Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Food Chemistry: X logoLink to Food Chemistry: X
. 2026 Jan 23;34:103583. doi: 10.1016/j.fochx.2026.103583

Systematic comparison of the effects of different treatments on the shelf-life storage of citrus fruits and screening of preservation measures: A frequency network meta-analysis

Shiyi Xu 1, Xinyue Dai 1, Weifeng Zhao 1, Xuehu Yang 1,⁎, Ran Tang 1,⁎
PMCID: PMC12914818  PMID: 41717373

Abstract

Background

Citrus fruits are highly prone to postharvest losses, requiring effective and eco-friendly preservation strategies. This study evaluates various treatments to identify optimal measures for extending citrus shelf-life.

Method

A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed, comparing 27 preservation treatments and synthesizing standardized mean differences of key indicators to rank efficacy.

Result

Specific treatments outperformed for distinct goals: cinnamon oil-konjac gum coatings retained firmness and reduced weight loss; hydroxypropyl methylcellulose-chitosan composites controlled decay and acidity; bioactive treatments boosted secondary metabolites and antioxidant enzyme activities.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis provides evidence-based rankings of citrus preservation treatments, guiding strategies to cut losses, boost quality and advance sustainability. No single treatment is universally optimal, so future studies should focus on multi-objective optimization for balanced integrated protocols.

Keywords: Citrus, Preservation strategy, Antioxidant activity, Postharvest storage, Meta-analysis

Highlights

  • •

    A comprehensive comparison and systematic review were conducted on the mainstream preservation measures for citrus fruits.

  • •

    A large amount of valid data has been collected and the results are highly reliable.

  • •

    The results of the analysis can provide a basis for researchers to design effective combination programs.

1. Introduction

Citrus is an important source of ascorbic acid and dietary fiber, and is popular worldwide for its pleasant aroma and taste. Citrus fruits are rich in various bioactive substances, such as flavonoids, essential oils, carotenoids, limonene, and synephrine, among others (Caballero et al., 2022; Huang et al., 2021). Eating citrus can prevent various diseases including cancer and inflammation, digestive system and cardiovascular diseases, and has extremely high nutritional value (Karn et al., 2021; Lu et al., 2023). The nutritional function of citrus is shown in Fig. 1. However, during transportation, storage, and sales, citrus fruits are difficult to preserve and prone to decay, often resulting in significant economic losses (Xue et al., 2022). For instance, Penicillium species, the causative agent of citrus green mold disease, are major pathogens contributing to postharvest deterioration, particularly in Mediterranean regions, where they inflict severe yield losses (Salim et al., 2022). In addition, during postharvest storage, citrus fruits also undergo uncontrollable physical and biochemical changes, leading to physiological disorders and affecting their marketability (François et al., 2022; Niemann et al., 2024).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

The nutritional value of citrus fruits.

However,citrus fruits are highly perishable during postharvest stages—including transportation, storage, and marketing—due to their susceptibility to microbial decay and physiological disorders, leading to substantial economic losses globally (Xue et al., 2022). Key fungal pathogens such as Penicillium spp. (causing green mold), Geotrichum candidum (sour rot), and Phytophthora spp. (brown rot) are major contributors to postharvest deterioration, with Penicillium infections being particularly devastating in Mediterranean climates (François et al., 2022; Salim et al., 2022). Beyond biotic threats, citrus fruits also undergo inevitable physical and biochemical changes—such as water loss, softening, nutrient degradation, and chilling injury—which further compromise their quality and marketability (Deng et al., 2024; Niemann et al., 2024).

At present, induced resistance is the mainstream fresh-keeping measures, including solution coating of fruits, inoculation of biocontrol bacteria, film packaging, nanoemulsion soaking, etc. (Li, Bai, et al., 2024; Liu, Pan, et al., 2024; Zhou et al., 2024). Many natural materials used for coatings, such as chitosan and konjac glucomannan, are essentially dietary fibers or biopolymers with similar structures. Dietary fibers, particularly soluble fibers, have garnered significant attention in food science due to their unique physicochemical properties (such as excellent film-forming ability, water retention, and oil-holding capacity) and their potential to regulate physiological processes, such as delaying gastric emptying, adsorbing fats, and reducing cholesterol levels(Kumar et al., 2023). These properties enable dietary fiber-based coatings not only to form physical barriers but also to potentially delay postharvest fruit quality deterioration through microenvironment modulation and physiological intervention, offering new strategies for sustainable preservation. Although some practical and feasible treatment plans have been demonstrated in some experimental content, spraying or soaking of preservation substances is closely related to food safety, and excessive use may affect fruit quality or pose potential hazards to consumer health. Considering that individual studies may not provide sufficient data to guide practice, we attempt to objectively evaluate the potential role of various preservation treatments in citrus storage. (Liu, Liu, Tan, Luo and Xue, 2024)In this study, we conducted a systematic review of cutting-edge preservation measures for citrus fruits, using the standardized mean of each treatment effect after secondary treatment as the variable abundance, and employed a network meta-analysis based on a random effects model. The aim was to obtain a wider confidence interval and more authentic analysis results through direct and indirect fair comparisons, providing empirical reference for screening and innovating efficient ideal ecological composite preservation measures, and offering new ideas for reducing costs and increasing efficiency in high-quality storage of citrus fruits.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Included literature search strategies and screening criteria

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted and reported in accordance with the PICOS framework (Participants, Interventions, Comparators, Outcomes, and Study design)(Ioannidis and Lau, 1996) [1]. A comprehensive literature search was performed using the following electronic databases from their inception to June 15, 2025: PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, and Wipu databases. The search was restricted to articles published in English and Chinese.

The search strategy was developed based on the PICOS principle:

P (Participants): Freshly harvested citrus fruits (Citrus spp.) of any variety.

I (Interventions):Any physical, chemical, biological, or composite postharvest preservation treatment (e.g., edible coatings, essential oils, biocontrol agents, soaking, spraying, or modified atmosphere packaging).

C (Comparators): Control groups treated with water (e.g., sterile water, distilled water) via the same application method (e.g., soaking, spraying).

O (Outcomes): Indicators including primary quality attributes (firmness, decay rate, weight loss, respiration rate, total soluble solids, titratable acidity), secondary metabolites (total phenolic content, total flavonoid content), and physiological activity-related parameters (malondialdehyde content, superoxide dismutase, catalase, peroxidase activities, ascorbic acid content).

S (Study design): Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including parallel-group and crossover designs, with an intervention duration of at least one week.

The search terms included: (“citrus” OR “orange” OR “tangerine” OR “mandarin”) AND (“postharvest” OR “storage” OR “preservation”) AND (“treatment” OR “coating” OR “packaging” OR “essential oil” OR “chitosan” OR “film”). To minimize the risk of missing eligible studies, the reference lists of all included articles and relevant reviews were manually screened.

2.2. Exclusion criteria for inclusion in the study

The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the literature are as follows: (1)Studies that are duplicates across different databases, lack a control group, or contain incomplete information; (2) Experiments with fewer than 10 samples per repeated fruit experiment, leading to significant heterogeneity in the results; (3) Studies with data errors or incomplete data. Additionally, we used the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment tool (RoB 2) to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. Studies rated as having a “high risk of bias” in any key domain were excluded. (4) As an auxiliary screening criterion, we excluded studies published in non-core Peking University Chinese journals or in SCI journals with an impact factor below 5, to control for potential publication bias and heterogeneity. After screening, both single treatment and combined treatment schemes were included in the meta-analysis database. The researchers (Shiyi Xu, Xinyue Dai) independently selected the studies, screened the main reports and supplemented relevant materials, and extracted relevant information from the included trials. Any discrepancies that “arose were double checked and resolved through discussions with other members of the review team (Ran Tang and Xuehu Yang).

