Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40538960›Full record

ReviewJournal of food science and technology2025

Antimicrobial peptides in post-harvest management of fruits.

Balenahalli Narasingappa Ramesh, P A Niveditha, S N Nagesha, R Charith, D M Hithashree

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of food science and technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Balenahalli Narasingappa RameshICAR - AICRP on Post Harvest Engineering and Technology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, 560 065 India.ORCID 0000-0002-6494-8576
P A NivedithaDepartment of Plant Biotechnology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, 560 065 India.
S N NageshaDepartment of Plant Biotechnology, College of Agriculture, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, 560 065 India.
R CharithDepartment of Plant Biotechnology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, 560 065 India.
D M HithashreeDepartment of Plant Biotechnology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, 560 065 India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern agriculture is more prone to insect, pest, and disease attacks. Fruits are considered perishable crops compared to cereals and pulses. Fruits are majorly lost after harvest during storage, known as the post-harvest period, due to insect and pest infestations, pathogen attacks, and unfavorable environmental conditions. Conventionally, pesticides, fungicides, and some antibiotics are used to control the post-harvest diseases in fruits. However, the use of these conventional chemicals and antibiotics has been strictly restricted because of their drawbacks, such as leaving residues on fruits for extended periods, causing environmental effects, and, most notably, the development of resistance by many microorganisms against the commonly used antibiotics. Thus, there is an immediate need for an alternative method to control post-harvest diseases in fruits. The use of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) is the best promising alternative for efficiently controlling post-harvest diseases caused by microbes. The present review focuses on insect-derived AMPs, their use in post-harvest management of fruits, and the mechanism of action of AMPs.

Indexed as

Antimicrobial peptidesCoatingPackagingPost-harvest loss

Identifiers

PMID40538960
PMCPMC12173987

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.