberg let-
tuce. Acta Horticulturae, 343, 321}324
Wills R; McGlasson B; Graham D; Joyce D (1998). Posthar-
vest: An Introduction to the Physiology and Handling of
Fruit, Vegetables and Ornamentals. University of New South
Wales Press Ltd. Sydney