Abstract
Strawberry is a non-climacteric fruit but exhibits very limited postharvest life due to its rapid softening and decay. Therefore, the current study was carried out to evaluate the effect of edible coatings using chitosan (CH) and chitosan nanoparticles (CHNPs) to improve the quality and extending the shelf life of strawberries during storage. Chitosan nanoparticles (CHNPs) were prepared by an ionic gelation method. The size and shape of the synthesized CHNPs were observed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) technique. The strawberry samples were stored (after coating) at ambient temperature (25±3°C) and cold temperature (6±2°C) then, we evaluated the effectiveness of edible coating for physicochemical and microbiological properties, as well as the shelf-life during storage. The results of the TEM showed that the average particle size was 18.8-21.8 nm. At the different temperatures of storage, the samples coated with CHNPs had lower values of weight loss, decay, total soluble solids, and malondialdehyde concentrations. The same treatment had higher levels of total acidity and anthocyanin compared to the CH and uncoated treatments, that lead to preserving their quality properties and extending the shelf-life. Also, counts of total aerobic, mold, and yeast for strawberry samples treated by CHNPs were lower than those for CH and control treatment during the storage. In conclusion, the antimicrobial edible coating by CHNPs improved the qualitative characteristics and increased the shelf-life from 2 to 6 days for fruits stored at 25±3°C and from 8 to 16 days for samples stored at 6±2°C.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Synthesized chitosan nanoparticles had an average particle size of 18.8-21.8 nm by TEM.
Not reportedTaxonDirection
Verbatim
e0“The results of the TEM showed that the average particle size was 18.8-21.8 nm.”
Claim · model-written summary
CHNP-coated strawberries had lower weight loss, decay and total soluble solids at the different storage temperatures.
- Taxon
- strawberries
_single2.jpg?width=60)
Fragaria ×ananassat0 - Treatment
- coated with CHNPse0
- Outcome
- weight loss, decay, total soluble solidse0
- Direction
- lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_single2.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“At the different temperatures of storage, the samples coated with CHNPs had lower values of weight loss, decay, total soluble solids, and malondialdehyde concentrations.”
t0“strawberries”
Claim · model-written summary
CHNP-coated strawberries had lower malondialdehyde concentrations at the different storage temperatures.
- Taxon
- strawberriesFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- coated with CHNPse0
- Outcome
- malondialdehyde concentrationse0
- Direction
- lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At the different temperatures of storage, the samples coated with CHNPs had lower values of weight loss, decay, total soluble solids, and malondialdehyde concentrations.”
t0“strawberries”
Claim · model-written summary
CHNP treatment gave higher total acidity and anthocyanin levels than CH and uncoated treatments.
- Taxon
- strawberriesFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- coated with CHNPse1
- Outcome
- total acidity and anthocyanine0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- CH and uncoated treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The same treatment had higher levels of total acidity and anthocyanin compared to the CH and uncoated treatments, that lead to preserving their quality properties and extending the shelf-life.”
e1“the samples coated with CHNPs”
t0“strawberries”
Claim · model-written summary
CHNP-treated strawberries had lower total aerobic, mold and yeast counts than CH and control treatments during storage.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassae0
- Treatment
- treated by CHNPse0
- Interactor
- molde0other
- Second interactor
- yeaste0other
- Outcome
- counts of total aerobic, mold, and yeaste0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- CH and control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Also, counts of total aerobic, mold, and yeast for strawberry samples treated by CHNPs were lower than those for CH and control treatment during the storage.”
Claim · model-written summary
CHNP edible coating increased strawberry shelf life from 2 to 6 days at 25±3°C.
- Taxon
- strawberriesFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- antimicrobial edible coating by CHNPse0
- Outcome
- shelf-lifee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2 to 6 dayse0
- Qualifier
- stored at 25±3°Ce0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In conclusion, the antimicrobial edible coating by CHNPs improved the qualitative characteristics and increased the shelf-life from 2 to 6 days for fruits stored at 25±3°C and from 8 to 16 days for samples stored at 6±2°C.”
t0“strawberries”
Claim · model-written summary
CHNP edible coating increased strawberry shelf life from 8 to 16 days at 6±2°C.
- Taxon
- strawberriesFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- antimicrobial edible coating by CHNPse0
- Outcome
- shelf-lifee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 8 to 16 dayse0
- Qualifier
- stored at 6±2°Ce0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In conclusion, the antimicrobial edible coating by CHNPs improved the qualitative characteristics and increased the shelf-life from 2 to 6 days for fruits stored at 25±3°C and from 8 to 16 days for samples stored at 6±2°C.”
t0“strawberries”
The same questions in other papers
chitosan · quality: sugar starch · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Results differ
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →chitosan · disease · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Results differ
41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
39 papers more in this group
See all 43 papers →chitosan · physiology: oxidative · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →chitosan · quality: postharvest · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →antimicrobial agent · quality: postharvest · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Results agree
7 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →nanoparticle · quality: postharvest · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- positive
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →storage · quality: postharvest · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results
116 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
117 papers more in this group
See all 121 papers →nanoparticle · physiology: oxidative · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.