1. Introduction
Chitosan is a natural biopolymer that has garnered increasing attention over recent decades due to its wide range of applications in the food, pharmaceutical, biomedical, and agricultural industries (Bhowmik et al., 2024). Derived from the deacetylation of chitin—the second most abundant natural polymer—chitosan exhibits several desirable functional properties, including film-forming ability, biodegradability, biocompatibility, and antimicrobial and antioxidant activities. These characteristics make it a promising candidate for the development of edible coatings designed to extend the postharvest shelf life of perishable commodities, particularly fruits and vegetables (Riseh et al., 2023).
The film-forming capacity of chitosan enables the elaboration of thin, transparent, and non-toxic coatings that act as semipermeable barriers, modulating gas exchange (O₂ and CO₂) and thereby delaying ripening and senescence. Moreover, chitosan coatings can inhibit the growth of various pathogenic microorganisms and reduce oxidative spoilage due to their intrinsic antimicrobial and antioxidant properties (Subramani and Manian, 2024). As such, chitosan represents a sustainable and consumer-friendly alternative to synthetic preservatives. Chitosan-based coatings have been extensively studied in both climacteric and non-climacteric fruits, including strawberries, apples, mangoes, guavas, and papayas. Several authors (Hajji et al., 208; Priyadarshi et al., 2024) demonstrated that a 1-1.5% chitosan coating significantly reduced fungal growth, weight loss, and preserved firmness in strawberries during storage. Similarly, a 2% coating extended the shelf life of papaya and reduced anthracnose symptoms (Vilaplana et al., 2020), while studies in pears reported reduced weight loss and respiration rate, along with higher retention of firmness, total soluble solids, titratable acidity, and polyphenol content (Adhikary et al., 2022).
Several studies have confirmed that the efficacy of chitosan coatings is strongly influenced by concentration of the polymer. In apricots, Algarni et al. (2022) found that 1.5% chitosan nanoparticles coating extended shelf life up to 30 days at 5 °C, compared with a 1% concentration. In cherries, Zam (2019) observed that 2% chitosan coatings enriched with olive leaf extract preserved higher levels of phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity than lower concentrations. In tomatoes, coatings of chitosan combined with grapefruit extract effectively prevented weight loss during storage (Won et al., 2018). In papaya, Escamilla-García et al. (2018) reported that a 1% chitosan coating improved firmness, reduced weight loss, and maintained antioxidant activity. Similarly, in cashews nuts, higher chitosan concentrations were more effective at reducing lipid oxidation, as evidenced by lower peroxides and TBARS levels (Azimzadeh and Jahadi, 2024). Vasile and Baican (2021) concluded that increasing chitosan concentrations enhances functional properties such as mechanical strength, selective gas permeability, and antimicrobial and antioxidant effects. However, they caution that excessively high concentrations may produce overly dense films that negatively impact fruit quality.
Banana (Musa spp.), a highly perishable climacteric fruit of considerable economic and nutritional importance, is particularly susceptible to rapid postharvest deterioration. Its high respiratory rate and sensitivity to ethylene accelerate ripening, leading to uneven coloration, firmness loss, and increased susceptibility to microbial decay. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of chitosan coatings in mitigating these issues. Hossain and Iqbal (2016) reported that a 1% shrimp-derived chitosan coating significantly reduced weight loss and disease incidence, extending banana shelf life by 3 to 4 days. Suseno et al. (2014) found that a 2% chitosan formulation more effectively preserved vitamin C and reducing weight loss, while Sikder and Islam (2019) observed similar benefits with a 1% concentration. These findings suggest that the performance of chitosan coatings is influenced by several factors, including concentration, degree of deacetylation, molecular weight, application method (e.g., dipping, spraying, or brushing), and storage conditions. Overly concentrated solutions may lead to the formation of dense films that restrict fruit respiration and negatively affect sensory quality. Therefore, optimizing the chitosan concentration for each specific fruit cultivar is essential to ensure postharvest effectiveness and product acceptability.
