Next Article in Journal
Feature Disentangling Autoencoder for Anomaly Detection of Reactor Core Temperature with Feature Increment Strategy
Next Article in Special Issue
MYB Transcriptional Factors Affects Upstream and Downstream MEP Pathway and Triterpenoid Biosynthesis in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Previous Article in Journal
A Risk-Data-Based Human Reliability Analysis for Chemical Experiments with Hazardous Processes
Previous Article in Special Issue
Transcriptome Analysis Reveals the Involvement of Alternative Splicing in the Nitrogen Starvation Response of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Underutilized Fig (Ficus carica L.) Cultivars from Puglia Region, Southeastern Italy, for an Innovative Product: Dried Fig Disks

1
Department of Soil, Plant and Food Sciences, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Via G. Amendola 165/A, 70126 Bari, Italy
2
CREA, Council for Agricultural Research and Economics, Research Center for Viticulture and Enology, 70010 Turi, Italy
3
Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, University of Bari Aldo Moro, 70124 Bari, Italy
4
Foundation ITS Academy Agroalimentare Puglia S.C., 138 Cda Marangi n. 26, 70010 Locorotondo, Italy
5
Centre of Research, Experimentation and Training in Agricultural CRSFA ‘Basile Caramia’, Via Cisternino 281, 70010 Locorotondo, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2023, 11(5), 1485; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11051485
Submission received: 18 April 2023 / Revised: 5 May 2023 / Accepted: 12 May 2023 / Published: 14 May 2023

Abstract

:
Fig fruits have recently received more attention by consumers for their quality as either fresh or dried fruits and, consequently, growers are becoming more interested in the cultivation of this species. Figs are mainly consumed as processed fruits (dried, marmalade, jam, etc.), but limited attention has been paid to new possible processing applications of several local cultivars grown in Mediterranean countries. This study aimed to investigate both the morpho-pomological characteristics and consumer sensory ratings (two groups: students and technicians) for four fig cultivars processed as a new type of product, ‘dried fig disks’. The results showed that three out of the four cultivars (Processotto Nero, Natalese Nera, and Verde di Natale) had good pomological characteristics such as fruit weight and skin color, as well as easy peeling, yield, ripening time, and TSS. The same cultivars received positive hedonic scores for appearance (>5 on a 10-point hedonic scale), flavor (4–6 on a 10-point hedonic scale) and taste (6–7 on a 10-point hedonic scale). The overall score was positive for Processotto Nero, Natalese Nera, and Verde di Natale (>5 on a 10-point hedonic scale), whereas one cultivar, Comunione, was less appreciated (<5 on a 10-point hedonic scale). The flavor–sensory attributes most appreciated were black-red fruit, cooked, grassy, and floral; fig off-flavors were perceived as rancid only by students and to a limited extent. Consumer overall acceptance toward dried fig disks was mainly driven by the acceptability of appearance of the new product, together with pleasant flavor and taste.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Ficus carica (Moraceae), commonly known as fig, is one of the more than 750 species of the tree genus Ficus [1,2]. It is cultivated widely in the Mediterranean region, where it is reported to have become established ≈ 6000 years ago [3]. The simplicity of fig tree domestication, by cutting and planting part of branches/twigs, and the nutritional role of its edible fruit (mainly dried) in human diet explain the ancient association with horticulture and why its success has preceded that of other fruit trees [4]. Fig as a fresh fruit is very perishable, with a short post-harvest life, i.e., 7–10 days [5], and its availability for extended consumption has been made possible through sun drying since ancient times [6]. The world’s biggest producer and exporter of figs, Turkey, contributed 300,000 MT of figs produced in 2019, 84,923 MT of which were exported as dried fruits, for a commercial value of almost USD 300 million [7]. The production and consumption/export of dried figs is typical of countries with Mediterranean climates, as well as countries such as Iran or Afghanistan, whereas dried figs were imported from several countries at a total of almost 90,000 MT in 2019 [7]. The nutritional composition of fig fruits varies among the cultivars because of the growing conditions (pedo-climatic characteristics), the cultural practices adopted, time of harvest, duration of ripening, etc. [6]. Dried figs possess a high polyphenol concentration when compared with other fruits and are rich in fiber, copper, manganese, magnesium, potassium, calcium, and vitamin K [8]. Dried figs are available on the market, even as further processed fruits, i.e., filled with nuts or covered with chocolate or other ingredients. In addition to being consumed as they are, dried figs can be further processed as concentrated syrup, wine, or vinegar [6].
Sliced dried fruits are available on the market for very popular fruits, such as apple, pineapple, banana, etc. The possibility to process the figs as sliced dried fruits (dried fig disks) could prompt a higher inclination to the consumption of this healthy fruit and consequently to its cultivation. On the other hand, sliced dried figs could also be sold directly as snack products in vending machines in schools, gyms, and stores, and be available to young people as a healthy alternative to junk food. As a sun-dried fruit, it has also been used as fig tea, since the ripe fig fruits are cut into thin slices and put in the boiled water of a cup of tea, providing a relaxing and refreshing effects [9].
Further interests have been focused on its biological activities and the role of fruit drying technologies in the processing industry of fig to preserve these healthy properties. Mechanical and electrical devices (even with solar power) enhance the productivity of drying and improve natural antioxidant compounds, consumer safety, and the final quality of fruits in general [10,11,12]. Most of the studies in the pharmacological field validate its potential application as a food supplement, not only for healthy diets, but also even for medical usages [8,13].
The key features for figs to be used for drying include: high total soluble solids content (TSS), low acidity values (TA), fleshy skin together with visual appeal, organoleptic characteristics (porosity, texture, rehydration properties, flavor, juiciness, taste, firmness, etc.), chemical properties (water activity, chemical stability, taint, off-flavor, etc.), as well as safety (microbial load, pests and contaminants), which are also the leading quality parameters in other dried fruits [8,14]. However, considering the high relevance of organoleptic characteristics as an essential quality trait of fruit, the human sensory description remains the best approach to evaluate the consumers’ preferences and appreciation for such foods [15]. The sensory description requires a process of quantification of personal responses, based on a specific questionnaire and a group of members defined as panelists. It is recommended that at least one group consists of untrained consumers, so that the evaluation can be sufficiently accurate; commonly, children or students represent a potential consumer category for this purpose [16].
The presence of many local cultivars and the possibility of new processing approaches are solid keys to promoting new interest in fig cultivation. The recent data (2022) for Puglia Region (Southeastern Italy) report that the agricultural area dedicated to fig is 500 ha with a harvested amount of 3342 MT, with respect to 1490 ha and 9481 MT reported for Italy [17]; this limited cultivation is due to its low-value crop attraction for the growers. In recent years, several studies have been conducted to investigate the fig rich genetic diversity and counteract germplasm erosion in Puglia Region [18,19,20,21]. On these bases, an accurate analysis of germplasm characterization is a useful tool for guiding on-farm conservation and valorization of local fig accessions [22]. Evaluation of threatened accessions can reveal important agronomic and organoleptic characteristics for both economic profitability and consumer acceptance. Moreover, the application of different technologies to the traditional methods of processing could add more value to the final product on the market.
The aim of this study was to evaluate, either pomologically or sensorially, a new processed food (dried fig disks) obtained from local fig cultivars as a marketable novel snack product, in order to obtain a new interest for fig cultivation, appreciation, and consumption toward more sustainable and healthy horticulture. Figs have been dried as whole fruits for centuries, but to our knowledge, this is the first time that: (a) dried figs are being produced as thin disks to make them more attractive for new and traditional consumers; (b) underutilized fig cultivars are being used for such a purpose; (c) late-ripening and dark-skinned cultivars are being evaluated as dried disks.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Fig Materials and Organoleptic Analyses

