The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Alternative technologies to control postharvest diseases of stone fruits
Open accessAbstract
Purpose of review The aim of this review is to assemble the key information available to understand the pathology and to develop strategies (pre- and postharvest) to control the main postharvest diseases of stone fruits. Findings The bibliography presented in this review contains the most interesting research done in the last few years concerning the main postharvest diseases of stone fruit, and especially that caused by Monilinia spp. Recent studies of the epidemiology of this pathogen and the disease it causes in the field have revealed essential aspects of its behavior that facilitate the design of effective preharvest disease management strategies. Moreover, there is a large volume of recent studies about a wide range of strategies to control brown rot after harvest that include Chemical control methods including food additives, natural compounds and natural edible coatings; biological control; and physical treatments. Directions for future research Although a large number of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of alternative postharvest treatments, only few of them are currently applied under commercial conditions. Some others, although developed and intended for near future commercial application, have limitations such as economic cost, delays due to registration issues, or reduced efficacy compared to conventional fungicides. Research is needed to resolve these obstacles to make all these strategies available in a near future. © 2015 SPS (UK) Ltd.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Several research works showed that postharvest applications of SBC or potassium bicarbonate (PBC), alone or in combination with other alternative control methods, effectively reduced brown rot caused by different species of Monilinia (mainly M. fructicola , M. laxa , and M. fructigena ).”
From GRAS, plant- and animal-derived compounds as alternatives to conventional fungicides for the control of postharvest diseases of fresh horticultural produce (2016) · cites this paper as Usall et al., 2015
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Palou, L., Ali, A., Fallik, E., & Romanazzi, G. (2016) · Postharvest Biology and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.postharvbio.2016.04.017 · Cited by 286
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Usall, J., Casals, C., Sisquella, M., Palou, L., & Cal, A. D.
- Venue
- Stewart Postharvest Review
- Publisher
- Portico
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1-6
- ISSN
- 1745-9656 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4243026629
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 6.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- Stewart Postharvest Review (publishedVersion)
- DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Postharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Disease Management Techniques
- Keywords
- postharvest disease, stone fruit, Monilinia, brown rot, chemical control, natural compounds, edible coatings, biological control, physical treatment, disease epidemiology, fungicides
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: Alternative technologies to control postharvest diseases of stone fruits. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2212/spr.2015.4.2
- The paper
- Usall, J., Casals, C., Sisquella, M., Palou, L., & Cal, A. D. (2015). Alternative technologies to control postharvest diseases of stone fruits. Stewart Postharvest Review. https://doi.org/10.2212/spr.2015.4.2