Although the application of chitosan coatings in bananas has been broadly explored, limited research is available on the ‘Gran Enano’ (Musa AAA) cultivar. Furthermore, the postharvest behavior of this variety when treated with chitosan solutions at concentrations above the commonly used 1.5%—and the corresponding effects on its antioxidant properties—remains largely unknown. Because of this, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of edible coatings formulated with different concentrations of chitosan (1.5% and 2%) on the postharvest shelf life and antioxidant properties of ‘Gran Enano’ bananas.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials, reagents, and treatments
Banana fruits (Musa sp.) cv. ‘Gran Enano’ at physiological maturity were obtained from a local packing facility in Tapachula, Chiapas, Mexico. A total of 150 fruits from the same harvest lot were selected based on uniform size, absence of defects, and good sanitary condition (50 fruits per treatment). Three treatments were applied: T1 = control (no treatment), T2 = coating with 1.5% chitosan solution (Q-1.5%), and T3 = coating with 2% chitosan solution (Q-2%). Chitosan (85% deacetylated, MW = 340.33), glacial acetic acid (Meyer®), and Tween 20 (Sigma-Aldrich®) were used. All reagents were of analytical grade.
2.2. Preparation of chitosan solutions
Chitosan coating solutions were prepared by dissolving 1.5% or 2% (w/v) chitosan in distilled water previously acidified with 1.5% (v/v) acetic acid to reach a pH of 4. The mixtures were stirred on a magnetic plate for 24 h and used immediately after preparation (Monzón-Ortega et al., 2018).
2.3. Application of coatings
Banana fruits were washed with distilled water and immersed in a 100-ppm sodium hypochlorite solution for 1 min. They were then individually separated from the cluster using a sterile scalpel and randomly assigned to one of the three treatments. The coating solutions were manually applied using a polyurethane foam brush. After application, fruits were dried at room temperature under continuous airflow. All treated fruits were stored under ambient conditions (30 ± 2 °C; 70 ± 10% relative humidity) in a closed storage room for 9 days (Cruz-Ortiz et al., 2021).
2.4. Postharvest physiology of the fruits
One day after coating application (day 1) and subsequently every 48 h, the following parameters were measured: weight loss (Adventurer™ Pro, model AV264C), external color (MiniScanEZ colorimeter), and total soluble solids (TSS) using a digital refractometer (ATAGO, model PAL-1. CO₂ production was also measured by placing individual fruits in 3 L sealed containers for 2 h. The concentration of CO₂ was then determined using an IAQ-CALC probe (TSI®) and reported as mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹ (Monzón-Ortega et al., 2018). Weight loss and external color were measured in all fruits per treatment, while the other parameters were determined using five fruits per sampling point, with three measurements per fruit (15 measurements per sampling), performed at the apical, middle, and peduncular regions (Cruz-Ortiz et al., 2021).
2.5. Antioxidant properties of the fruits
2.5.1. Total polyphenols content
A total of 100 mg of banana pulp was macerated in 1 mL of 80% (v/v) methanol (Merck, USA) and stirred at 200 rpm for 24 h at room temperature. The mixture was centrifuged at 2,626 × g for 25 min, and the supernatant was collected and stored at −25 °C. The pellet underwent a second extraction under identical conditions. Both extracts were pooled and stored at −25 °C until analysis. Total polyphenol content was determined using the colorimetric Folin–Ciocalteu method as described by Vázquez-Olivo et al. (2019). Briefly, 20 μL of extract were mixed with 80 μL of 80% (v/v) methanol, 500 μL of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent (1:10 dilution; Sigma-Aldrich, USA), and 400 μL of sodium carbonate solution (Na₂CO₃; Meyer, Mexico). After incubation in the dark for 60 min, absorbance was measured at 765 nm using a microplate reader (MR-96A, Mindray, China). A calibration curve (0–10 mg L⁻¹) was generated using gallic acid (Merck, USA), and results were expressed as mg of gallic acid equivalents per gram of fresh pulp (mg GAE g⁻¹).
