Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/3178
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMichailides, Themis J.-
dc.contributor.authorManganaris, George A.-
dc.date.accessioned2013-01-17T08:44:17Zen
dc.date.accessioned2013-05-17T07:13:10Z-
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-02T14:27:16Z-
dc.date.available2013-01-17T08:44:17Zen
dc.date.available2013-05-17T07:13:10Z-
dc.date.available2015-12-02T14:27:16Z-
dc.date.issued2009-04-
dc.identifier.citationStewart Postharvest Review, 2009, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1-7en_US
dc.identifier.issn19459656-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/3178-
dc.description.abstractPurpose of review: The aims of this review are: (1) to highlight the most significant results over the last few years in harvesting methods and pre- and postharvest handling of horticultural products; and (2) to provide insights in terms of technological aspects, with special reference to the control of postharvest decay. New system approaches that should be considered as components of an integrated decay control strategy and overall good agricultural practices are also described. Main findings: Harvest and handling practices have major effects on postharvest decay. Mechanical harvesting systems and time of harvest have a prominent effect on postharvest decay and mycotoxin contamination. Fruit maturity at harvest, which directly affects bruising, is a major factor affecting infection by postharvest pathogens. Harvest of fruits from the ground and contact of harvest containers with soil contaminate fruits with postharvest propagules and result in increased decay. Climatic conditions affect sources of contamination and infection of fruits: under dry, hot subtropical climates latent and quiescent infections preharvest play a significant role while under warm, humid tropical climates contamination of fruit wounds during harvest can be of great importance, affecting levels of postharvest decay. Packing directly in the field reduces production costs but increases chances for postharvest decay. Electronic noses have been constructed that can "smell" and separate decayed fruits in packinghouses and predict mycotoxin contamination. Regression models have been developed to detect the impact of mechanical damage on postharvest decay. In addition, new packaging systems have been created to minimise mechanical injuries and decrease susceptibility to decay and bruising. Postharvest treatments, such as application of reduced-risk fungicide, biological agents and natural products, heat treatment and edible coating formulations, alone or in combination, can be successfully applied in a range of commodities in order to prevent decay. Directions for future research: The mode of action of antagonistic yeast in postharvest fruit disease control may be an important tool in postharvest biocontrol strategies, thus providing important guidance for their future application. In addition, mixtures of low-risk fungicides with biological agents should be carried out to identify the best postharvest treatments with the lowest environmental impact and the greatest consumer safety. Comparative studies for a range of fleshy products harvested from organic, integrated and conventional production systems should be also carried outen_US
dc.formatpdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofStewart Postharvest Reviewen_US
dc.rights© Stewart Postharvest Solutionsen_US
dc.subjectEdible coatingsen_US
dc.subjectFungal pathogensen_US
dc.subjectHeat treatmenten_US
dc.subjectMaturity stageen_US
dc.subjectBiological agentsen_US
dc.subjectMechanical harvesten_US
dc.titleHarvesting and handling effects on postharvest decayen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.collaborationCyprus University of Technologyen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of California-Davisen_US
dc.subject.categoryBiological Sciencesen_US
dc.journalsOpen Accessen_US
dc.reviewpeer reviewed-
dc.countryCyprusen_US
dc.countryUnited Statesen_US
dc.subject.fieldNatural Sciencesen_US
dc.publicationPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2212/spr.2009.2.3en_US
dc.dept.handle123456789/70en
dc.relation.issue2en_US
dc.relation.volume5en_US
cut.common.academicyear2008-2009en_US
dc.identifier.spage1en_US
dc.identifier.epage7en_US
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.openairetypearticle-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
crisitem.journal.journalissn1945-9656-
crisitem.journal.publisherStewart Postharvest Solutions-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, Biotechnology and Food Science-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-5849-6104-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles
CORE Recommender
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

15
checked on Nov 9, 2023

Page view(s)

437
Last Week
8
Last month
2
checked on Feb 16, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in KTISIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.