In Puglia Region, Southeastern Italy, 4 local fig cultivars (Figure 1), identified and described in a previous project, were used for the drying process: ‘Verde di Natale’, ‘Processotto Nero’, ‘Natalese Nera’ and ‘Comunione’. These four fig cultivars were chosen because they are defined as ‘winter figs’, due to the fact that they start ripening from the end of summer (Processotto Nero) almost up to December (Verde di Natale). The wide ripening time could allow for the production of dried figs even during autumn and winter, in order to have a new processed product (fig disks) with different organoleptic characteristics as the season proceeds. Moreover, this could be a chance for the valorization of minor and underutilized fig cultivars, in order to prevent their loss and favor a new edible use as dried figs.
The characterization of the fruits from the four cultivars was carried out using the IPGRI (International Plant Genetic Resources Institute) descriptors for Ficus carica [23].
The fig fruits were collected at the ripening stage (based on color, size, and TSS) to be used for the successive processing activities. In total, 3 replicates of 10 fruits each were used for the determination of: total soluble solids (TSS) using a digital refractometer (model HI 96801, Hanna Instruments, Woonsocket, RI, USA); as well as titratable acidity (TA) and pH using an automated pH-meter (PH-Burette 24, Crison Instruments, Barcelona, Spain).
Before the drying process, fruits were sorted and selected, and fruits with defects (cavities, browning, etc.) were discarded. Fruits to be dried were cleaned of dust and soil particles. The commercial quality standards for the dried fig market are overseen by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) under their Dry and Dried Product Standard. Under DPP-14, producers are responsible for ensuring minimum requirements are met before their products are marketed to consumers. These requirements include physical appearance, hygienic condition, and overall texture [8]. The commercial quality standards require that dried figs produced for direct consumption must contain moisture of less than 26% for untreated figs, and 26–40% for high moisture, treated figs. The global market for dried figs is characterized by fruits obtained through the sun drying of fresh or semi-dried (on the tree) figs on trays, mats, or under tunnels [24]. It is obvious that drying parameters such as air temperature, velocity, and relative humidity, as well as duration of the processing, affect the final quality of the dried figs [8].

2.2. The Drying Process

The procedure adopted for drying the figs was adapted in order to obtain a new final product (dried fig disks) with respect to indications by the manufacturer of the dryer [25], calibrated to the whole fruit. It is well known that novelty represents a factor that increases consumer curiosity and could increase the appeal towards a specific category of products (‘positive consumer reaction’). The change in the shape and type of presentation of the dried figs and the processing method were conducted in order to preserve and increase the content of the bioactive substances as healthy components and sensory characteristics, now recognized as fundamental drivers for consumer appreciation and choice. The drying process adopted in the trial is described in Figure 2.
The fig fruits were cut into thin slices, 4–6 mm thick, to allow for very rapid drying. After cutting, the slices were immersed for few minutes in an ascorbic acid bath at a concentration of 0.3 g/L. Subsequently, the slices were placed on a tray and finally sent through the drying process, which was applied in two steps: (1) for 30 h (after 20 h, the slices were flipped) at 55 °C and (2) for 1.5 h at 68 °C. The final yield of the dried slices was in the range of 16–23%.

