Advanced Strategies for Mitigating Postharvest Deterioration in Soft Fruits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preventing disease incidence in soft fruit post-harvest presents a substantial challenge. This study examines traditional methods and emerging technologies employed to address this issue. Conventional approaches typically regulate fruit ripening and pathogen proliferation through low-temperature storage and modified atmosphere techniques. Various methodologies such as irradiation, brief heat treatments, and chemical applications (e.g., calcium, 1-Methylcyclopropene, nitric oxide). Physical methods like heat treatments and irradiation promise to extend soft fruit's shelf-life. Biological control and treatments that stimulate the fruit's innate responses exhibit potential, particularly considering fungicide restrictions. Before commercial implementation, it is crucial to comprehend the diverse facets of these techniques. Progress in plant metabolic engineering may diminish fruit susceptibility to diseases. Swift cooling and low-temperature storage (at 0°C with 90-95% relative humidity) are indispensable for preserving soft fruit and necessitate integrated pre-harvest and post-harvest strategies. While emerging technologies may complement low-temperature storage and modified atmospheres, evaluating their feasibility and constraints on a commercial scale is imperative. Testing novel techniques under low-temperature conditions is essential for exploring alternatives that enhance existing methods. Further research is warranted to elucidate fruit-pathogen interactions, encompassing factors of pathogen virulence and the regulation of natural fruit-defense strategies. This information would be invaluable for the identification of candidate genes for breeding, the development of biotechnological approaches, and the establishment of consistent and efficacious methods rooted in the activation of the fruit's innate defense system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".