Comparing steady‐state to unsteady‐state respiration rate measurement methods for design of modified atmosphere packaging of grape tomatoes and blueberries with microperforations

Abstract Designing modified atmosphere packages (MAPs) for fresh produce requires respiration rate (RR) data. A steady‐state (SS) approach is widely used but is expensive, tedious, and time‐consuming. Unsteady‐state (USS) methods mitigate shortcomings of the SS approach, but comparisons between the two approaches have not been done to verify the design outcomes of MAPs, especially those with microperforations. RR measurement methods for grape tomatoes and blueberries were compared. Data were then used to design microperforated MAP packages to compare predicted design specifications created from RR data with observed shelf life. Results show that the USS method provides similar magnitudes of RR and predicts similar numbers of perforations as the SS method. Observations of packages produced using 100 µm perforations, using measured respiration data, suggest that both methods underestimated what might have been deemed correct by about one microperforation. Practical Application Designing packaging for fresh produce requires the knowledge of produce respiration. Steady‐state methods are conceptually simple, but time‐consuming. Unsteady‐state methods are rapid. This work compares methods on design of packages.