Dry Beans and Pulses Production, Processing, and Nutrition. Группа авторов
in another production region often can influence dry bean markets. Over the years, especially when there is an oversupply of dry beans, government feeding programs put in place years ago can quickly absorb some or all of the oversupply and quickly change the supply demand ratio. USDA programs such as the PL480 program (US International Food Aid) have very successfully taken the slack out of an oversupply and provided healthy, nutritious dry beans to malnourished families around the globe.
Canners and packagers begin discussing pre‐plant contract values for the upcoming planting season shortly after harvest. As mentioned, these discussions consider estimates of supply vs demand, market values, grower’s cost of production, etc. Once a value has been determined communications with growers begin and growers make decisions for their own operations. Contracts usually cover only a portion of the expected production, which also is considered by buyer and seller. The unpriced portion of the expected crop is a highly significant variable for both parties. Canners and packagers have ongoing relationships with institutions and retailers that also factor into pricing. These relationships are long term and quite complicated. The challenge is to receive beans for the processor’s projection of specified production volume at a fixed price. This also recognizes up‐front shelf space costs, price of the beans, cans, sauces, etc.
Over half of the beans produced in the USA are consumed domestically, leaving the balance available to be exported. Central America, South America, and the Caribbean have become tremendous trading partners. The UK and Mediterranean have been long‐term trading partners. The US industry interests continue to develop relationships in Asia and China. Exporting can add another level of responsibility or risk. Logistics, insurances, documentation (requirements vary from country to country) and transactional fees all add cost.
Marketing of organic vs. conventional dry beans
Organic dry bean production and marketing is similar to the traditionally grown beans. The high level of management at all the links in the supply chain add cost. Demand for organically produced dry beans continues to grow globally. This segment of the marketplace has a strong contractual relationship throughout the supply chain. As demand grows the rotational options for growers gets stronger. Certification is required throughout the supply chain. Growers have a specific process to go through to obtain organic certification. Prior to USDA organic certification a producer must have practiced strictly organic production practices for a minimum of three years (S. Bales 2021, personal communication). The bean industry has acknowledged this costly period that it takes to become certified and has created a transition phase that compensates growers as they move through the process. Having a good reputation for following the rules and diligent documentation is essential to this market segment.
Marketing and promotion organizations
As industry stakeholders look for information to help in their individual decision‐making processes, grower and processor organizations positioned in each production region have become sources. USDA is also a source of historic acreage and production data. They also produce timely crop production reports and planting intention forecasts.
Most grower groups are funded by a state governed assessment program. As an example, the Michigan Bean Commission was established as a state sanctioned agency to promote the production of dry beans. Michigan Public Act 114 went into effect in 1965 to secure funding for grower interests. This referendum is renewed every 5 years by a vote of eligible dry bean growers. The revenue generated (per pound of bean production) is used to fund bean‐related research and to promote the consumption of dry beans (MLA 1965).
Dry bean growers and processors are represented by the US Dry Bean Council in USA. Many states have grower associations, commissions, or boards (e.g., in California, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, and Nebraska) to help growers and promote dry beans marketing and utilization. In Canada, Pulse Canada, Ontario Bean Growers, and other provincial organizations play a similar role. Globally, organizations like the Global Pulse Confederation, FAO, CIAT, ICRISAT, and CGIAR promote dry beans sustainability and growth.
POSTHARVEST STORAGE QUALITY
Dry bean storage damage and contamination must be minimized through the use of good handling practices. The established standards for food handling are important to sanitary control and defined lot identity. The use of good agricultural practices (GAPs), good manufacturing practices (GMPs), and a broad range of advanced food quality and food safety standards and programs are applied in dry bean handling including ISO 9000, HACCP (hazard analysis critical control points), and SQF (safe quality food) (Uebersax and Siddiq 2012).
As stated previously, the impact of high‐moisture beans or localized moisture that migrates throughout the beans will cause significant mold growth, respiratory heating, and seed darkening within the bean lot. This condition is commonly termed as musty‐moldy beans or bin‐burned beans. Storage‐damaged beans may vary in color, ranging from slightly discolored to a deep chocolate‐brown color and also possess mold mycelia and strong musty off‐flavors (musty, moldy, sour, bitter, or “fishy”). Frequently, moisture migration that has not been adequately dissipated through aeration in the storage bin will result in localized pockets of beans of high moisture content and subsequent mold growth. The uppermost sections of a long‐term storage bin are most susceptible to this rising moisture vapor, its condensation, and the subsequent mold development. Typically, this condition manifests as a solid clumped mass of beans and is characterized as “severely damaged beans” during storage. This damaged bean mass causes significant quality deterioration if not carefully segregated and removed (Uebersax and Siddiq 2012).
The musty off‐flavor that develops in stored dry beans is partially attributed to the bi‐phenol compound, geosmin – an oxygenated hydrocarbon (trans‐1,10‐di methyl‐trans9‐decalol) (Buttery et al. 1976; Roland et al. 2017). Swanson and Hernandez (1984) reported that geosmin and 2‐methylisoborneol (MIB) are microbial metabolites associated with the earthy, musty off‐flavors in dry beans. The presence of part per billion (ppb) concentrations of contaminating volatile compounds in dry beans can result in objectionable off‐flavors since the flavor of dry beans is bland. The growth of Actinomyces produces both geosmin and MIB on beans or in the water supply used during bean cultivation and may result in production of a musty off‐flavor in processed dry beans and other food products. Fairley (2007) detected geosmin in navy beans spiked with A. flavus, P. commune, and P. expansum after three days of incubation. Concentrations increased during incubation and with increased mold counts and geosmin and 2‐MIB were identified as the musty‐odor compounds associated with moldy navy beans during processing.
Further, seed moisture content, storage temperature, and duration of storage each directly influence bean quality and are thus important factors to consider during dry bean storage (Nasar‐Abbas et al. 2009; Rani et al. 2013).
Moisture content
The aggregate moisture content of bean seed is the most important consideration during harvest and storage. Seeds with moisture content above 18% are subjected to excessive damage during storage and in the processing line, due to physical susceptibility to mechanical forces and microbial spoilage from molds. However, seeds with moisture content below 15% are increasingly sensitive to impact damage. Dry beans have been studied widely with respect to storage stability and quality (McCurdy et al. 1980; Uebersax and Bedford 1980; Dhahir 1987; Rani et al. 2013). Respiration rates of beans decrease with moisture concentrations as beans mature (Swanson et al. 1977), with none detected at beans of <18% moisture.
Beans stored at too low moisture exhibit increased clumping and splitting upon canning due to seed coat and cotyledon rupture, while storage at high initial moisture encourages discoloration, off‐flavor development, loss of water uptake capacity, and mold growth. Morris and Wood (1956) reported that beans with moisture content above 13% deteriorated significantly in both flavor and texture after six months at 77 °F and became unpalatable within 12 months. Burr et al. (1968) reported that beans stored at high moisture showed a significant