2.3. The Experimental Sensory Procedure

Sensory analysis is defined as ‘a scientific method used to awaken, measure, analyze, and interpret those responses to products that are the result of perception through the senses of sight, smell, touch, taste, and hearing’ (Definition accepted and adopted by the American Society for Testing and Materials and Institute of Food Technologists) [26,27]. In the case of new products that are not habitually consumed and that may be unrelated to usual consumption, in terms of shape, aroma, and taste, the sensory analysis represents a crucial phase to define the degree of acceptability of the food, regardless of whether it has significant nutraceutical characteristics in its composition.
Two random working groups of panelists were involved in the tasting of the fig disks: (1) 20 untrained students from the 4th and 5th classes of 2 schools (Group 1), comprising 14 males and 6 females with an average age of 17 years; and (2) 11 trained technicians involved in the agri-food sector (Group 2), for a total of 31 panelists.
The two sensory analysis panels took place on two distinct days, one for each group. Each panelist was provided with 4 copies of an evaluation card (one for each fig cultivar) and received the samples of the four ‘dried fig disks’ in disposable white plastic plates coded with one-digit numbers (1, 2, 3, 4).
In order to facilitate the taste and flavor recognition procedure, some specific samples were prepared for sweet, bitter, tannic acid, and cooked reference.

2.4. The Hedonic Scale

For each fig cultivar, the panelist was asked to evaluate sensorial parameters and general liking. The values ranged from 1 to 10 in accordance with a 10-point hedonic scale that was created for this purpose. Although a 9-point hedonic scale is commonly adopted for these studies [28], a 10-point hedonic scale can also be used, since the two scales are not statistically different and there are more evaluation points (10 vs. 9) [29,30].
Important characteristics of the fig disks (texture homogeneity, structure and similarity to fresh fruit) were verified with one single response question and counted as frequencies (%). The evaluation card included multiple choice questions related to aroma and flavor characteristics and quantified again on a 10-point scale. Furthermore, the sensory attribute selection provided an ‘other’ response, for values not listed or not perfectly appreciated by the panelists.
Overall, there were 21 total measured variables in this sensory evaluation (including the overall acceptability). More detailed information about the used indicators can be found in Table 1.
An important aspect was the similarity/dissimilarity of the dried fig disks to the fresh fruit. The processing of fresh fruits can modify the sensory impact of the product, and the sensory evaluation provides information that can be used for marketing, in order to present the fig disks as a competitive product and alternative to the traditional whole dried figs.
Additionally, age, sex, city of residence, employment of the panelists, the period of the year in which the analysis was conducted, whether or not the panelist was a smoker, and the predisposition to a specific category of flavors are aspects that act as variables in the evaluation test.
For this reason, it was considered useful to develop a graph for age (but also for other characteristics) to be associated with the graphs of the QDA (Quantitative Descriptive Analysis) obtained from panelists’ responses for a more correct interpretation of the data.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Data from Groups 1 and 2 were treated as two separate population samples, since each group represents different panelists according to our selection criteria (different types of consumers). A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to examine the variation in consumer ratings based on sight, flavor, and taste approach among the four cultivars used for the dried fig disks. These multisensory evaluations were the dependent variables, while fig cultivar was the ‘factor’ in R studio software. The acceptance results were analyzed by Tukey’s test at a 5% significance level. The data obtained from taste and flavor were plotted in a radar chart in order to better show the differences among the cultivars for each considered value.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Pomological and Fruit Quality Traits of Figs

Comunione was the fig cultivar with the smallest fruits (20–50 g), whereas the other three fig cultivars had similar weights (Table 1), between 50 and 90 g, suitable for the production of fig disks of an appropriate size. The fruit size is an important aspect of fig packaging, transporting, marketing, and consumption of dried figs [31,32]. Processotto Nero and Comunione have globose fruits, whereas Verde di Natale is slightly oblong and Natalese Nera is oblate; only Comunione is a symmetric fruit.