2.3. Evaluation indicators

The following data were extracted from each selected study: (1) Primary quality indicators, including hardness, decay rate, weight loss rate, respiration rate, total soluble solids (TSS), and titratable acidity (TA). (2) Secondary metabolite content indicators, including total flavonoid content (TFC) and total phenolic content (TPC). (3) Physiological activity-related enzyme activities and ascorbic acid indicators, including malondialdehyde content (MDA), superoxide dismutase activity (SOD), catalase activity (CAT), peroxidase activity (POD), and ascorbic acid content (ASA). Due to differences in the measurement methods, measurement times, and units of various research outcome indicators included in the literature, in order to minimize data bias, we chose the normalized results of the changes in quality indicators, secondary metabolite content indicators, and physiological activity indicators after preservation treatment and storage for 7 ± 1 d, namely Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) and Standardized Error (SE), as the performance measurement standards. Among these, quality changes (including hardness, decay rate, weight loss rate, respiration rate, TSS, and TA) served as the primary outcome measures, while secondary outcome measures included secondary metabolite content indicators (such as TFC and TPC) as well as physiological activity-related indicators (MDA, SOD, CAT, POD, and ASA). Notably, decay rate, weight loss, respiration rate, and MDA content were observed as negative outcomes in their respective randomized controlled trials, whereas all other indicators showed positive outcomes.

2.4. Statistical analysis

Considering that the data type is a continuous variable and there is heterogeneity in the methodology of multiple studies, the Random Effects Model (REM) was used for analysis. Using Bayesian models as statistical methods; network diagrams were created using Stata 18.0for direct or indirect comparisons between various preservation treatments; By conducting a meta-analysis, forest plots comparing various treatments were obtained and a confidence interval table of expected values was plotted. We assessed between-study heterogeneity using the I2 statistic and tau2 values. A random-effects model was employed to account for variability across studies. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using the leave-one-out method to evaluate the influence of individual studies on the overall results.Considering that the data type is a continuous variable and there is heterogeneity in the methodology of multiple studies, we first applied normalization (SMD and SE) to standardize outcome measures across studies. Subsequently, a Random Effects Model (REM) within a Bayesian framework was used for analysis, which is well-suited for addressing between-study heterogeneity and provides more reliable effect estimatesPrior distributions were specified to reflect vague prior knowledge. The treatment effects were assigned normal priors: θ ∼ N(0, 10^4)and the between-study heterogeneity standard deviationτ ∼ N+(0, 0.5^2). These non-informative priors were chosen to minimize the influence of prior assumptions on the final effect estimates, ensuring a robust, data-driven analysis consistent with standard practices for Bayesian network meta-analyses.Then, the effectiveness of each treatment was measured and a ranking chart was obtained to evaluate the effectiveness of the preservation treatment based on the cumulative probability ranking curve (SUCRA) value. For indicators with positive results, the higher the SUCRA value, the more reliable the comprehensive effectiveness of the treatment, while for indicators with negative results, the opposite was true, lower SUCRA values indicate better efficacy for negative outcomes To address potential publication bias and small-study effects, we employed an empirical Bayesian approach. This method integrates prior information with the observed data, thereby improving the accuracy of effect size estimates, especially in the presence of small sample sizes or potential publication bias. By using this technique, we aimed to obtain more reliable and robust conclusions from our analysis.

3. Results and analysis

3.1. Literature screening results and basic features of included studies

This study included experiments related to citrus preservation strategies published from the date of database establishment to June 15, 2025, and randomized controlled trials were used to measure the specific effectiveness of the measures. After screening, 2308 duplicate data records were removed from the initial total of 4131 retrieved records, and 1647 irrelevant articles were excluded after reading the titles and abstracts. 176 articles were retained. After excluding conference papers, meta-analyses, and reviews, literature that did not match the research subjects, intervention measures, low-quality literature, incomplete data, and literature that could not obtain the full text were further excluded. A total of 48 randomized controlled experiments were included, and 27 different preservation treatments (including untreated ones) were finally included as comparison objects for network META analysis. The processing screening flowchart and the constructed direct and indirect comparison relationship network for the included studies are shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Literature screening process (A) and constructed comparative network relationship (B). In Fig. B, node size is proportional to sample size, and line thickness is positively correlated with the strength of connection.

The basic characteristics of the included studies are shown in Table 1. The sample sizes corresponding to each treatment included in the analysis all met the requirements of literature screening. After double checks and strict screening, the treatments under each index in the comparison network system were cross-compared with their respective control groups. After regression statistics, forest plots were obtained. The statistical comparison results of quality indicators were shown in Fig. 3, the comparison results of secondary metabolite content are shown in Supplementary Fig. S1Supplementary Fig. S1Supplementary Fig. S1A, and the comparison results of physiological activity indicators are shown in Supplementary Fig. S1Supplementary Fig. S1Supplementary Fig. S1B. For primary quality indicators, normalized integration results showed: firmness (SMD = −7.12, 95% CI [−11.50; −2.75]), weight loss (SMD = 37.33, 95% CI [7.77; 66.90]), decay rate (SMD = 4.31, 95% CI [−10.60; 19.23]), respiratory rate (SMD = −2.92, 95% CI [−10.77; 4.93]), TSS (SMD = 2.22, 95% CI [−0.46; 4.90]), TA (SMD = −6.72, 95% CI [−10.60; −2.83]). For secondary metabolite content indicators, TFC (SMD = −2.27, 95%CI [−6.42; 1.88]), TPC (SMD = −2.85, (95%CI [−12.77; 7.07]). Physiological activity-related indicators included MDA (SMD = 4.69, 95% CI [−1.00; 10.38]), SOD (SMD = 10.94, 95% CI [7.38; 14.50]), CAT (SMD = 14.87, 95% CI [9.36; 20.39]), POD (SMD = 5.64, 95% CI [1.14; 10.13]), ASA (SMD = −6.45, 95% CI [−19.19; 6.29]). These integrated results exhibited broader confidence intervals compared to individual study-level control experiments under each study, providing robust empirical foundations for SUCRA based composite scoring of treatment efficacy according to actual effect magnitudes.

Table 1.

Basic features included in the study.

Serial
Number		 Included
Studies		 Treatment Mcasures Sample
Size 		Incusion
Indicators
A1 Qianyi Zhou, 2024 Soaked with 1% CS solution 600 Decay Rate, Respiration Rate, TSS,
Firmness, TA, Weight Loss
A2 Qianyi Zhou, 2024 Soaked with 1% HPMC solution +0.5% CS solution 600
A3 Qianyi Zhou, 2024 Soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution 600
A4 Qianyi Zhou, 2024 Soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution 600
B1 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 Kraft paper coated with 1.5% konjac gum solution 693 Decay Rate, Firmness, TSS,
Weight Loss, TA, ASA
B2 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 Kraft paper coated with 1% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution 693
B3 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 Kraft paper coated with 2% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution 693
B4 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 Kraft paper coated with 3% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution 693
B5 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 Kraft paper coated with 4% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution 693
B6 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 Kraft paper coated with 5% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution 693
C1 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 A mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg / mL 30 Weight Loss, TSS, TFC, TPC,
SOD, POD, CAT, MDA
C2 Liu, Pan, et al., 2024 A mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg / mL 30
D1 Yurong Li, 2024 Immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times 432 Decay Rate, Firmness, Weight Loss,
ASA, CAT, TPC, MDA, POD,
SOD, TA, TFC, TSS
D2 Yurong Li, 2024 Immersed in pure CS coating solution 432
D3 Yurong Li, 2024 Soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution 432
E1 Shanqiao Chen, 2022 Soaked in an aqueous solution of LAE at 32 g / L 750 Decay Rate, TA, TSS
E2 Shanqiao Chen, 2022 Soaked in an aqueous solution of NT at 16 g / L 750
E3 Shanqiao Chen, 2022 Soaked in a composite solution with 16 g per liter of LAE and 4 g per liter of NT 750
F1 Qianyun Zhou, 2022 Treated with BC coating agent 2000 Firmness, Respiration Rate, Weight Loss,
TA, TFC, TPC, TSS
F2 Qianyun Zhou, 2022 Treated with 402D coating agent 2000
F3 Qianyun Zhou, 2022 Treated with polyethylene film bags 2000
G1 Chenxi Xu, 2024 Washed and air - dried + applied with 402F coating agent 216 Weight Loss, TA, TSS
G2 Chenxi Xu, 2024 Washed and air - dried + applied with BC coating agent 216
H1 Chushan Yuan,2024 Soaked in 1.3% MEO – NE - PT solution 240 Decay Rate, Weight Loss,
Firmness, TA, TSS
H2 Chushan Yuan,2024 Soaked in 2.7% MEO – NE - PT solution 240
H3 Chushan Yuan,2024 Soaked in 5.4% MEO – NE - PT solution 240
I / No process / /
Open in a new tab

