ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2022
Food loss of perishable produce from farm to retail: evidence from tomato supply chains in South India.
Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReducing food loss and waste (FLW) may narrow gaps between fruit and vegetable production and recommended intake. However, FLW estimates are inconsistent due to varying estimation methods.
objectivesUsing multiple estimation approaches, we examined the extent and determinants of FLW along tomato supply chains in South India, from farm to retail. We also explored tomato quality assessments.
methodsWe surveyed 75 farm households and 83 tomato traders in the Chittoor district, Andhra Pradesh, and 52 vegetable traders and 50 vegetable retailers in Hyderabad, Telangana, on harvest and market days. We calculated declared FLW values using participant-reported losses to estimate the preharvest quality FLW and quantitative FLW values at the farmer, vegetable-trader, and vegetable-retailer stages. We calculated the destination FLW based on counted crates diverted to loss destinations, using participant-reported destinations (animal feed, field discard), to estimate the postharvest FLW from farm to retail. We used pile sorting with farmers to explore on-farm quality assessments.
resultsThe average preharvest quality FLW was 13.9% of harvested tomatoes. From farm to retail, the quantitative FLW was greatest at the postharvest, farm level. Among all harvests, the median postharvest, farm-level FLW was 0.0% (IQR, 0.0%-7.9%) using the destination FLW approach (tomatoes diverted to nonfood uses) and 2.3% (IQR, 0.0%-12.5%) using the declared FLW approach (P < 0.05). Among harvests with a non-zero postharvest, farm-level FLW, the median FLW was 9.1% (IQR, 2.4%-16.7%) using the destination FLW approach (tomatoes diverted to nonfood uses) and 10.0% (IQR, 2.9%-16.7%) using the declared FLW approach. Harvesting during peak season was a determinant of postharvest, farm-level and preauction, market-level FLW values. Farmers prioritize color/ripeness attributes while harvesting and tomato size while grading.
conclusionsSingle-point estimates may obscure FLW patterns for perishable, indeterminate crops and depend on data collection and estimation methods. Reducing FLW of perishables requires the integration of quantitative and qualitative FLW estimation methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.