The skin color is predominantly purple, with bluish shades in Processotto Nero and Natalese Nera, and brown in Comunione; Verde di Natale, as the name suggests (verde = green in Italian), has a light green color. A recent paper on Iranian fig cultivars reported yellow as the dominant skin color, but the cultivars examined were predominantly at early ripening [33], whereas in a recent survey of the Puglia fig germplasm, many local cultivars presented a dark color (from red to almost black) [20]. In general, light-colored fruits (yellow–green) suffer significantly more sunburn [34]; however, green-skinned cultivars are commonly used for drying, but cultivars with darker skin could be also used for processing as dried figs, as occurs in other countries as USA (such as California ‘Black Mission’ figs). Darkening of the product is a concern for white cultivars (yellow–green skin), as it influences the product’s appearance, which is the major factor that determines the acceptance level among consumers [8,14]. In the USA, growers use dark cultivars for the production of dried figs, since there are no additional treatments required to prevent darkening. The use of dark-skinned cultivars to produce dried fig disks could be a further advantage, due to avoiding the color-darkening issues typical of the white cultivars. Sugar formation is a result of the crystallization of sugar from inside of the fruit on its external surface, but can be prevented with gentle heat treatment [8], as conducted in this trial, and no sugar formation was observed in our dried fig disks.
Most conventional dryers operate at high air temperatures (>65 °C), which contribute to the product’s visual and quality degradation [35]. The skin color of the cultivar is an important aspect that can be affected by both the drying methods and the duration of the process [8,36]. Dark-colored figs have significantly higher total phenolic content and antioxidant capacity with respect to yellow–green figs, and although the drying processes reduced both phenolic content and antioxidant activity, the dark-colored cultivars can keep 15–74% higher antioxidant activity than the yellow–green cultivars after drying [36]. The use of late-ripening fig cultivars with dark skin can add a nutraceutical aspect to the novelty of the product, and this aspect could be highlighted when promoting the new product.
The stalk is generally short in all the cultivars, though a little bit longer in Natalese Nera and Verde di Natale (Table 2). Skin lenticels are small and scarce in Processotto Nero and Comunione, and larger and numerous in the other two cultivars. Drupelets are numerous in all four cultivars and of medium size. The number of drupelets ranged from 24 to 575 in several Iranian cultivars, with great variability among cultivars [33]. With regards to juiciness, only Verde di Natale has a small amount of juice, whereas the others are very juicy. The pulp color is red in all four cultivars (somewhat reflecting the skin color, except for Verde di Natale), ranging from a more orange presentation in Verde di Natale to a darker red in Processotto Nero and Comunione. On the contrary, yellow was the most frequent color (72%) for several Iranian cultivars recently evaluated for dried fig processing [33]. In the case of considering fresh consumption, only Comunione is difficult to peel, whereas in the other cultivars, the skin is easy to remove for consumption of the pulp, which has an intense flavor in all the cultivars.
Ripening occurs around the end of August for only Processotto Nero, whereas the other cultivars are generally ripen later, at the end of September to the beginning of October for Comunione and Natalese Nera, and in October and even later for Verde di Natale.
The ripening of the fruits on the one-year shoot lasts for more than 20 days, with the exception of Natalese Nera, for which the fruits ripen within 10–20 days. The yield of all the cultivars is generally average.
With regards to the chemical traits (Table 3), all of the cultivars had a very high edible portion (94–95%), with Verde di Natale representing the lowest value (91%). Moreover, these four local fig cultivars yielded bigger fruits than new and underutilized fig cultivars in California, which weighed less than 40 g on average [34]. The water content was the highest in Comunione (≈87%) and significantly lower in Verde di Natale and Processotto Nero, with ≈82 and ≈84%, respectively (Table 3). The early-ripening cultivar, Processotto Nero, had the highest amount of TSS (16.2 °Brix), followed by Natalese Nera, whereas Comunione and Verde di Natale had around 10 °Brix. The pH values were in the range of 4–5, similar to values reported in Italy and other countries [32,37,38,39]. The titratable acidity (TA) showed significant differences among the four cultivars; in particular, the TA was very low for Verde di Natale (1.00 g/L) and the highest value was measured for Natalese Nera, with 2.81 g/L. It has been recently reported that drying time can be reduced from 40 h to 27 h by cutting fig samples into quarters [40]. Thus, the thin fig disks require a reduced time for drying, with consequent positive effects on fig quality. Fig cut into quarters presented significantly higher total phenolic content and total antioxidant activity with respect to the whole figs [40]. Moreover, artificial drying, using cabinet dryers, similar to our device, increased the total phenolic content and total antioxidant activity of figs after the drying process with respect to the traditional sun-drying procedure [40].