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

The effect size comparison results of each treatment effect under the quality index as the main evaluation standard.

3.2. Network meta-analysis results

3.2.1. Comprehensive effects of each treatment under the quality index

The SUCRA values and their rankings for each treatment intervention are shown in Fig. 4, with the percentage likelihood of optimal effect as the evaluation criterion, and letters and numbers on the outer circle corresponding to the serial numbers in Table 1, representing the corresponding interventions.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Fig. A shows the comprehensive evaluation of each treatment under the quality index, Fig. B shows the physiological activity index, and Fig. C shows the secondary metabolite content index.

In terms of citrus firmness retention, this dataset compared the results of 20 different preservation methods and showed the overall effectiveness score from high to low according to SUCRA score: kraft paper coated with 3% cinnamon essential oil (CEO) + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 98.35%); kraft paper coated with 2% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 96.38%); kraft paper coated with 5% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 89.5%); kraft paper coated with 1% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 84.2%); kraft paper coated with 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 79.0%); kraft paper coated with 4% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 73.7%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 68.4%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +0.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 63.2%); soaked with 1% CS solution (SUCRA = 57.9%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution (SUCRA = 52.6%); soaked in chitosan – polymethoxylated flavonoids - loaded citral emulsion (CS - PCT) composite coating solution (SUCRA = 47.4%); treated with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 42.1%); treated with beeswax - candelilla wax (BC) coating agent (SUCRA = 36.8%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 31.6%); soaked in 2.7% Mustard essential oil - nanoemulsions fortified with citrus pectin and tween-80 (MEO - NE - PT) solution (SUCRA = 26.3%); untreated control (SUCRA = 21.0%); immersed in a preservative prochloraz (PCZ) solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 15.7%); treated with 402-Decco (402D) coating agent (SUCRA = 10.6%); soaked in 5.4% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 5.3%); soaked in 1.3% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

This dataset compared the specific effects of 20 different preservation methods in controlling the decay rate of citrus, and the ranking order is as follows: soaked in 5.4% MEO – NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); soaked in 1.3% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 94.7%); kraft paper coated with 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 73.7%); kraft paper coated with 1/2/4/5% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 73.7%); kraft paper coated with 3% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 73.6%); untreated control (SUCRA = 73.6%); soaked in an aqueous solution of natamycin (NT) at 16 g/L (SUCRA = 52.6%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 46.0%); soaked in an aqueous solution of Nα - Lauroyl – L - arginine ethyl ester hydrochloride (LAE) at 32 g/L (SUCRA = 40.2%); soaked in a composite solution with 16 g per liter of LAE and 4 g per liter of NT (SUCRA = 40.2%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 31.6%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 26.3%); soaked in 2.7% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 21.0%); soaked with 1% CS solution (SUCRA = 15.8%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +0.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 10.5%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution (SUCRA = 5.3%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

Regarding the level of weight loss in citrus, this data compares the results of 24 different preservation methods, ranked in order according to SUCRA values: soaked in 1.3% MEO – NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); soaked in 5.4% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 95.65%); soaked in 2.7% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 91.3%); treated with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 82.6%); treated with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 87.0%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 78.3%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 73.9%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 69.5%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution (SUCRA = 61.1%); washed and air - dried + applied with 402F coating agent (SUCRA = 56.2%); washed and air - dried + applied with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 53.1%); treated with 402D coating agent (SUCRA = 55.6%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution (SUCRA = 52.2%); untreated control (SUCRA = 46.5%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 34.6%); Soaked with 1% CS solution (SUCRA = 40.6%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile potato dextrose broth (PDB) medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/mL (SUCRA = 30.60%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/mLwas injected into each wound (SUCRA = 26.10%); kraft paper coated with 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 21.70%); kraft paper coated with 1/2/4% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 12.90%); kraft paper coated with 3% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 2.40%); kraft paper coated with 5% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 2.36%).

For the comparison of respiration rates, this dataset covers 8 treatments with SUCRA values in descending order: soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); untreated control (SUCRA = 85.7%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution (SUCRA = 71.4%); treated with 402D coating agent (SUCRA = 57.1%); treated with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 42.9%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +0.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 28.6%); soaked with 1% CS solution (SUCRA = 14.3%); treated with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 0.0%).

A total of 21 preservation treatments were included in terms of maintaining TSS content, ranked as follows: a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml (SUCRA = 100.0%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution (SUCRA = 93.2%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/ml was injected into each wound (SUCRA = 91.8%); treated with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 84.3%); treated with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 79.7%); treated with 402D coating agent(SUCRA = 74.5%); untreated control (SUCRA = 68.7%); washed and air – dried + applied with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 62.9%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +0.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 60.5%); washed and air - dried + applied with 402F coating agent (SUCRA = 56.4%); Immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times(SUCRA = 52.7%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution(SUCRA = 45.2%); soaked in an aqueous solution of NT at 16 g/L (SUCRA = 40.0%); soaked in a composite solution with 16 g per liter of LAE and 4 g per liter of NT (SUCRA = 35.0%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 30.0%); soaked in an aqueous solution of LAE at 32 g/L (SUCRA = 25.0%); soaked with 1% CS solution (SUCRA = 18.6%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 16.4%); soaked in 5.4% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 10.0%); soaked in 2.7% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 5.0%); soaked in 1.3% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

In terms of maintaining TA content, a total of 25 different treatments were compared in this analysis, ranked as follows: soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1% CS solution (SUCRA = 95.8%); soaked in an aqueous solution of NT at 16 g/L (SUCRA = 91.7%); kraft paper coated with 3% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 87.5%); kraft paper coated with 4% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 81.3%); kraft paper coated with 5% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 81.2%); kraft paper coated with 2% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 75.0%); kraft paper coated with 1% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 70.8%); soaked in 5.4% MEO – NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 66.6%); soaked with 1% CS solution (SUCRA = 60.4%); soaked in 2.7% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 58.9%); treated with 402D coating agent (SUCRA = 55.7%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 45.3%); soaked in a composite solution with 16 g per liter of LAE and 4 g per liter of NT (SUCRA = 45.0%); soaked with 1% HPMC solution +0.5% CS solution (SUCRA = 44.8%); treated with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 38.7%); kraft paper coated with 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 31.1%); washed and air - dried + applied with 402F coating agent (Kaifeng Ruipin Biotechnology Co., LTD.) (SUCRA = 27.5%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 23.0%); washed and air - dried + applied with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 21.2%); untreated control (SUCRA = 19.9%); treated with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 14.3%); soaked in an aqueous solution of LAE at 32 g/L (SUCRA = 9.6%); soaked in 1.3% MEO - NE - PT solution (SUCRA = 4.7%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 0.0%).

