Tomato post-harvest fungal rot represents a significant challenge in the agriculture industry, leading to substantial economic losses and reduced quality of produce. This preliminary study investigates the factors contributing to fungal rot in tomatoes following harvest. We conducted a series of experiments to identify the fungal species responsible for the rot and examined environmental conditions, handling practices, and storage methods that may exacerbate the problem. The study involved sampling tomatoes from different stages of the supply chain, analyzing fungal contamination, and assessing the impact of various storage conditions on fungal growth. Our findings indicate that specific fungal species, such as Fusarium and Botrytis, are prevalent in post-harvest tomatoes. Additionally, improper handling and suboptimal storage conditions significantly increase the incidence of fungal rot. These insights highlight critical areas for intervention, including improved handling practices and optimized storage conditions to mitigate fungal contamination. The results of this study provide a foundational understanding of the factors leading to post-harvest fungal rot and suggest practical measures to enhance tomato storage and handling practices.

Post-harvest, fungal rot, Fusarium

Agrios, G.N. (2005). Plant Pathology. Academic Press, New york. 922pp.

Alexopoulos, C. O., Mims, C.W. and Blackwell, M. (2002). Introductory Mycology.

(4th edition). John Wiley and Sons Inc. Singapore, 869pp.

Barnett, H.L. and Hunter, B.B. (1999). Illustrated Genera of Imperfect Fungi, (4 th edition). The American Phytopathological Society . St. Paul, Minnessota,USA, 218pp.

Chiejina, N.V. (2008). Mycoflora of some salad vegetables. Bio-Research.6(2):392-395.

Coursey, D .G. (1983). Postharvest losses in perishable foods of the developing world, pp485-515. In: Postharvest Physiology and Crop preservation, (ed) Liberman M. Plenum Press, NY. 515pp

Eckert, J. W. and Sommer, N.F. (1967) Control of diseases of Fruits and Vegetables by Post-harvest Treatment. Annual Review Plant Pathology 5:391-432

Kader, A.A. (2002). Post-harvest Technology of Horticultural crops. University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources. 535pp.

Kurup, V.P. (2003). Fungal Allergens. Curr. Allergy Asthma Rep 3:416-423.

Liu, M.S. and Ma, P.C. (1983). Post-harvest problems of vegetables and fruits in the

Tropics and subtropics. Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center.

0 th Anniversary monograph Series. Taiwan, China.14pp.

Mehrotra, R. S. and Aggarwal, A. (2003). Plant pathology. 2nd Ed. Tata McGraw- Hill. New Delhi. 846pp.

Michailides, T. J. and Spotts, R. A. (1990). Postharvest diseases of pome and stone fruits caused by Mucor piriformis in the Pacific Northwest and California. Plant Diseases 74:537-543.

Moss, M.O. (2002). Mycotoxin Review. 1. Aspergillus penillium. Mycologist, 16:116-119.

Okigbo, R.N., Ramesh P. and Achusi, C.T (2009). Post-Harvest Deterioration of Cassava and its Control Using Extracts of Azadirachta indica and Aframomum melegueta. E-Journal of Chemistry 6(4), 1274-1280.

Phillip, D.J. (1984). Mycotoxins as a post-harvest problem, pp50-54. In: Post-harvest pathology of fruits and vegetables; Postharvest losses in perishable crops. Moline, H.E. (ed). Agricultural experimental station. University of California, Berkeley Publications. NE. 461pp.