ReviewInternational journal of food science2025
Food Waste-Derived Organic Fertilizers: Critical Insights, Agronomic Impacts, and Pathways for Sustainable Adoption.
Review in International journal of food science, 2025. 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.
- Food Waste-Derived Organic Fertilizers: Critical Insights, Agronomic Impacts, and Pathways for Sustainable Adoption.International journal of food science · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food waste is one of the fastest growing sustainability challenges, wasting scarce resources and aggravating environmental degradation. Its valorization into organic fertilizers provides a critical opportunity to recover nutrients, reduce landfill burdens, and strengthen circular bioeconomy strategies. This review critically examines FW-derived organic fertilizers (FWOFs) across four major conversion routes including composting, vermicomposting, anaerobic digestion, and pyrolysis and also evaluates their impacts on soil health, nutrient cycling, crop yield and quality, and environmental trade-offs. We emphasize that while FWOFs offer multiple benefits, outcomes remain highly variable due to heterogeneity in feedstocks, processing methods, and application practices. Evidence highlights the strong potential for improving soil organic matter, water retention, and micronutrient supply but also raises unresolved risks from heavy metals, microplastics, and the survival of pathogens. By integrating multiscale evidence, this review provides a fertilizer-focused perspective that identifies critical knowledge gaps, standardization needs, and adoption pathways. In conclusion, this work underscores both the opportunities and limitations of FWOFs, offering concise guidance for advancing sustainable agriculture and circular bioeconomy practices.
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.