3.2.2. Comprehensive effect of each treatment under secondary metabolite content index

For promoting the accumulation of total phenolics and total flavonoids in fruits, nine interventions were compared. Ranked by SUCRA values for total phenolic content changes, the interventions showed the following order: soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); immersion in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 87.5%); injection of spore suspension in PDB medium with 120 μg/mL streptomycin (SUCRA = 75.0%); immersion in 1000 × diluted PCZ solution (SUCRA = 62.5%); injection of spore suspension in PDB medium with 60 μg/mL streptomycin into wounds (SUCRA = 49.7%); treatment with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 37.8%); untreated control (SUCRA = 25.0%); treatment with 402D coating agent (SUCRA = 12.5%); treatment with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 0.0%).

For changes in total flavonoid content, the treatments were ranked by their SUCRA scores as follows: soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); injection of spore suspension in PDB medium with 120 μg/mL streptomycin (SUCRA = 87.5%); injection of spore suspension in PDB medium, with 60 μg/mL streptomycin into wounds (SUCRA = 75.0%); untreated control (SUCRA = 62.5%); treatment with 402D coating agent (SUCRA = 50.0%); treated with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 37.5%); treatment with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 25.0%); immersion in 1000 × diluted PCZ solution (SUCRA = 12.5%); immersion in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

3.2.3. Comprehensive effect of each treatment under physiological activity index

The dataset included 6 preservation measures for comparing changes in SOD, CAT, POD activities, changes in MDA content, and 10 different treatments for comparing changes in ASA activity. For MDA accumulation, the treatments were ranked by combined SUCRA scores as follows: injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 60 μg/mL streptomycin into wounds (SUCRA = 100.0%); injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 120 μg/mL streptomycin (SUCRA = 76.5%); untreated control (SUCRA = 63.5%); immersion in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 40.0%); immersion in 1000 × diluted PCZ solution (SUCRA = 20.1%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

For promoting SOD activity, treatments were ranked by their SUCRA scores as follows: immersion in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 120 μg/mL streptomycin (SUCRA = 79.1%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 60.9%); untreated control (SUCRA = 39.8%); injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 60 μg/mL streptomycin into wounds (SUCRA = 17.6%); and immersion in 1000 × PCZ solution (SUCRA = 2.6%).

For promoting CAT activity treatments were ranked by their SUCRA scores as follows: injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 120 μg/mL streptomycin (SUCRA = 100.0%); injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 60 μg/mL streptomycin into wounds (SUCRA = 80.0%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 60.0%); untreated control (SUCRA = 38.8%); immersion in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 21.2%); immersion in 1000 × PCZ solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

For promoting POD activity, treatments were ranked by their SUCRA scores as follows:: injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 120 μg/ml streptomycin (SUCRA = 100.0%); injection of a 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium with 60 μg/ml streptomycin into wounds (SUCRA = 80.0%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 60.0%); untreated control (SUCRA = 40.0%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 20.0%); immersion in 1000 × PCZ solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

For promoting ASA content, treatments were ranked by their SUCRA scores as follows: kraft paper coated with 4% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); kraft paper coated with 3% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 88.9%); kraft paper coated with 5% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 77.8%); immersion in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 66.7%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 55.6%); untreated control (SUCRA = 44.4%); immersion in 1000 × PCZ solution (SUCRA = 33.3%); kraft paper coated with 1% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 22.2%); kraft paper coated with 2% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 11.1%); kraft paper coated with 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

In promoting the accumulation of total phenolics and total flavonoids in fruits, we compared nine interventions. In terms of changes in total phenolic content, the magnitude of SUCRA values for each treatment was ranked as follows: soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 87.5%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml (SUCRA = 75.0%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 62.5%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/ml was injected into each wound (SUCRA = 49.7%); treated with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 37.8%); untreated control (SUCRA = 25.0%); treated with 402D coating agent (SUCRA = 12.5%); treated with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 0.0%).

For the aspect of changes in total flavonoid content, the rankings of the scores of the treatments were as follows: Soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml (SUCRA = 87.5%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/ml was injected into each wound (SUCRA = 75.0%); untreated control (SUCRA = 62.5%); treated with 402D coating agent (SUCRA = 50.0%); treated with BC coating agent (SUCRA = 37.5%); treated with polyethylene film bags (SUCRA = 25.0%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 12.5%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 0.0%). Higher SUCRA values indicate greater efficacy in preserving total flavonoid content, with the ranking reflecting the relative performance of each treatment.

3.2.4. Comprehensive effect of each treatment under physiological activity index

For comparing the physiological activity indices, for the different changes in the activities of SOD, CAT, POD and the MDA content, a total of 6 preservation measures were included in the dataset for comparison. For changes in ASA activity, 10 different treatments were included.

For the effect of MDA accumulation, the results of the combined utility scores for each treatment were as follows: a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/ml was injected into each wound (SUCRA = 100.0%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml (SUCRA = 76.5%); untreated control (SUCRA = 63.5%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 40.0%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 20.1%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

In terms of promoting SOD activity, the treatments were ranked in order of utility: immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml (SUCRA = 79.1%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 60.9%); untreated control (SUCRA = 39.8%); A mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/ml was injected into each wound (SUCRA = 17.6%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 2.6%).

In terms of the promotion of CAT activity, the ranking of treatments was: a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml (SUCRA = 100.0%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/ml was injected into each wound (SUCRA = 80.0%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 60.0%); untreated control (SUCRA = 38.8%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 21.2%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 0.0%).

Regarding the promotion of POD activity, the comprehensive utility of each treatment is ranked as follows: a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml (SUCRA = 100.0%); a mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 60 μg/ml was injected into each wound (SUCRA = 80.0%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 60.0%); untreated control (SUCRA = 40.0%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 20.0%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 0.0%).

Regarding the promotion of ASA content, the results of the combined utility scores of the treatments were as follows: kraft paper coated with 4% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 100.0%); kraft paper coated with 3% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 88.9%); kraft paper coated with 5% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 77.8%); immersed in pure CS coating solution (SUCRA = 66.7%); soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution (SUCRA = 55.6%); untreated control (SUCRA = 44.4%); immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times (SUCRA = 33.3%); kraft paper coated with 1% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 22.2%); kraft paper coated with 2% CEO + 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 11.1%); kraft paper coated with 1.5% konjac gum solution (SUCRA = 0.0%).

4. Discussion

4.1. Efficient processing under each indicator

4.1.1. Quality index

Fruit firmness is an important index to evaluate fruit quality and ripeness. The loss of fruit firmness is intricately related to the degradation of cell wall components (mainly cellulose, hemicellulose and pectin) (Chen & Sun, 2020; Yuan et al., 2024). The results of the Meta-analysis indicate that, in terms of maintaining the hardness of citrus, the top 3 intervention measures are all packaging citrus with kraft paper coated with a mixture of CEO and 1.5% konjac gum solution. The corresponding CEO contents, ranked from highest to lowest in terms of comprehensive effectiveness, are 3%, 2%, and 5%, respectively. (Li et al., 2024)CEO is rich in eugenol and cinnamaldehyde, which are important antibacterial substances in essential oils, and its antibacterial effect is mainly realized through the synergistic effect of various (Wang, Ning and Chen, 2019, Wang et al., 2016)effective components (Yuan et al., 2023; Zhou et al., 2024). This function plays a role in promoting the stability of citrus during storage, effectively improving the storage cycle of citrus, in addition, according to Hsu et al., it was reported that CEO not only has good antioxidant activity, but also can stimulate the antioxidant stress response in plants by inducing the expression of antioxidant genes such as SOD-3 and GST-4 (Hsu et al., 2012). There are many types of konjac gum solutions, including konjac glucomannan (KGM), which is widely used in preservation, is a natural polysaccharide extracted from konjac tubers, with a topological structure composed of glucose and mannose (Chen et al., 2017; Sun et al., 2023). KGM can be used as a gel carrier to load active molecules in food preservation. The three-dimensional gel network structure based on KGM provides good protection for the loaded active molecules and allows slow release, thus enhancing the antioxidant and antibacterial activities of these molecules (Wang et al., 2023; Wu, Yin, et al., 2024).