3.2. Sensory Panel Evaluation

Direct sun drying is a process based on the exposure of fruits under the sun; in particular, the fruits can be dried directly on the tree, or are harvested fresh or semi-dried and placed on trays, left to dry under ambient conditions or in tunnels [41]. However, this type of drying requires clean days and high air temperature, conditions that are not possible for late-ripening cultivars in Puglia region or in other countries at that time of the year. Moreover, although solar drying is a sustainable process, it has a low efficiency and fruits are exposed to air for a longer duration, with possible negative consequences on fruit quality (insects, dust, pests, etc.) [8]. The dryers could be powered by photovoltaic panels, making the whole process more energy sustainable, a very important aspect in these times in every country.
The data obtained from all 15 sensory descriptors, based on a 1–10 grading scale, are provided in Table 4 for both groups.
Appearance is the first sensory characteristic that influences fruit acceptance by consumers, since it is the first sensory characteristic that consumers perceive in food and definitely drives the choice [39]. The four cultivars were found to be statistically different for visual assessment by Group 1, though with a lower degree of liking than Group 2. The ratings of visual palatability, an overall impression attribute for appearance, were identified, with the highest ratings of 5.70 for Processotto Nero, and of 7.45 for Natalese Nera, by Groups 1 and 2, respectively (Table 4). During postharvest storage, the dried fruits of white cultivars commonly receive SO2 application to inhibit enzymatic and non-enzymatic browning, whereas dark cultivars do not receive SO2 application because the dark skin conceals any darkening [42]. Color maintenance is an important commercial factor and can significantly affect the acceptance of the product by consumers; thus, dark-skinned cultivars could be advantageous.
Significant higher values for Processotto Nero might be explained by a more homogeneous texture assessment (60% vs. 40% presence of defects) compared to the other cultivars; for this parameter, Verde di Natale ranked second. It should be pointed out that intensity and brightness attributes had no influence on the appearance, and no significant differences were reported by either Group 1 or Group 2 (Table 4).
With regards to flavor, together with appearance, a very important sensory quality of a food [43], no differences were detected for the four cultivars by either Group 1 or Group 2 (Table 4). Verde di Natale and Processotto Nero were the most appreciated dried fig disks for both groups of panelists for their flavors.
The four fig cultivars showed a general acceptance according to the hedonic ratings for appearance and flavor, as also recently reported for the evaluation of pecan cultivars [44], although the resulting differences among the cultivars were significant for this latter species.
When considering the taste, the most palatable cultivar was considered to be Verde di Natale by Group 1, which was significantly different with respect to the other cultivars (Table 4). Natalese Nera was also considered by Group 1 to be significantly different with respect to the others when considering the crispness (Table 4). No significant differences among the cultivars were noticed by Group 2 with regard to the taste (Table 4).
In the overall acceptability score, Verde di Natale and Processotto Nero were the most liked by Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. The two types of panelists appreciated different cultivars: white skin for young people and dark skin for mature and experienced ones.
In this study, the overall acceptability of the cultivars from the panelists of Group 2 ranged between 5.73 and 7.27, with all of the ratings above the middle point of the scale and indicating a common acceptance of the four cultivars. Instead, the panelists of Group 1 presented generally less appreciation (between 4.58 and 6.11). Regardless of the panelists group, the minimum score was noticed for Comunione. In general, the dried fig disks of the cultivars tasted by Group 2 presented higher scores than the ones tasted by Group 1.
The flavor descriptors for evaluation of the cultivars (Figure 3) showed the highest appreciation for the disks of Processotto Nero, with some differences between the two groups of panelists. Group 1 perceived more black red fruit, grassy, rancid, and other flavors, whereas Group 2 perceived more floral, cooked, and also black red fruit flavors (Figure 4).
The taste evaluation showed differences between the cultivars and between the two groups of panelists (Figure 4). Processotto Nero and Verde di Natale are still the two most appreciated cultivars, and the panelists of Group 2 preferred more black red fruit, cooked, and sweet flavors, whereas panelists of Group 1 appreciated both the black red fruit and sweet flavors, and, to a lesser extent, the bitter and cooked tastes (Figure 5). Consumer hedonic ratings are associated with perceived sensory attributes and their intensity levels, determining the degree of pleasure experienced during consumption and the association with flavors and tastes most liked [45].
The sensory values found after the processing phase highlighted some differences between the two groups of panelists. In particular, the values described by Group 1 are closer to average values, whereas Group 2 reported more extreme sensory scores. In the overall final score of the processed dried fig disks, the preferred disks were not the same between the two groups, since group 1 appreciated Verde di Natale and Group 2 preferred Processotto Nero; it seemed to be a difference between young consumers and adult ones, so the products could be targeted to different consumers, even in two different periods of the season.
One of the main goals of sensory research is to identify the key points of overall consumer acceptance [46]. The overall acceptance for the dried fig disks resulted in a mix of several attributes and their interaction; often, consumers do not pay equal attention to all sensory attributes [43]. In this study, the drivers of overall acceptance of these processed fig products were the black red fruit flavor, appearance, and sweetness. This study also suggested the importance of flavor, in particular of black red fruits, to the liking of the consumers, maybe associated with healthy compounds which are more identified in black red fruits. Trying to determine the single effect of each attribute on consumer acceptance is not easy, since many attributes jointly contribute to the overall liking and interactions that exist between the various attributes [47]. In a recent study in Tunisia, figs dried under plastic tunnels were more appreciated than figs dried in the open air, indicating that drying techniques can affect the satisfaction and the acceptance of the consumers [30]. Moreover, this could be considered a positive aspect, since late-ripening cultivars must be artificially dried, due to the climatic conditions at that time of the season.
The intention to buy this new processed fig product was evident for Verde di Natale, whereas the cultivar Comunione was not so appreciated (Figure 5). We also have to take into account that the main fig cultivar for producing dried figs in Italy is still the Dottato, cultivated in Calabria, Campania, and Puglia Region (and in other fig countries of the world under the name Kadota), with green skin and very sweet pulp, but ripening at the end of August; this is the standard cultivar used as a reference by Italian consumers for the taste of dried fig [48]. However, dried fig disks can be considered a new product to be presented with different characteristics for various consumers, i.e., young and adult people.
This research indicated that there are further possibilities for the cultivation of fig, in particular local and underutilized cultivars. From the figs, through the drying process, a new product can be obtained that can present this old fruit in a modern way. Cultivars with dark skin and late ripening, not or only partially used for fresh consumption, could be used for processing. More cultivars could be evaluated for either drying (whole fruit, slices, or quarters) or obtaining innovative products for different consumers (ice cream, jam, etc.). The rich germplasm of the fig can be a source not only for sustainable horticultural production, but also for the food sector.

