Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26787928›Full record

ReviewJournal of food science and technology2016

Sprout suppression on potato: need to look beyond CIPC for more effective and safer alternatives.

Vijay Paul, R Ezekiel, Rakesh Pandey

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of food science and technology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
14.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 153 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Valorization of Potato Peels (Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vijay PaulCentral Potato Research Institute-Campus, Modipuram, Meerut, 250 110 UP India ; Division of Plant Physiology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi, 110 012 India.
R EzekielCrop Physiology and Post-Harvest Technology, Central Potato Research Institute (CPRI), Shimla, 171 001 HP India ; National Agricultural Innovation Project (NAIP), Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan - II, Pusa Campus, New Delhi, 110 012 India.
Rakesh PandeyDivision of Plant Physiology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi, 110 012 India.
Central Potato Research Institute · INIndian Agricultural Research Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

World over, potatoes are being stored at 8-12 °C (85-90 % RH). This is the most common way of long-term (up to 6 to 9 months) storage of potatoes. The benefit of storing the potatoes within the temperature range of 8-12 °C is minimum accumulation of sugars in stored potato tubers. In sub-temperate, sub-tropical and tropical countries of the world, short-term (3 to 4 months) storage of potatoes is being done by non-refrigerated traditional/on-farm methods. These short- and long-term storage methods keep the stored potatoes suitable not only for table purpose but also for processing. However, once the natural dormancy period of potato is over, the prevailing temperatures in these storage methods favour sprouting and sprout growth. Therefore, use of some sprout suppressant to check the sprout growth becomes essential under these methods of potato storage. CIPC [Isopropyl N-(3-chlorophenyl) carbamate] is the most wide spread and commonly used sprout suppressant on potatoes. CIPC has been in use for more than 50 years and research carried out over such a long period use of CIPC has not only enhanced our understanding of its properties and chemistry but also about the production and toxicological status of its metabolites/degradation products. Today, various safety issues and concerns have surfaced primarily due to continuous and long-term use of CIPC. This review presents an appraisal on CIPC and explains the reasons for the long-time dependence on this chemical as a potato sprout suppressant. Issues like maximum residue limit and acceptable daily intake limit are being discussed for CIPC. This article brings an update on practical aspects of potato storage, residue levels of CIPC, efficacy of CIPC as sprout suppressant and health and environmental safety issues linked with CIPC and its metabolites. The aim of this article is to find possible solutions, way outs and future plans that can make the sprout suppression of potatoes safer and more risk free.

Indexed as

ADILCIPCMetabolite toxicityMRLPotatoPotato storageResidueSafety issuesSprout suppressant

Identifiers

PMID26787928
PMCPMC4711416
OpenAlexW1175581706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.