The change trend of decay rate directly reflects the effectiveness of preservation measures. According to the analysis results, soaked with 1% HPMC solution + CS solution is an effective measure to inhibit fruit (Zou, Lin, Xu and Cheng, 2022)spoilage. Among them, the effect is best when the concentration of CS solution is 1.5%. At this concentration, the spoilage rate of citrus fruit is much lower than that at concentrations of 0.5% and 1%. In recent years, edible coating has become a green and effective post-harvest fruit preservation technology. HPMC is a kind of amphiphilic polymer with good preservation properties for fruits (Vieira et al., 2020; Yao et al., 2023). Chitosan, a linear polycationic polysaccharide derived from partial deacetylation of chitin, has been widely used in the manufacture of edible films or coatings due to its good gas barrier and antimicrobial properties (Sultan et al., 2023; Yan et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2021). Chitosan-based coatings have high surface tension values, but the surface of fruits is usually covered with a layer of nonpolar waxes, resulting in chitosan coatings being less effective on their surface (Soradech et al., 2017; Xu, 2024). The combination of HPMC and chitosan effectively solved the problem of limited wetting and spreading ability of chitosan hydrophilic coatings on fruit surfaces, but it is worth noting that this approach also adversely affects the homogeneity and stability of the resulting coatings(Prasad et al., 2025, Tantala, Meethongchai, Suethong, Ratanasumawong and Rachtanapun, 2022).

According to the results of the Meta-analysis, the use of kraft paper coated with a mixed content of CEO and a 1.5% solution of konjac gum for packing citrus was equally effective in suppressing the change in weight loss of the fruits. The inhibitory effect of this treatment on weight loss did not seem to be positively correlated with the amount of cinnamon essential oil content, as measured by the SUCRA values, and the analysis resulted in the best effect at a CEO content of 5%, followed by a concentration of 3%, and a more moderate effect at other concentrations, and the comparative results were in agreement with those of this randomized controlled experiment.

Although citrus are not respiratory jump fruits, the increase in decay rate will also lead to increased ethylene (a hormone that promotes fruit ripening) formation in the fruit, thus aggravating fruit spoilage (Feng et al., 2019; Sun et al., 2024). Treated with BC coating agent has an optimal inhibitory effect on the enhancement of respiration rate, BC coating agent is a new coating agent that can replace polyethylene film, and its main ingredient, small candelilla wax, is an edible natural lipid, which has good water retention and freshness preservation, and can effectively extend the shelf life of fruits and vegetables ((Aguirre-Joya et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2022). It has been shown that the treatment of avocados with a coating agent prepared from small candelilla wax and pectin was able to reduce fruit weight loss, delay the decline in firmness and maintaining the brightness of the fruit surface (Aguirre-Joya et al., 2017). In addition, soaked with 1% CS solution or soaked with 1% HPMC solution +0.5% CS solution can also effectively inhibit the increase of shelf-life citrus decay rate. CS solution has been widely used in fruit preservation, and HPMC solution combined with it can form a more dense and stable coating on the surface of fruit, providing a better barrier function between citrus and the external environment. Control respiration and oxidation rates while resisting microbial infestation (De Fátima Silva et al., 2022; Sapper et al., 2019). On this basis, the approach was also useful in maintaining the TSS content of the fruit.

TSS is a collective term for all compounds that are soluble in water, including sugars, acids, vitamins and minerals, etc., and soluble solids are considered an important quality indicator in the food industry (Sheng et al., 2019). Meta-analysis showed that A mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml were injected into each wound was the most effective treatment to maintain the TSS content of citrus during storage. The treatment has a dual preservation effect on citrus fruits, firstly, it can directly inhibit spore germination, shoot tube length and mycelial growth of pathogenic bacteria by disturbing the fungal cell surface, and secondly, it can activate the defense-related enzymes and accumulate disease-resistant substances, and these functions promote the preservation level of citrus during the storage period (Li, Bai, et al., 2024; Yang et al., 2022). In terms of retention of TA content, soaked with 1% HPMC solution +1.5% CS solution is effective. The denser and more stable coating material formed by CS solution with HPMC solution plays a vital role in extending the shelf life of fruits by creating a protective barrier against microbial growth, and the edible composite coating solution based on CS also enhances the post-harvest preservation quality of fruits such as peaches, strawberries, and others (Ali et al., 2024; Li, Wang, et al., 2024).

4.1.2. Secondary metabolite content index

Soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution is the best way to maintain the total phenol content, immersed in pure CS coating solution can also play an effective role in maintaining the total phenol content of citrus. Although CS films are now widely used in food preservation, they are poorly resistant to water vapor, brittle, have limited effective preservation capacity, and are structurally susceptible to damage (Yang et al., 2019). polyethoxylated flavonoids (PMFs) and citral have a variety of powerful biological activities, such as anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antibacterial, and anticancer properties (Ge et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2014). CS in combination with both can effectively reduce the rate of fruit decay, maintaining moisture utilization, color difference and hardness, and better preserve the content of non-enzymatic antioxidants and volatiles with bacteriostatic activity (Li, Guo, et al., 2024). Soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution was also the best treatment for maintaining the total flavonoid content of postharvest citrus. A mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml was injected into each wound This treatment was the next most effective. The retention of total flavonoids by both treatments stemmed from their powerful preservation function, the former belonging to the category of chemical control, while the latter was more biologically oriented, each with its own merits.

4.1.3. Physiological activity index

The level of MDA content can reflect the integrity of fruit cell membranes, which indirectly reflects the quality of fruits, and inhibiting the increase of MDA content can effectively ensure the integrity of cell membranes, and thus maintain the quality of post-harvested citrus during the shelf-life (Kim et al., 2022). The analysis results showed that immersed in pure CS coating solution could effectively inhibit the accumulation of MDA, and on this basis, the combination of PCT composite coating solution showed the most significant effect. In addition, immersed in a PCZ solution diluted 1000 times is also an effective measure to control MDA content. PCZ solution is a broad-spectrum systemic fungicide widely used in post-harvest applications to prevent spoilage and growth of disease-causing fungi in fruits and vegetables during storage and transportation by controlling the MDA content (Cong et al., 2018; Crapnell et al., 2023).

The enzymatic antioxidant system in the cell includes SOD, POD, CAT and other enzymes. SOD, as the first line of defense to remove ROS, can catalyze the disproportionation reaction of superoxides (Wang et al., 2023; Zhao et al., 2021). Immersed in pure CS coating solution is the best treatment to promote SOD activity. In addition, A mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml or soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution both treatments also showed significant promotion of SOD activity. Treatments significantly promoted CAT activity. CAT serves as a primary antioxidant enzyme that efficiently disposes of hydrogen peroxide H₂O₂ by converting it into water and oxygen, thus preventing the accumulation of reactive oxygen species and subsequent lipid peroxidation. This mechanism is consistent with our findings that treatments with higher CAT SUCRA rankings showed better preservation of cellular integrity. (Zhuang et al., 2024). A mixture of 200 μL spore suspension +800 μL sterile PDB medium, with streptomycin added to achieve a concentration of 120 μg/ml is the best treatment to promote CAT activity. Soaked in CS - PCT composite coating solution was also effective in promoting CAT activity. In addition, the above two methods are also efficient measures to promote POD enzyme activity, and the strength of the two treatments on POD enzyme activity is consistent with that of CAT enzyme. POD directly participates in plant respiration, ethylene and lignin biosynthesis, etc., and plays an important role in fruit preservation (Ma et al., 2025).