4. Conclusions

The processing of fresh fig fruits into dried fig disks can be a possible alternative for the consumption of figs. Data from pomological and chemical traits, together with the sensory panel data, were useful to evaluate this new product obtained from dried figs of local underutilized cultivars of Puglia Region. Figs have been sun-dried as whole fruits since centuries, but the possibility of presenting dried figs in a new manner could offer many advantages. The most important aspects of these fig disks include the following: disks can be obtained from underutilized local cultivars, and targeted for the different consumers; the thin disks could attract young consumers, due to their black red fruit flavor suggesting healthy properties; late-ripening and dark-colored skin cultivars could be used for processing, extending the product from the end of summer until December, with varying tastes and flavors; these disks could promote a higher consumption of figs, often forgotten amongst the fruits, favoring the cultivation of old and valuable cultivars.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.M. and P.V.; methodology, G.M. and P.V.; formal analysis, F.L., P.V., A.M. (Andrea Magarelli) and G.F.; investigation, G.M. and P.V.; data curation, A.M. (Andrea Magarelli), A.M. (Andrea Mazzeo) and G.F.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M. (Andrea Magarelli), A.M. (Andrea Mazzeo) and G.F.; writing—review and editing, G.F., A.C. and P.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This research has been supported by the Institutions—European, National, and Regional—that have promoted the creation of an ex-situ collection of the Puglia autochthonous fruit germplasm” at the CRSFA—Centro di Ricerca, Sperimentazione e Formazione sull’agricoltura Basile-Caramia of Locorotondo. We also thank the ITS Foundation—Istituto Tecnico Superiore Agroalimentare Puglia, Area “Nuove Tecnologie per il Made in Italy”—of which CRSFA is partner of the present project “Technological characterization of local fruit cultivars”.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Rønsted, N.; Weiblen, G.D.; Cook, J.M.; Salamin, N.; Machado, C.A.; Savolainen, V. 60 million years of co-divergence in the fig–wasp symbiosis. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2005, 272, 2593–2599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Heer, K.; Machado, C.A.; Himler, A.G.; Herre, E.A.; Kalko, E.K.V.; Dick, C.W. Anonymous and EST-based microsatellite DNA markers that transfer broadly across the fig tree genus (Ficus, Moraceae). Am. J. Bot. 2012, 99, e330–e333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Stover, E.; Aradhya, M.; Ferguson, L.; Crisosto, C.H. The Fig: Overview of an Ancient Fruit. HortScience 2007, 42, 1083–1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kislev, M.E.; Hartmann, A.; Bar-Yosef, O. Early Domesticated Fig in the Jordan Valley. Science 2006, 312, 1372–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Kamiloglu, S.; Capanoglu, E. Polyphenol content in figs (Ficus carica L.): Effect of sun-drying. Int. J. Food Prop. 2015, 18, 521–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mat Desa, W.N.; Mohammad, M.; Fudholi, A. Review of drying technology of fig. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 88, 93–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ferrara, G.; Mazzeo, A.; Colasuonno, P.; Marcotuli, I. Production and Growing Regions. In The Fig: Botany, Production and Uses; Sarkhosh, A., Yavari, A.M., Ferguson, L., Eds.; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2022; pp. 47–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Badgujar, S.B.; Patel, V.V.; Bandivdekar, A.H.; Mahajan, R.T. Traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology of Ficus carica: A review. Pharm. Biol. 2014, 52, 1487–1503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Lianju, W.; Weibin, J.; Kai, M.; Zhifeng, L.; Yelin, W. The production and research of fig (Ficus carica L.) in China. Acta Hortic. 2003, 605, 191–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jeszka-Skowron, M.; Zgoła-Grześkowiak, A.; Stanisz, E.; Waśkiewicz, A. Potential health benefits and quality of dried fruits: Goji fruits, cranberries and raisins. Food Chem. 2017, 221, 228–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Arvaniti, O.S.; Samaras, Y.; Gatidou, G.; Thomaidis, N.S.; Stasinakis, A.S. Review on fresh and dried figs: Chemical analysis and occurrence of phytochemical compounds, antioxidant capacity and health effects. Food Res. Int. 2019, 119, 244–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Petikirige, J.; Karim, A.; Millar, G. Effect of drying techniques on quality and sensory properties of tropical fruits. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 57, 6963–6979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Turan, A.; Celik, I. Antioxidant and hepatoprotective properties of dried fig against oxidative stress and hepatotoxicity in rats. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2016, 91, 554–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Şen, F.; Aksoy, U.; Özer, K.B.; Can, H.Z.; Köseoğlu, İ.; Konak, R. Impact of yearly conditions on major physical and chemical properties of fresh, semi-dried and sun-dried fig (Ficus carica L. ‘Sarılop’) fruit. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1173, 309–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dan, C.; Șerban, C.; Sestraş, A.F.; Militaru, M.; Morariu, P.; Sestraş, R.E. Consumer Perception Concerning Apple Fruit Quality, Depending on Cultivars and Hedonic Scale of Evaluation—A Case Study. Not. Sci. Biol. 2015, 7, 140–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Popper, R.; Kroll, J.J. Consumer testing of food products using children. In Developing Children’s Food Products; Kilcas, D., Angus, F., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2011; pp. 163–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. ISTAT. 2022. Available online: http://dati.istat.it/?lang=en&SubSessionId=4c1122e7-4f3d-42fa-8579-5068147b3dc1# (accessed on 2 May 2023).
  18. Laddomada, B.; Gerardi, C.; Mita, G.; Lumare, D.; Minonne, F.; Marchiori, S.; Fiocchetti, F. Molecular characterization of Apulian fig (Ficus carica L.) Germplasm collection using fluorescence-based aflp markers. Acta Hortic. 2008, 798, 205–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Marcotuli, I.; Mazzeo, A.; Nigro, D.; Giove, S.L.; Giancaspro, A.; Colasuonno, P.; Prgomet, Ž.; Prgomet, I.; Tarantino, A.; Ferrara, G.; et al. Analysis of genetic diversity of Ficus carica L. (Moraceae) collection using Simple Sequence Repeat (SSR) markers. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus 2019, 18, 93–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ferrara, G.; Mazzeo, A.; Pacucci, C.; Matarrese, A.M.S.; Tarantino, A.; Crisosto, C.; Incerti, O.; Marcotuli, I.; Nigro, D.; Blanco, A.; et al. Characterization of edible fig germplasm from Puglia, southeastern Italy: Is the distinction of three fig types (Smyrna, San Pedro and Common) still valid? Sci. Hortic. 2016, 205, 52–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ferrara, G.; Mazzeo, A.; Gallotta, A.; Pacucci, C.; Matarrese, A.M.S.; Tarantino, A.; Incerti, O.; Marcotuli, I.; Nigro, D.; Blanco, A.; et al. Fruit-set and SSR markers of fig cultivars from Puglia region, Southeastern Italy. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1173, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Perez-Jiménez, M.; López, B.; Dorado, G.; Pujadas-Salvá, A.; Guzmán, G.; Hernandez, P. Analysis of genetic diversity of southern Spain fig tree (Ficus carica L.) and reference materials as a tool for breeding and conservation. Hereditas 2012, 149, 108–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. IPGRI; CIHEAM. Descriptors of Fig; International Plant Genetic Resources Institute: Rome, Italy, 2003; p. 63. [Google Scholar]
  24. Aksoy, U. The dried fig management and the potential for new products. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1173, 377–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tauro Essiccatori srl. Available online: www.tauroessiccatori.com (accessed on 17 April 2023).
  26. Stone, H.; Sidel, J.; Oliver, S.; Woolsey, A.; Singleton, R.C. Sensory evaluation by quantitative descriptive analysis [1974]. Food Technol. 1974, 28, 24–34. [Google Scholar]
  27. Stone, H.; Sidel, J.; Oliver, S.; Woolsey, A.; Singleton, R.C. Sensory evaluation by quantitative descriptive analysis. In Descriptive Sensory Analysis in Practice; Gacula, M.C., Ed.; Food & Nutrition Press: Trumbull, CT, USA, 1997; pp. 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lim, J. Hedonic scaling: A review of methods and theory. Food Qual. Prefer. 2011, 22, 733–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sosa, M.; Martinez, C.; Marquez, F.; Hough, G. Location and scale influence on sensory acceptability measurements among low income consumers. J. Sens. Stud. 2008, 23, 707–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lachtar, D.; Zaouay, F.; Pereira, C.; Martin, A.; Ben Abda, J.; Mars, M. Physicochemical and sensory quality of dried figs (Ficus carica L.) as affected by drying method and variety. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2022, 46, e16379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Condit, I.J. The Fig; The Chronica Botanica Company: Waltham, MA, USA, 1947; p. 222. [Google Scholar]
  32. Aksoy, U.; Seferoglu, G.; Mısirli, A.; Kara, S.; Şahin, N.; Bulbul, S.; Duzbastılar, M. Selection of the table fig genotypes suitable for Aegean Region. In Proceedings of the Turkish Horticulture Congress, First National Horticultural Congress, Izmir, Turkey, 9–13 October 1992; pp. 545–548. (In Turkish). [Google Scholar]
  33. Khadivi, A.; Anjam, R.; Anjam, K. Morphological and pomological characterization of edible fig (Ficus carica L.) to select the superior trees. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 238, 66–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gordon, P.; Preece, J.E.; Ferguson, L.; Aradhya, M.; Norton, M.; Garrison, H.; DeBenedetto, C. Field evaluation of new and underutilized fig cultivars for fresh and dried markets. Acta Hortic. 2021, 1310, 173–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Xanthopoulos, G.; Yanniotis, S.; Lambrinos, G. Water diffusivity and drying kinetics of air drying of figs. Dry. Technol. 2009, 27, 502–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Konak, R.; Kösoğlu, İ.; Yemenıcıoğlu, A. Effects of different drying methods on phenolic content, antioxidant capacity and general characteristics of selected dark colored Turkish fig cultivars. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1173, 335–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Marcotuli, I.; Mazzeo, A.; Colasuonno, P.; Terzano, R.; Nigro, D.; Porfido, C.; Tarantino, A.; Aiese Cigliano, R.; Sanseverino, W.; Gadaleta, A.; et al. Fruit Development in Ficus carica L.: Morphological and Genetic Approaches to Fig Buds for an Evolution From Monoecy Toward Dioecy. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Koyuncu, M.A.; Bostan, S.Z.; Islam, A.; Koyuncu, F. Investigations on some physical and chemical characteristics in fig cultivars grown in Ordu. Acta Hortic. 1998, 480, 87–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mars, M.; Chebli, T.; Marrakchi, M. Multivariate analysis of fig (Ficus carica L.) germplasm in southern Tunisia. Acta Hortic. 1998, 480, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Tan, N. Effect of cabinet drying method on dried fruit quality and functional properties of ‘Sarilop’ (Ficus carica L.) fig cultivar. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1173, 359–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ekechukwu, O.V.; Norton, B. Review of solar–energy drying systems I: An overview of drying principles and theory. Energy Convers. Manag. 1999, 40, 615–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Haug, M.T.; King, E.S.; Heymann, H.; Crisosto, C.H. Sensory profiles for dried fig (Ficus carica L.) cultivars commercially grown and processed in California. J. Food Sci. 2013, 78, S1273–S1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Andersen, B.V.; Brockhoff, P.B.; Hyldig, G. The importance of liking of appearance, -odour, -taste and -texture in the evaluation of overall liking—A comparison with the evaluation of sensory satisfaction. Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 71, 228–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Du, X.; Wang, X.; Muniz, A.; Kubenka, K. Consumer Hedonic Ratings and Associated Sensory Characteristics and Emotional Responses to Fourteen Pecan Varieties Grown in Texas. Plants 2022, 11, 1814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Popper, R.; Rosenstock, W.; Schraidt, M.; Kroll, B.J. The effect of attribute questions on overall liking ratings. Food Qual. Prefer. 2004, 15, 853–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bi, J.; Chung, J. Identification of drivers of overall liking—Determination of relative importances of regressor variables. J. Sens. Stud. 2011, 26, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Bi, J. A review of statistical methods for determination of relative importance of correlated predictors and identification of drivers of consumer liking. J. Sens. Stud. 2012, 27, 87–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Genna, A.; De Vecchi, P.; Maestrelli, A.; Bruno, M. Quality of ‘Dottato’ dried figs grown in the Cosenza region, Italy. A sensory and physical-chemical approach. Acta Hortic. 2008, 798, 319–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The four cultivars used in the trial: Natalese Nera (A), Comunione (B), Verde di Natale (C), Processotto Nero (D).
Figure 1. The four cultivars used in the trial: Natalese Nera (A), Comunione (B), Verde di Natale (C), Processotto Nero (D).
Processes 11 01485 g001aProcesses 11 01485 g001b
Figure 2. Diagram of the processing activities adopted.
Figure 2. Diagram of the processing activities adopted.
Processes 11 01485 g002
Figure 3. Flavor evaluation of the four cultivars.
Figure 3. Flavor evaluation of the four cultivars.
Processes 11 01485 g003
Figure 4. Taste evaluation of the four cultivars.
Figure 4. Taste evaluation of the four cultivars.
Processes 11 01485 g004
Figure 5. The willingness to purchase the fig disks.
Figure 5. The willingness to purchase the fig disks.
Processes 11 01485 g005
Table 1. Dried fig disks consumer test design.
Table 1. Dried fig disks consumer test design.
IndicatorValueScore Scale
Intensity 1–10 point scale
Color1 = low
10 = vivid
Intensity
Smell
Taste
1 = none
10 = strong
Brightness
Color1 = dull
10 = brilliant
Persistence
Smell
Taste
1 = short (1 s)
10 = long (10 or more s)
Palatability
Visual Olfactive
Taste
1 = low
10 = high
Gustatory-Tactile
Crispness
Juiciness
Sapidity
Hardness
Adhesiveness
1 = low
10 = high
Overall Impression1 = dislike extremely
10 = like extremely
Texture HomogeneityVisible defects
Good
Single response question
StructureFull body
Medium body
Fibrous
Affinity to Fresh Fruit
Smell TasteFresh fruit smell/taste
Other smell/taste
AromasFlowery
Black/Red fruit
Acidic
Cooked
Grassy
Rancid
Other
Multiple response question
FlavoursFlowery
Sweet
Black/Red fruit
Cocked
Acidic
Bitter
Grassy
Astringent
Fermented
Other
Table 2. Pomological traits of the fruits of the four fig cultivars.
Table 2. Pomological traits of the fruits of the four fig cultivars.
TraitsProcessotto NeroComunioneNatalese NeraVerde Di Natale
Weight (g)50–9020–5050–9050–90
ShapeGloboseGloboseOblateOblong
SymmetryAsymmetricSymmetricAsymmetricAsymmetric
Skin colorBluish purplePurple–brownBluish purpleLight green
Stalk (length)ShortShortMediumMedium
Lenticels (size/number)Small/scarceSmall/scarceLarge/numerousLarge/numerous
Skin thicknessMediumThinMediumThick
Drupelets (size/number)Medium/numerousMedium/mediumMedium/numerousMedium/numerous
JuicinessMediumMediumHighScarce
Pulp flavor intensityMediumIntenseIntenseIntense
Pulp colorDark redDark redRedOrange–red
Skin peelingEasyDifficultEasyEasy
Pulp textureFineFineCoarseCoarse
YieldAverageAverageAverageAverage
Scalarity of ripening (days)>20>2010–20>20
Ripening timeEnd of AugustEnd of SeptemberEnd of SeptemberOctober
Table 3. Chemical traits of the four fig cultivars.
Table 3. Chemical traits of the four fig cultivars.
ParameterProcessotto NeroComunioneNatalese NeraVerde Di Natale
Edible part (%)94 a95 a94 a91 b
Water (%)82.34 b86.75 a84.34 ab83.87 b
TSS (°Brix)16.2 a10.6 c14.2 b10.4 c
pH4.76 a4.35 b4.41 b4.83 a
TA (titratable acidity as g/L malic acid)1.81 c2.28 b2.81 a1.00 d
Within each row, means with different letters are significantly different according to the Tukey’s test, at p < 0.05.
Table 4. Attributes of the descriptive sensory evaluation by Groups 1 and 2 for each of the four fig cultivars.
Table 4. Attributes of the descriptive sensory evaluation by Groups 1 and 2 for each of the four fig cultivars.
Processotto NeroComunioneNatalese NeraVerde Di Natale
Group12121212
Appearance
Palatability5.70 a6.64 a3.70 b6.36 a5.30 ab7.45 a5.40 ab6.27 a
Brightness4.65 a5.91 a3.80 a5.73 a3.75 a5.45 a4.75 a5.27 a
Intensity5.70 a7.36 a4.10 a6.27 a5.65 a8.36 a5.30 a6.00 a
Flavor
Palatability4.30 a5.73 a3.85 a5.00 a4.65 a4.27 a4.45 a4.45 a
Persistence3.50 a4.73 a3.40 a4.64 a2.55 a3.45 a3.70 a4.00 a
Intensity4.15 a4.55 a4.15 a5.27 a3.20 a3.27 a4.25 a3.91 a
Taste
Intensity5.75 a6.73 a5.25 a5.82 a4.60 a6.00 a5.20 a6.82 a
Persistence5.75 a6.73 a5.25 a7.44 a5.55 a5.73 a5.45 a5.91 a
Crispness6.10 ab6.91 a6.30 ab5.91 a6.65 a7.45 a4.65 b6.50 a
Juiciness4.00 a4.64 a2.65 a3.64 a2.45 a2.91 a3.45 a4.73 a
Sapidity4.40 a5.73 a3.85 a4.91 a4.50 a5.18 a4.35 a5.36 a
Hardness5.30 a6.27 a5.15 a5.27 a5.85 a5.73 a4.50 a5.00 a
Adhesiveness5.75 a5.82 a6.05 a4.64 a6.80 a3.55 a5.75 a6.20 a
Palatability4.70 ab7.18 a3.75 b6.60 a5.00 ab5.82 a5.65 a6.36 a
Overall Acceptability5.63 a7.27 a4.58 a5.73 a5.10 a6.00 a6.11 a6.00 a
Within each row, means with different letters are significantly different according to the Tukey test, at p ≤ 0.05, for each group and for each cultivar.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ferrara, G.; Magarelli, A.; Mazzeo, A.; Coletta, A.; Crupi, P.; Loperfido, F.; Maggi, G.; Venerito, P. Underutilized Fig (Ficus carica L.) Cultivars from Puglia Region, Southeastern Italy, for an Innovative Product: Dried Fig Disks. Processes 2023, 11, 1485. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11051485

AMA Style

Ferrara G, Magarelli A, Mazzeo A, Coletta A, Crupi P, Loperfido F, Maggi G, Venerito P. Underutilized Fig (Ficus carica L.) Cultivars from Puglia Region, Southeastern Italy, for an Innovative Product: Dried Fig Disks. Processes. 2023; 11(5):1485. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11051485

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ferrara, Giuseppe, Andrea Magarelli, Andrea Mazzeo, Antonio Coletta, Pasquale Crupi, Francesco Loperfido, Giuseppe Maggi, and Pasquale Venerito. 2023. "Underutilized Fig (Ficus carica L.) Cultivars from Puglia Region, Southeastern Italy, for an Innovative Product: Dried Fig Disks" Processes 11, no. 5: 1485. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11051485

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop