Paper · 2018 · Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry

Effect of biosynthesized zinc oxide nanoparticles coating on quality parameters of fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit

Sagili Jhansi Lakshmi; Roopa Bai RS; H. Sharanagouda; et al.

6
claims
20
verbatim quotes
24
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

This study evaluated the effect of biosynthesized Zinc oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles coated on fig fruits to assess the quality parameters such as total soluble solids, pH, colour, weight loss, firmness and microbial population. The coating solution was prepared by mixing the ZnO nanoparticles in premixed chitosan-acetic acid solution. The fresh fig fruits were dipped in coating solution with different concentrations [T1 (25), T2 (50), T3 (75), T4 (100), T5 (125), T6 (150), T7 (175) and T8 (200) ppm] of ZnO nanoparticles. The coated and uncoated (control) fig fruits were stored at room temperature. The fig fruits coated with a concentration of 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles delayed ripening, slowed down the weight loss, reduced the colour changes, increased the firmness of fruits and inhibited the growth of microorganism compared to uncoated fig fruits. Hence, it was concluded that the application of ZnO nanoparticles coating is a promising approach to extend the shelf-life of fig fruits.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fig fruits coated with 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles delayed ripening compared with uncoated fruits.

Taxon
Ficus carica L.Ficus caricat0
Treatment
175 ppm ZnO nanoparticlese0
Outcome
ripeninge0
Direction
delayede0
Comparator
uncoated fig fruitse4

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

Ficus carica
Ficus carica · TaxonRyan Hodnett · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–110 · show in text ↑
e0

“The fig fruits coated with a concentration of 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles delayed ripening”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 602–690 · show in text ↑
e4

“inhibited the growth of microorganism compared to uncoated fig fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–855 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fig fruits coated with 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles slowed weight loss compared with uncoated fruits.

Taxon
Ficus carica L.Ficus caricat0
Treatment
175 ppm ZnO nanoparticlese0
Outcome
weight losse1
Direction
slowed downe1
Comparator
uncoated fig fruitse4

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

Ficus carica
Ficus carica · TaxonRyan Hodnett · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–110 · show in text ↑
e0

“The fig fruits coated with a concentration of 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles delayed ripening”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 602–690 · show in text ↑
e1

“slowed down the weight loss”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–719 · show in text ↑
e4

“inhibited the growth of microorganism compared to uncoated fig fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–855 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fig fruits coated with 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles reduced colour changes compared with uncoated fruits.

Taxon
Ficus carica L.Ficus caricat0
Treatment
175 ppm ZnO nanoparticlese0
Outcome
colour changese2
Direction
reducede2
Comparator
uncoated fig fruitse4

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

Ficus carica
Ficus carica · TaxonRyan Hodnett · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–110 · show in text ↑
e0

“The fig fruits coated with a concentration of 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles delayed ripening”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 602–690 · show in text ↑
e2

“reduced the colour changes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 721–747 · show in text ↑
e4

“inhibited the growth of microorganism compared to uncoated fig fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–855 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fig fruits coated with 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles had increased firmness compared with uncoated fruits.

Taxon
Ficus carica L.Ficus caricat0
Treatment
175 ppm ZnO nanoparticlese0
Outcome
firmnesse3
Direction
increasede3
Comparator
uncoated fig fruitse4

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

Ficus carica
Ficus carica · TaxonRyan Hodnett · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–110 · show in text ↑
e0

“The fig fruits coated with a concentration of 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles delayed ripening”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 602–690 · show in text ↑
e3

“increased the firmness of fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 749–781 · show in text ↑
e4

“inhibited the growth of microorganism compared to uncoated fig fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–855 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fig fruits coated with 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles inhibited microbial growth compared with uncoated fruits.

Taxon
Ficus carica L.Ficus caricat0
Treatment
175 ppm ZnO nanoparticlese0
Outcome
growth of microorganisme4
Direction
inhibitede4
Comparator
uncoated fig fruitse4

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

Ficus carica
Ficus carica · TaxonRyan Hodnett · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–110 · show in text ↑
e0

“The fig fruits coated with a concentration of 175 ppm ZnO nanoparticles delayed ripening”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 602–690 · show in text ↑
e4

“inhibited the growth of microorganism compared to uncoated fig fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–855 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

ZnO nanoparticle coating is a promising approach to extend the shelf life of fig fruits.

Taxon
Ficus carica L.Ficus caricat0
Outcome
shelf-lifee5
Qualifier
promising approache5

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

Ficus carica
Ficus carica · TaxonRyan Hodnett · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–110 · show in text ↑
e5

“the application of ZnO nanoparticles coating is a promising approach to extend the shelf-life of fig fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 886–993 · show in text ↑

nanoparticle · quality: postharvest · Ficus carica (common fig)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
See all 2 papers →

nanoparticle · growth · Ficus carica (common fig)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.