ASA, as a reducing agent, acts on all stages of plant growth and development, fruit maturation and abiotic stress response, and plays a key role in maintaining the redox balance in cells (Rodríguez et al., 2020; Wu, Li, et al., 2024).Kraft paper coated with CEO + konjac gum solution is an effective way to promote ascorbic acid, on this basis, adding 4% CEO showed the highest efficacy in promoting ASA content. This information provides valuable empirical basis for innovative advanced postharvest citrus management strategies and related physiological and molecular studies in the future.

4.2. Deviation analysis

Since the comparison group means, standard deviations, and sample sizes were provided in each study and the statistical manipulations of the outcome variables were basically the same, we adopted the direct algorithm of calculation summarized by Muka et al. and optimized and improved it. In order to test whether the combined effect values of multiple similar studies were statistically significant, we conducted hypothesis tests on the combined effect values by the confidence interval method: when the test effect indicators were RD and SMD, their 95% confidence intervals were statistically significant if they did not contain 0, which was equivalent to P < 0.05. According to the calculation of forest map, all the data met the statistical requirements, and the data deviation did not affect the analysis results incorrectly (Muka et al., 2020; Williams et al., 2023). In this Meta-analysis, our literature search was as comprehensive as possible, however, we cannot exclude the possibility that some unpublished studies were missing and published reports overestimated their effects, while some studies with either too high or too low SD resulted in a higher or lower Hedges's g SMD than the expected results, and we welcome any information that helps to clarify any errors or omissions in the dataset. On the basis of maintaining as much objectivity as possible in the assessment of the effect of each intervention, the following limitations still exist in this study from a comprehensive perspective: (1) the included studies were all indirect comparisons and lacked direct comparisons of the results; (2) the inclusion of fewer literatures for some outcome indicators and small sample sizes for some of the interventions may have affected the range of confidence intervals under the comparison of the endpoints. (3) This meta-analysis provides a comprehensive ranking of preservation treatments based on biochemical and physiological metrics, but it does not include pilot-scale trials or consumer acceptance assessments. (Liu, Liu, Tan, Luo and Xue, 2024)The real-world effectiveness of these treatments may be influenced by factors such as cost, scalability, sensory attributes, and consumer preference for natural versus synthetic preservatives. For example, treatments using cinnamon essential oil or chitosan-based coatings may be more readily accepted due to their natural origin and edibility. Future research should include pilot studies in commercial settings and consumer panels to evaluate the practical applicability and market potential of the highest-ranked treatments, providing a foundation for the development of novel citrus preservation strategies. (4) Although this network meta-analysis provides comprehensive comparisons of various preservation treatments for citrus fruits, several limitations should be considered. First, the included studies were predominantly indirect comparisons, and direct head-to-head trials between some interventions are lacking, which may affect the robustness of the ranking results. Second, the number of studies available for certain outcome indicators (e.g., secondary metabolites and enzyme activities) was relatively small, which may widen the confidence intervals and reduce the precision of the effect estimates. Third, despite our comprehensive search strategy, the possibility of unpublished studies or publication bias cannot be entirely ruled out. Finally, variations in citrus varieties, storage conditions, and measurement methods across studies may introduce heterogeneity that could not be fully adjusted for in the model. Future research should include more direct comparisons and standardized experimental protocols to validate these findings.

4.3. Practical feasibility and commercial scalability

Furthermore, the feasibility of scaling up the recommended preservation methods for commercial application deserves consideration. Treatments such as kraft paper coated with cinnamon essential oil and konjac gum solution utilize naturally derived, commercially available compounds. Cinnamon essential oil is extracted from cinnamon bark, a widely cultivated spice, while konjac gum is produced from the konjac plant, both of which are economically viable and scalable for industrial use. Similarly, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) and chitosan (CS) are already employed in the food and packaging industries, indicating established supply chains and regulatory acceptance. The application methods (e.g., dipping, spraying, or coating packaging materials) are compatible with existing postharvest handling infrastructure, requiring minimal additional investment. Although some composite treatments (e.g., CS-PCT emulsion) may involve higher initial costs due to synthesis complexity, their enhanced efficacy and potential for reducing food loss could justify the investment. Therefore, the proposed strategies not only exhibit strong preservation performance but also hold promise for broad adoption in citrus supply chains.

5. Conclusion

This study evaluated 27 distinct preservation methods for citrus fruits, concluding that there is no universal optimal solution. The best preservation strategies vary depending on the specific quality indicators targeted. For instance, kraft paper coated with 3% cinnamon essential oil and 1.5% konjac gum solution was found to be the most effective for maintaining fruit firmness. Meanwhile, a 5% concentration of cinnamon essential oil yielded the best results for minimizing weight loss. In contrast, a 5.4% mustard essential oil nanoemulsion combined with chitosan-hydroxypropyl methylcellulose solution was most effective in preventing microbial decay.

The following are the supplementary data related to this article.

Supplementary Fig. S1.

Supplementary Fig. S1

Open in a new tab

Supplementary Fig. S2.

Supplementary Fig. S2

Open in a new tab
Supplementary material
mmc3.docx (5.6MB, docx)

Abrreviations and nomenclature

SMDs standardized mean differences
SD standard deviation
SE standard error
TSS total soluble solid
TA titratable acid
MDA malondialdehyde
SOD superoxide dismutase
CAT catalase
POD peroxidase
ASA ascorbic acid
REM random effects model
SUCRA sum cumulative ranked area under the curve
CEO cinnamon essential oil
HPMC hydroxypropyl methylcellulose
CS chitosan
CS - PCT chitosan – polymethoxylated flavonoids - loaded citral emulsion
BC beeswax - candelilla wax
MEO – NE - PT Mustard essential oil - nanoemulsions fortified with citrus pectin and tween-80
PCZ preservative prochloraz
NT natamycin
LAE Nα – Lauroyl - L - arginine ethyl ester hydrochloride
PDB potato dextrose broth
KGM konjac glucomannan
PMFs polyethoxylated flavonoids
Open in a new tab

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Shiyi Xu: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Software, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Xinyue Dai: Software, Investigation, Data curation, Conceptualization. Weifeng Zhao: Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Data curation. Xuehu Yang: Supervision, Resources, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. Ran Tang: Supervision, Resources, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization.

Funding

The Construction of Science and Technology Innovation Center for South Asia and Southeast Asia - International Joint Innovation Platform of Yunnan Province (202403AP140018).

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

  1. Aguirre-Joya J.A., Cerqueira M.A., Ventura-Sobrevilla J., Aguilar-Gonzalez M.A., Carbó-Argibay E., Castro L.P., Aguilar C.N. Candelilla wax-based coatings and films: Functional and physicochemical characterization. Food and Bioprocess Technology. 2019;12(10):1787–1797. doi: 10.1007/s11947-019-02339-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Aguirre-Joya J.A., Ventura-Sobrevilla J., Martínez-Vazquez G., Ruelas-Chacón X., Rojas R., Rodríguez-Herrera R., Aguilar C.N. Effects of a natural bioactive coating on the quality and shelf life prolongation at different storage conditions of avocado (Persea americana mill.) cv. Hass. Food Packag. Shelf Life. 2017;14:102–107. doi: 10.1016/j.fpsl.2017.09.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Ali M., Ullah S., Zeb A., Bibi L., Sarwar R. Enhanced preservation of postharvest peaches with an edible composite coating solution of chitosan, tannic acid, and beeswax. Food Chemistry Advances. 2024;5 doi: 10.1016/j.focha.2024.100797. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Caballero S., Li Y.O., McClements D.J., Davidov-Pardo G. Encapsulation and delivery of bioactive citrus pomace polyphenols: A review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2022;62(29):8028–8044. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2021.1922873. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen Q., Ma H., Yuan Y., Han X., Zhu J., Zhang H. Rheaological behavior of high acyl gellan gum solution at gel point. International Journal of Food Properties. 2017;20(sup3):S2332–S2341. doi: 10.1080/10942912.2017.1362431. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen S.Q., Sun Z.D. Application of LAE and natamycin in postharvest preservation of ’Benimadonna'citrus, in: Proceedings of the 17th annual meeting of CIFST. Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, Xi'an, China. 2020:487–488. doi: 10.26914/c.cnkihy.2020.022127. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cong M., He S., Ma H., Li G., Zhu F. Hormetic effects of carbendazim on the virulence of Botrytis cinerea. Plant Disease. 2018;102(5):886–891. doi: 10.1094/PDIS-10-17-1602-RE. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Crapnell R.D., Adarakatti P.S., Banks C.E. Electroanalytical overview: The sensing of carbendazim. Analytical Methods. 2023;15(37):4811–4826. doi: 10.1039/D3AY01053H. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. De Fátima Silva M., Maciel V.B.V., Noletto A.P.R., Venturini A.C., De Carvalho R.A., Yoshida C.M.P. Chitosan active coating on paperboard surface forming an anti-insect grain-based food packaging. Packaging Technology and Science. 2022;35(4):361–372. doi: 10.1002/pts.2634. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Deng Z., Ma G., Zhang L., Kurata D., Ikeya M., Keawmanee N., Nonaka K., Takishita F., Kato M. Characterization of granulation in citrus “Harumi” fruit during postharvest storage. Postharvest Biology and Technology. 2024;210 doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2024.112770. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Feng G., Wu J., Yi H. Global tissue-specific transcriptome analysis of Citrus sinensis fruit across six developmental stages. Scientific Data. 2019;6(1):153. doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0162-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. François G.A., De Moraes Pontes J.G., Pereira A.K., Fill T.P. Exploring the citrus sour rot pathogen: Biochemical aspects, virulence factors, and strategies for disease management - a review. Fungal Biology Reviews. 2022;41:70–83. doi: 10.1016/j.fbr.2022.03.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Ge Y., Chen Y., Li C., Zhao J., Wei M., Li X., Yang S., Mi Y. Effect of sodium nitroprusside treatment on shikimate and phenylpropanoid pathways of apple fruit. Food Chemistry. 2019;290:263–269. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.04.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hsu F.-L., Li W.-H., Yu C.-W., Hsieh Y.-C., Yang Y.-F., Liu J.-T., Shih J., Chu Y.-J., Yen P.-L., Chang S.-T., Liao V.H.-C. In vivo antioxidant activities of essential oils and their constituents from leaves of the Taiwanese Cinnamomum osmophloeum. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2012;60(12):3092–3097. doi: 10.1021/jf2045284. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Huang J., Liao J., Qi J., Jiang W., Yang X. Structural and physicochemical properties of pectin-rich dietary fiber prepared from citrus peel. Food Hydrocolloids. 2021;110 doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2020.106140. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Ioannidis J.P., Lau J. On meta-analyses of meta-analyses. The Lancet. 1996;348(9029):756. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)65647-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Karn A., Zhao C., Yang F., Cui J., Gao Z., Wang M., Wang F., Xiao H., Zheng J. In-vivo biotransformation of citrus functional components and their effects on health. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2021;61(5):756–776. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2020.1746234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Kim J., Choi J.-Y., Kim J., Moon K.-D. Effect of edible coating with Morus alba root extract and carboxymethyl cellulose for enhancing the quality and preventing the browning of banana (Musa acuminata Cavendish) during storage. Food Packaging and Shelf Life. 2022;31 doi: 10.1016/j.fpsl.2022.100809. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Kumar N., Pratibha, Prasad J., Yadav A., Upadhyay A., Neeraj, Shukla S., Petkoska A.T., Heena, Suri S., Gniewosz M., Kieliszek M. Recent trends in edible packaging for food applications — Perspective for the future. Food Engineering Reviews. 2023;15(4):718–747. doi: 10.1007/s12393-023-09358-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Li J., Bai X., Zhu G., Liu S., Liu C., Wu M.…Liu S. Sanxiapeptin is an ideal preservative with a dual effect of controlling green mold and inducing systemic defense in postharvest citrus. Food Chemistry. 2024;453 doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2024.139669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Li J., Wang Y., Ma Y., Zheng N., Liu J., Liu T. Preparation and characterization of chitosan-based corn protein composites constructed with TG enzyme and their preservation performance on strawberries. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2024;270 doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.132190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Li Y., Guo L., Wei J., Yao Y., Xu L., Zhou Z. Effect of polyethoxylated flavonoids (PMFs)-loaded citral and chitosan composite coatings on citrus preservation: From the perspective of fruit resistance. Food Chemistry: X. 2024;22 doi: 10.1016/j.fochx.2024.101417. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Liu G., Liu Q., Tan Q., Luo H., Xue W. Comparison of the effects of various preservation treatments on storage tolerance and soft rot resistance in kiwifruit: A network meta-analysis. Scientia Horticulturae. 2024;337 doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2024.113519. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Liu Y., Pan L., Li T., Tang T., Xu R., Duan X.…Liu Y. Improving the performance of Kraft paper by cinnamon essential oil/soybean protein isolate microcapsules and konjac glucomannan for citrus preservation. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2024;277 doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.134308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lu X., Zhao C., Shi H., Liao Y., Xu F., Du H., Xiao H., Zheng J. Nutrients and bioactives in citrus fruits: Different citrus varieties, fruit parts, and growth stages. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2023;63(14):2018–2041. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2021.1969891. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Ma J., Liu S., Zeng J., Zhang Y., Chang W., Meng Z., Zhou Y., Zhang W., Ding X., Pan X., Duan X. Comparative metabolome and transcriptome analyses reveal the role of MeJA in improving postharvest disease resistance and maintaining the quality of Rosa roxburghii fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology. 2025;220 doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2024.113314. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Muka T., Glisic M., Milic J., Verhoog S., Bohlius J., Bramer W., Chowdhury R., Franco O.H. A 24-step guide on how to design, conduct, and successfully publish a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research. European Journal of Epidemiology. 2020;35(1):49–60. doi: 10.1007/s10654-019-00576-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Niemann J., Hoffman E.W., Zacarías L., Kidd M., Cronjé P.J.R. Postharvest cold-storage behaviour of ‘Nadorcott’ mandarin fruit remains unaffected by preharvest shade netting. Horticulturae. 2024;10(8):782. doi: 10.3390/horticulturae10080782. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Prasad J., Kumar N., Pratibha, Jaiswal R., Yadav A., Sharma S.P., Fawole O.A., Kaushik N. Biopolymer based composite packaging: A sustainable approach for fruits and vegetables preservation. Applied Food Research. 2025;5(2) doi: 10.1016/j.afres.2025.101211. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Rodríguez G.M., Sibaja J.C., Espitia P.J.P., Otoni C.G. Antioxidant active packaging based on papaya edible films incorporated with Moringa oleifera and ascorbic acid for food preservation. Food Hydrocolloids. 2020;103 doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.105630. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Salim D., De Caro P., Chasseray X., Cheong Sing A.S. Development of biobased emulsions for postharvest citrus fruit preservation. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy. 2022;25 doi: 10.1016/j.scp.2021.100583. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Sapper M., Bonet M., Chiralt A. Wettability of starch-gellan coatings on fruits, as affected by the incorporation of essential oil and/or surfactants. LWT. 2019;116 doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2019.108574. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Sheng R., Cheng W., Li H., Ali S., Akomeah Agyekum A., Chen Q. Model development for soluble solids and lycopene contents of cherry tomato at different temperatures using near-infrared spectroscopy. Postharvest Biology and Technology. 2019;156 doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2019.110952. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Soradech S., Nunthanid J., Limmatvapirat S., Luangtana-anan M. Utilization of shellac and gelatin composite film for coating to extend the shelf life of banana. Food Control. 2017;73:1310–1317. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.10.059. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Sultan M., Elsayed H., Taha G. Potential effect of citrate nanocellulose on barrier, sorption, thermal and mechanical properties of chitosan/Arabic gum packaging film. Food Bioscience. 2023;56 doi: 10.1016/j.fbio.2023.103246. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Sun Q., He Z.C., Ye J.L., Wei R.R., Yin Y.Z., Chai L.J., Xie Z.Z., Xu Q., Xu J., Guo W.W., Cheng Y.J., Deng X.X. Storage with climacteric fruits improves color and quality of citrus fruit. Acta Hortic. Sin. 2024;51(3):601–615. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2022-1203. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Sun Y., Xu X., Wu Z., Zhou H., Xie X., Zhang Q., Liu R., Pang J. Structure, merits, gel formation, gel preparation and functions of konjac glucomannan and its application in aquatic food preservation. Foods. 2023;12(6):1215. doi: 10.3390/foods12061215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Tantala J., Meethongchai S., Suethong W., Ratanasumawong S., Rachtanapun C. Mold-free shelf-life extension of fresh rice noodles by synergistic effects of chitosan and common food preservatives. Food Control. 2022;133 doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2021.108597. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Vieira A.C.F., De Matos Fonseca J., Menezes N.M.C., Monteiro A.R., Valencia G.A. Active coatings based on hydroxypropyl methylcellulose and silver nanoparticles to extend the papaya (Carica papaya L.) shelf life. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2020;164:489–498. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.07.130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Wang L., Ning T., Chen X. Postharvest storage quality of citrus fruit treated with a liquid ferment of Chinese herbs and probiotics. Scientia Horticulturae. 2019;255:169–174. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2019.03.030. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Wang S., Li M., He B., Yong Y., Zhu J. Composite films of sodium alginate and konjac glucomannan incorporated with tea polyphenols for food preservation. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2023;242 doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.124732. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Wang W., Xia M.X., Chen J., Yuan R., Deng F.N., Shen F.F. Gene expression characteristics and regulation mechanisms of superoxide dismutase and its physiological roles in plants under stress. Biochemistry (Moscow) 2016;81(5):465–480. doi: 10.1134/S0006297916050047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Williams S., Carson R., Tóth K. Moving beyond P values in the journal of physiology: A primer on the value of effect sizes and confidence intervals. The Journal of Physiology. 2023;601(23):5131–5133. doi: 10.1113/JP285575. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Wu G., Yin Y., Li C., Hao R., Zang J., Kang M., Luo D., Xu W. Sustained release behavior of lysozyme based on konjac glucomannan/κ-carrageenan composite hydrogels. LWT. 2024;201 doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2024.116274. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Wu P., Li B., Liu Y., Bian Z., Xiong J., Wang Y., Zhu B. Multiple physiological and biochemical functions of ascorbic acid in plant growth, development, and abiotic stress response. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024;25(3):1832. doi: 10.3390/ijms25031832. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Wu T., Cheng D., He M., Pan S., Yao X., Xu X. Antifungal action and inhibitory mechanism of polymethoxylated flavones from Citrus reticulata Blanco peel against aspergillus Niger. Food Control. 2014;35(1):354–359. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.07.027. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Xu C.C. Evaluation of new coating on citrus fruit preservation and optimization of the postharvest handling precedure for Citrus sinensis (master thesis) Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, China. 2024 doi: 10.27158/d.cnki.ghznu.2024.001963. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Xue Y.-H., Li A., Li H., Liu C., Luo H.-J., Liu C.-X., Chen J.-F., Zou K., Liu S.-P. Metabolite profiling reveals comprehensive effects of Chaetomium globosum on citrus preservation. Food Chemistry. 2022;369 doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.130959. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Yan C., McClements D.J., Zhu Y., Zou L., Zhou W., Liu W. Fabrication of OSA starch/chitosan polysaccharide-based high internal phase emulsion via altering interfacial behaviors. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2019;67(39):10937–10946. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.9b04009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Yang K., Dang H., Liu L., Hu X., Li X., Ma Z., Wang X., Ren T. Effect of syringic acid incorporation on the physical, mechanical, structural and antibacterial properties of chitosan film for quail eggs preservation. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2019;141:876–884. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.08.045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Yang Y.-C., Li K., Liu C.-X., Cheng F., Liu C., Quan W.-J., Xue Y., Zou K., Liu S.-P. Sanxiapeptin, a linear pentapeptide from Penicillium oxalicum, inhibited the growth of citrus green mold. Food Chemistry. 2022;366 doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.130541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Yao L., Man T., Xiong X., Wang Y., Duan X., Xiong X. HPMC films functionalized by zein/carboxymethyl tamarind gum stabilized Pickering emulsions: Influence of carboxymethylation degree. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2023;238 doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.124053. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Yuan C.S., Cheng X.M., Sun C., Xia X., Zhou Y.N., Li G.Y., Zhu X.R. Stability and bacteriostatic activity of mustard essential oil nanoemulsion fortified with citrus pectin and Tween-80 and its application in the preservation of ’Shatangju’ mandarin. Food Science. 2024;45(16):213–222. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20231102-010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  54. Yuan S., Xue Z., Zhang S., Wu C., Feng Y., Kou X. The characterization of antimicrobial nanocomposites based on chitosan, cinnamon essential oil, and TiO2 for fruits preservation. Food Chemistry. 2023;413 doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.135446. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Zhao H., Zhang R., Yan X., Fan K. Superoxide dismutase nanozymes: An emerging star for anti-oxidation. Journal of Materials Chemistry B. 2021;9(35):6939–6957. doi: 10.1039/D1TB00720C. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Zhou Q., Huang S., Zou L., Ren D., Wu X., Xu D. Application of hydroxypropyl methylcellulose to improve the wettability of chitosan coating and its preservation performance on tangerine fruits. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2024;263 doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130539. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Zhou W., He Y., Liu F., Liao L., Huang X., Li R., Zou Y., Zhou L., Zou L., Liu Y., Ruan R., Li J. Carboxymethyl chitosan-pullulan edible films enriched with galangal essential oil: Characterization and application in mango preservation. Carbohydrate Polymers. 2021;256 doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.117579. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Zhou X.B. Cassia bark preparation and characterization of essential oil and its application in the preservation of cherry tomatoes (master thesis) Jilin University, Changchun, China. 2024 doi: 10.27162/d.cnki.gjlin.2024.003365. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Zhuang Y., Zhang Y., Shi H., Pang Y., Feng X., Fan W., Chang D., Lin H., Zhou H. Calmodulin-binding receptor-like cytoplasmic kinase 3 regulates salt tolerance through catalase 2 in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiology. 2024;197(1) doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiae669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Zou Y.Q., Lin Z.Z., Xu R.W., Cheng Y.J. Development and evaluation of a coating substitute for individual polyethylene film packaging of citrus fruit. Scientia Agricultura Sinica. 2022;55(12):2398–2412. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.12.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary material
mmc3.docx (5.6MB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

Articles from Food Chemistry: X are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES