Paper · 2011 · Polymer International

Evaluation of the antifungal properties of chitosan coating on cut apples using a non‐invasive image analysis technique

Odilio B Garrido Assis; Douglas de Britto

3
claims
3
verbatim quotes
42
citations
4
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Image analysis techniques have often been chosen as fundamental tools for evaluating the surface and/or structure of organic and inorganic materials over a broad range of scales. In the study reported, a simple image capture system comprising a commercial desktop scanner combined with free image analysis software was used to evaluate the efficiency of antifungal activity of commercial medium‐molecular‐weight chitosan as an edible coating on sliced apples. Fungal growth rate (predominantly Penicillium sp. and Alternaria sp.) was assessed via images acquired twice daily and binary‐transformed for quantitative analysis. The inhibitory effect of chitosan coating on the mycelial fungi growth on cut apple surfaces was confirmed. Chitosan deposited on glass slides was used to simulate film formation and its structure was characterized using atomic force microscopy, revealing a thin porous formation. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Image analysis quantified fungal growth on sliced apples.

Interactor
Penicillium sp.Penicilliume0pathogen
Second interactor
Alternaria sp.Alternariae0pathogen
Outcome
Fungal growth ratee0

Not reportedTaxonComparatorValue

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Penicillium
Penicillium · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryMilo Manica · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Alternaria
Alternaria · Second interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)http://phil.cdc.gov/phil_images/20030612/9/PHIL_3963_lores.jpg · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fungal growth rate (predominantly Penicillium sp. and Alternaria sp.) was assessed via images acquired twice daily and binary‐transformed for quantitative analysis.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 469–633 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chitosan coating inhibited mycelial fungal growth on cut apple surfaces.

Treatment
chitosan coatinge0
Outcome
mycelial fungi growthe0
Direction
inhibitorye0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The inhibitory effect of chitosan coating on the mycelial fungi growth on cut apple surfaces was confirmed.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 634–741 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chitosan deposited on glass slides formed a thin porous film.

Outcome
thin porous formatione0
Setting
glass slidese0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Chitosan deposited on glass slides was used to simulate film formation and its structure was characterized using atomic force microscopy, revealing a thin porous formation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 742–914 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

chitosan · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

storage · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 17 positive, 1 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.