Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38241946›Full record

ArticleUltrasonics sonochemistry2024

Ultrasound synergistic slightly acidic electrolyzed water treatment of grapes: Impacts on microbial loads, wettability, and postharvest storage quality.

Yabin Feng, Kui Suo, Yang Zhang, Zhenfeng Yang, Cunshan Zhou, Liyu Shi, Wei Chen, Jiancheng Wang, Caiying Wang, Yangxiao Zheng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasonics sonochemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
16.2field-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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yabin FengCollege of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Wanli University, Ningbo 315100, China; Haitong Food (Ninghai) Co., Ltd, Ningbo 315602, China. Electronic address: fengyabinyx@zwu.edu.cn.
Kui SuoCollege of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Wanli University, Ningbo 315100, China.
Yang ZhangCollege of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Wanli University, Ningbo 315100, China.
Zhenfeng YangCollege of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Wanli University, Ningbo 315100, China. Electronic address: yangzf@zwu.edu.cn.
Cunshan ZhouSchool of Food and Biological Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China.
Liyu ShiCollege of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Wanli University, Ningbo 315100, China.
Wei ChenCollege of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Zhejiang Wanli University, Ningbo 315100, China.
Jiancheng WangHaitong Food (Ninghai) Co., Ltd, Ningbo 315602, China.
Caiying WangHaitong Food (Ninghai) Co., Ltd, Ningbo 315602, China.
Yangxiao ZhengHaitong Food (Ninghai) Co., Ltd, Ningbo 315602, China.
Zhejiang Wanli University · CNNinghai County First Hospital · CNJiangsu University · CNNingbo University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbial contamination is the principal factor in the deterioration of postharvest storage quality in grapes. To mitigate this issue, we explored a synergistic treatment which combines ultrasound (US) and slightly acidic electrolyzed water (SAEW), and rigorously compared with conventional water cleaning (CW), exclusive US treatment, and standalone SAEW treatment. The US + SAEW treatment proved to be markedly superior in reducing total bacterial, mold & yeast counts on grapes. Specifically, it achieved reductions of 2.23 log CFU/g and 2.76 log CFU/g, respectively, exceeding the efficiencies of SAEW (0.78, 0.75), US (0.58, 0.65), and CW (0.24, 0.46). The efficacy of this synergistic treatment is attributed to the ultrasound removal of the wax layer on grape skins, which transitions the skin from hydrophobic to hydrophilic. This alteration increases the contact area between the grape surface and SAEW, thereby enhancing the antimicrobial efficacy of SAEW. From a physicochemical quality standpoint, the US + SAEW treatment exhibited multiple advantages. It not only minimized weight loss, color deviations, polyphenol oxidase activity and malondialdehyde synthesis in comparison to CW-treated samples but also preserved firmness, sugar-acid ratio and the activities of key enzymes including phenylalanine ammonia-lyase, superoxide dismutase and catalase, and thus maintaining high levels of total phenolics, total ascorbic acid, total anthocyanins, and antioxidants. Consequently, US + SAEW treatment put off the times of decay onset in grapes by 12 days, outperforming both SAEW (8) and US (4) in comparison to CW. These results highlight the potential of US + SAEW as an effective strategy for maintaining grape quality during their postharvest storage period.

Indexed as

VitisAnthocyaninsWettabilityAnthocyaninsGrapesPostharvest Storage QualitySlightly Acidic Electrolyzed WaterSterilizationUltrasound Treatment

Identifiers

PMID38241946
PMCPMC10825514
OpenAlexW4390590812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.