The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Integrated management of postharvest gray mold on fruit crops
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Gray mold, incited by Botrytis cinerea , causes major postharvest losses in a wide range of crops. Some infections that occur in the field remain quiescent during the growing season and develop after harvest. The pathogen is also capable of infecting plant tissues through surface injuries inflicted during harvesting and subsequent handling; these develop during storage, even at 0 °C, and spread among products by aerial mycelial growth and conidia. The postharvest decay by this pathogen is controlled by a combination of preharvest and postharvest practices. To minimize postharvest gray mold, control programs rely mainly on applications of fungicides. However, mounting concerns of consumers and regulatory authorities about risks associated with chemical residues in food have led to imposition of strict regulations, the banning of use of certain chemical groups, and preferences by wholesaler, retailers and consumers to avoid chemically treated produce. These developments have driven the search for alternative management strategies that are effective and not reliant on conventional fungicide applications. In this review, conventional and alternative control strategies are discussed including their advantages and disadvantages. They include the use of conventional fungicides, biocontrol agents, physical treatments, natural antimicrobials, and disinfecting agents. Based on examples to control gray mold on specific crops, it is concluded that an integrated management program where adoption of a holistic approach is the key for meeting the challenge of minimizing postharvest losses caused by B. cinerea . To optimize the efficacy of treatments, it is essential to understand their mechanism of action as much as possible. Information about direct and indirect effects of each approach on the pathogen is also presented.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Tripathi, P., & Dubey, N. K. (2004) · Postharvest Biology and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2003.11.005 · Cited by 786
Twenty years of postharvest biocontrol research: Is it time for a new paradigm?
Droby, S., Wisniewski, M., Macarisin, D., & Wilson, C. (2009) · Postharvest Biology and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2008.11.009 · Cited by 758
Self-citationReview: Utilization of antagonistic yeasts to manage postharvest fungal diseases of fruit
Liu, J., Sui, Y., Wisniewski, M., Droby, S., & Liu, Y. (2013) · International Journal of Food Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2013.09.004 · Cited by 521
Self-citationShelf life extension of fresh fruit and vegetables by chitosan treatment
Romanazzi, G., Feliziani, E., Baños, S. B., & Sivakumar, D. (2017) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408398.2014.900474 · Cited by 367
Self-citationSaravanakumar, D., Ciavorella, A., Spadaro, D., Garibaldi, A., & Gullino, M. L. (2008) · Postharvest Biology and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2007.11.006 · Cited by 224
Karabulut, O. A., Smilanick, J. L., Gabler, F. M., Mansour, M., & Droby, S. (2003) · Plant Disease · doi:10.1094/pdis.2003.87.11.1384 · Cited by 139
Self-citationControl of table grape storage rots by pre-harvest applications of salts
Nigro, F., Schena, L., Ligorio, A., Pentimone, I., Ippolito, A., & Salerno, M. G. (2006) · Postharvest Biology and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2006.06.005 · Cited by 134
Youssef, K., & Roberto, S. R. (2014) · Postharvest Biology and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2013.08.011 · Cited by 104
Fiori, S., Fadda, A., Giobbe, S., Berardi, E., & Migheli, Q. (2008) · FEMS Yeast Research · doi:10.1111/j.1567-1364.2008.00424.x · Cited by 41
Cited by
Grande-Tovar, C. D., Chaves-Lopez, C., Serio, A., Rossi, C., & Paparella, A. (2018) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2018.05.019 · Cited by 242
Arrarte, E., Garmendia, G., Rossini, C., Wisniewski, M., & Vero, S. (2017) · Biological Control · doi:10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.03.002 · Cited by 121
Abdel-Kareem, M. M., Zohri, A.-N. A., & Nasr, S. A. E. E. (2021) · Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection · doi:10.1007/s41348-021-00461-y · Cited by 25
Givi, F., Gholami, M., & Massah, A. (2019) · Journal of Food Safety · doi:10.1111/jfs.12639 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Romanazzi, G., Smilanick, J. L., Feliziani, E., & Droby, S.
- Venue
- Postharvest Biology and Technology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-03
- Volume
- 113
- Pages
- 69-76
- ISSN
- 0925-5214 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2207280189
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 20.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Integrated management of postharvest gray mold on fruit crops. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.11.003
- The paper
- Romanazzi, G., Smilanick, J. L., Feliziani, E., & Droby, S. (2016). Integrated management of postharvest gray mold on fruit crops. Postharvest Biology and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.11.003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.