2.5.2. DPPH radical scavenging activity
The free radical scavenging activity was determined using 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), following the method described by Farzana et al. (2023), with slight modifications. In brief, 4 mL of a 0.1 mM methanolic DPPH solution were mixed with 1 mL of sample extract. The mixture was vortexed vigorously for 1 min and then incubated in the dark at room temperature for 30 min. Absorbance was measured at 517 nm using a UV-Vis spectrophotometer. Scavenging activity was calculated as follows: DPPH scavenging activity (%) = (Acontrol−Asample)/Acontrol × 100.
2.5.3. ABTS radical scavenging activity
The ABTS [2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid)] assay was conducted following the method by Nenadis et al. (2004), with adjustments for microplate absorbance measurements. The ABTS•⁺ radical cation was generated by mixing 5 mL of a 7 mM ABTS solution with 88 μL of 140 mM potassium persulfate (K₂S₂O₈; Meyer, Mexico), and incubated in the dark at 25 °C for 12 h. The mixture was diluted with 7% ethanol to obtain an absorbance of 0.80 ± 0.03 at 734 nm, measured using a microplate reader (MR-96A, Mindray, China). For calibration, 280 μL of the ABTS•⁺ solution were mixed with 20 μL of Trolox standard solutions (0–800 μM), and absorbance was recorded after 6 min. The same protocol was followed for banana extracts, using 20 μL of sample extract. Results were expressed as micromoles of Trolox equivalents per gram of fresh pulp (μmol TE g⁻¹).
2.6. Data analysis
All data from the physicochemical variables were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by mean comparison using Tukey’s test (α = 0.05). Statistical analyses were conducted using XLSTAT © v2012 software.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Weight loss
As expected, weight loss increased progressively in all treatments (Figure 1) over time due to transpiration and respiration processes. However, the rate and extent of weight loss were modulated by the presence and concentration of the chitosan coatings. Control fruits exhibited a final weight loss of approximately 23% by day 9, while Q-2% coated fruits showed the lowest loss (~20%). Notably, fruits treated with Q-1.5% displayed slightly higher weight loss than the control from day 3 onwards, which may be attributed to differences in coating uniformity or permeability at lower concentrations. Although these results show a trend and possible effect, no significant differences (P>0.05) were found between treatments.
The best performance of the 2% chitosan coating in reducing moisture loss suggests a more effective formation of a semipermeable barrier that limits water vapor diffusion. This agrees with findings in other climacteric fruits, such as tomatoes and apricots, where thicker chitosan layers provided better protection against dehydration (Algarni et al., 2022; Won et al., 2018). Moreover, the reduced water loss in Q-2% may help delay fruit softening and senescence, indirectly contributing to the overall maintenance of postharvest quality. The results reinforce the importance of optimizing polymer concentration to balance gas and moisture permeability. Although 1.5% is frequently reported as effective, the current data suggest that under tropical storage conditions, a 2% formulation offers greater efficacy in limiting water loss in bananas. Nevertheless, further investigation into film thickness, structural integrity, and microstructural interactions would be necessary to confirm these mechanisms.
3.2. Peel color
L* (lightness) values indicate the brightness of the peel, where higher values reflect a lighter color. At day 0, control bananas showed the highest L* (55.73), while Q-1.5% and Q-2% started at lower values (46.78 and 50.49, respectively) (Figure 2). Over time, a marked decline was observed in all treatments, but the extent of the decrease varied significantly only the day 9. This day, L* dropped sharply in the control (35.8), indicating higher browning and senescence. In contrast, Q-2% maintained a substantially higher L* (44.67), suggesting that the coating delayed peel darkening. Q-1.5% showed the lowest L* at day 9 (32.98), indicating less effective preservation of surface brightness. These results suggest that the 2% chitosan coating offered a more efficient barrier against oxidative and enzymatic browning, likely due to reduced oxygen penetration and water loss. Similar trends have been reported in papaya and strawberry, where chitosan-coated fruits retained better peel lightness (Priyadarshi et al., 2024; Vilaplana et al., 2020).
The a* values reflect the transition from green (negative values) to red (positive values), closely associated with chlorophyll degradation and carotenoid accumulation during ripening. Initially, all fruits exhibited negative values (−10.21 to −8.67), typical of unripe bananas. A rapid increase in a* values occurred in all treatments as storage progressed, with the control reaching 6.63 by day 9, indicating advanced ripening. Coated fruits followed a similar trajectory, with Q-1.5% peaking at 8.05 (day 7) and Q-2% reaching 6.73 at day 9. Interestingly, Q-2% exhibited a delayed transition to positive a* values, remaining at −1.79 even at day 3, suggesting a slower breakdown of chlorophyll pigments. This delay in color change further supports the hypothesis that higher chitosan concentrations may reduce ethylene diffusion and respiratory activity, effectively slowing the ripening process (Sikder and Islam, 2019; Suseno et al., 2014).
The b* component represents the intensity of yellow coloration. At the beginning, control fruits had the highest b* value (36.79), while Q-1.5% showed the lowest (25.68), and Q-2% was intermediate (32.48). A general decrease in b* values occurred over time, especially in the control, which reached 13.56 by day 9—a sign of senescence and pigment breakdown. Remarkably, Q-2% retained much of its yellow hue (24.48), whereas Q-1.5% declined more sharply (10.33). The preservation of b* in Q-2% suggests a protective effect against the oxidative degradation of carotenoids. This may be attributed to both reduced oxidative stress and maintenance of membrane integrity, as suggested the results in antioxidants.
These results reinforce the idea that 2% chitosan coatings are more effective in delaying visible ripening and browning in ‘Gran Enano’ bananas under ambient tropical conditions, in agreement with previous studies in mangoes, tomatoes, and bananas (Hossain and Iqbal, 2016; Silva et al., 2020).
3.3. Respiration rate
The Figure 3 shows the evolution of respiration rates in ‘Gran Enano’ bananas. At the start of storage (day 0), all treatments displayed similar respiration rates, ranging from 23.5 to 36.3 mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹, with Q-2% showing a slightly higher initial rate (36.3 mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹), possibly due to temporary stress following coating application. By day 1, respiration decreased sharply in all treatments, reaching values between 6.2 and 13.0 mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹, which may reflect transient metabolic suppression post-treatment and storage acclimatization.
A pronounced climacteric peak was observed on day 5 in the control treatment, with CO₂ production surging to 202.1 mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹, indicating the onset of full ripening. In contrast, both chitosan treatments displayed delayed and attenuated peaks: Q-1.5% peaked later (day 9, 188.9 mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹), while Q-2% peaked earlier but at a lower magnitude (day 7, 185.6 mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹). Q-1.5% exhibited an early modest increase at day 5 (65.4 mg CO₂ kg⁻¹ h⁻¹), followed by a sharp rise at day 9, suggesting a stronger delaying effect but less control over the eventual respiratory surge.
These trends confirm that chitosan coatings modulate respiratory activity by acting as a semipermeable barrier that restricts gas exchange and alters the internal atmosphere surrounding the fruit. This effect reduces ethylene action and oxygen availability, thereby slowing down metabolic reactions associated with ripening and senescence (Subramani and Manian, 2024). Among treatments, Q-2% demonstrated the most consistent suppression of respiration through day 9, with lower or more moderated peaks compared to the control and Q-1.5%. This finding aligns with the delay in color change and lower weight loss previously observed, reinforcing the effectiveness of the 2% chitosan concentration in extending postharvest life. The delayed climacteric peak in Q-1.5% and Q-2% also supports previous findings in bananas and papayas, where chitosan coatings postponed peak respiration and associated biochemical changes (Escamilla-García et al., 2018; Suseno et al., 2014).
3.4. Total soluble solids content
Total soluble solids (TSS) reflect the metabolic conversion of starch into simpler carbohydrates during the ripening. In untreated bananas (control), TSS levels exhibited a rapid and pronounced increase from 5.2 °Brix at day 0 to 21.7 °Brix at day 9 (Figure 4), with the most abrupt rise observed between days 3 and 5 (from 7.5 to 19.4 °Brix), corresponding to the peak of ethylene-mediated ripening and starch degradation (Zhu et al., 2021). In bananas coated with 1.5%, the TSS values increased more gradually, reaching 10.3 °Brix by day 5—nearly half of the value observed in the control at the same time point—suggesting a transient delay in starch hydrolysis. However, a substantial rise occurred between days 5 and 7 (from 10.3 to 19.5 °Brix), indicating that the delaying effect of the coating was temporary and that the fruit eventually resumed normal ripening. These results are consistent with reports in strawberries and papayas, where 1–1.5% chitosan coatings delayed—but did not fully suppress—ripening-related metabolic processes (Hajji et al., 2018; Vilaplana et al., 2020). Notably, the 2% chitosan coating demonstrated a more effective and prolonged delay in TSS accumulation. Throughout the first five days of storage, TSS values remained below 8 °Brix, reflecting a more substantial inhibition of respiratory and enzymatic activity.
This is likely due to the increased thickness and gas barrier properties of the higher-concentration chitosan film, which may have reduced oxygen permeability and suppressed ethylene biosynthesis, as previously documented (Algarni et al., 2022; Vasile and Baican, 2021). By day 9, however, TSS in this group increased sharply to 22.1 °Brix, surpassing the control. This sudden rise suggests that although the chitosan barrier was initially effective, ripening resumed—possibly due to saturation of the film’s permeability threshold. The observed dual pattern in the 2% chitosan group (initial suppression followed by a rebound in TSS) aligns with findings in other climacteric fruits where higher chitosan concentrations extended the pre-climacteric phase, yet ultimately allowed normal ripening to resume once internal metabolic signals overcame the diffusion barrier (Subramani and Manian, 2024; Zam, 2019). Overall, these findings confirm that chitosan coatings, particularly at 2%, can effectively delay the onset of ripening in ‘Gran Enano’ bananas by modulating soluble solids accumulation. However, the effectiveness is time-limited, and extended storage may lead to a compensatory increase in TSS.
3.5. Total phenolic content and antioxidant activity
At the beginning of storage (day 0), no significant differences (P>0.05) were observed among treatments for TPC or antioxidant capacity (Table 1), indicating that the coating process itself did not immediately alter the initial biochemical status of the fruit. However, variations became evident as storage progressed.
The TPC in control fruits showed fluctuations, peaking significantly on day 5 (5.1 ± 0.4 mg GAE 100 g⁻¹), likely due to stress-induced phenolic synthesis in response to abiotic conditions. In contrast, TPC in coated fruits (Q-1.5% and Q-2%) remained relatively stable throughout storage, ranging from 3.2 to 3.9 mg GAE 100 g⁻¹, with no significant (P>0.05) increases. This suggests that chitosan coatings may reduce oxidative or physiological stress, thereby stabilizing the phenolic profile. These findings align with previous observations in mangoes and papayas, where chitosan coatings were found to suppress stress-related phenolic accumulation (Salgado-Cruz et al., 2021; Vilvert et al., 2023).
Regarding DPPH radical scavenging activity, the control treatment showed variable values across storage, with a decline on day 1 (20.7 ± 1.8%) followed by an increased-on days 3 and 9. Interestingly, fruits coated with 2% chitosan exhibited a significantly higher DPPH activity (25.0 ± 1.9%) than the control and Q-1.5% treatments as early as day 1 (P<0.05). This trend continued throughout storage, with Q-2% consistently maintaining or improving radical scavenging capacity, suggesting that higher chitosan concentrations may enhance or preserve antioxidant systems. Similar behavior was reported in cherries and tomatoes where enriched chitosan matrices improved ROS-scavenging capacity (Zam et al., 2019; Won et al., 2018).
| t | TPC (mg GAE 100 g⁻¹) | DPPH (%) | ABTS (µmol TE g⁻¹) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Q-1.5% | Q-2% | Control | Q-1.5% | Q-2% | Control | Q-1.5% | Q-2% | |
| 0 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | 3.7 ± 0.3 | 22.9 ± 3.4 | 22.6 ± 2.9 | 21.8 ± 3.8 | 65.9 ± 3.4 | 65.5 ± 4.2 | 66.6 ± 2.8 |
| 1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 3.4 ± 0.4 | 3.5 ± 0.5 | 20.7 ± 1.8 | 22.0 ± 1.0 | 25.0 ± 1.9* | 68.5 ± 1.1 | 68.4 ± 0.9 | 66.7 ± 0.8* |
| 3 | 3.4 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 0.2 | 3.5 ± 0.6 | 24.8 ± 3.8 | 24.1 ± 3.4 | 24.8 ± 4.5 | 67.2 ± 0.9* | 65.4 ± 3.8 | 64.1 ± 3.5 |
| 5 | 5.1 ± 0.4* | 3.3 ± 0.3 | 3.2 ± 0.2 | 20.1 ± 1.3* | 23.0 ± 0.9 | 25.0 ± 1.4 | 64.0 ± 2.8 | 64.9 ± 4.2 | 65.6 ± 3.6 |
| 7 | 3.5 ± 0.7 | 3.9 ± 0.5 | 3.6 ± 0.3 | 23.3 ± 4.5 | 22.1 ± 2.8 | 25.3 ± 5.1 | 61.2 ± 5.6 | 60.6 ± 3.9 | 61.1 ± 4.5 |
| 9 | 3.4 ± 0.6 | 3.4 ± 0.4 | 3.6 ± 0.5 | 25.7 ± 2.9 | 27.2 ± 3.9 | 27.4 ± 3.6 | 60.9 ± 4.8 | 60.6 ± 4.2 | 60.2 ± 2.9 |
t = time of storage at room conditions (days); TPC = Total phenolics compounds. * Values with an asterisk are different from the other treatments (P<0.05) for the same sampling.
ABTS radical scavenging activity showed no major differences among treatments during the early storage period (days 0–5), with values ranging from 64–68 μmol TE g⁻¹. However, a significant increase was observed in Q-1.5% and Q-2% treatments on day 1 (66.7 and 66.7 μmol TE g⁻¹, respectively), compared to the control (68.5 μmol TE g⁻¹). Although the differences were minor, these findings suggest a protective effect of chitosan in maintaining redox stability during the early stages of ripening. By day 9, all treatments exhibited a decline in antioxidant parameters, with TPC and both scavenging activities decreasing slightly. However, Q-2% maintained the highest antioxidant levels, indicating a better protective effect against oxidative degradation during extended storage. This agrees with findings from Azimzadeh et al. (2018), where higher concentrations of chitosan reduced lipid peroxidation in cashew nuts.
Overall, the data indicate that chitosan coatings, particularly at 2%, can preserve antioxidant potential and phenolic stability during postharvest storage. This effect may be attributed to the semipermeable barrier formed by the coating, which reduces oxidative stress, moisture loss, and enzymatic activity, thereby delaying senescence.
4. Conclusion
Chitosan-based edible coatings proved to be an effective postharvest treatment to extend the shelf life and maintain the physicochemical and antioxidant quality of 'Gran Enano' bananas under tropical conditions. The application of 2% chitosan was particularly effective in reducing respiration rate, delaying the TSS accumulation, and preserving total phenolic and antioxidant activity throughout storage.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest
References
Adhikary T, Gill PPS, Jawandha SK, Sinha A. 2022. Chitosan coating modulates cell wall degrading enzymes and preserved postharvest quality in cold-stored pear fruit. Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization, 16(2), 1395-1403.
Algarni EH, Elnaggar IA, Abd El-wahed AEWN, Taha IM, Al-Jumayi HA, Elhamamsy SM, Mahmoud SF, Fahmy A. 2022. Effect of chitosan nanoparticles as edible coating on the storability and quality of apricot fruits. Polymers, 14(11), 2227.
Azimzadeh B, Jahadi M. 2018. Effect of chitosan edible coating with Laurus nobilis extract on shelf life of cashew. Food Science & Nutrition, 6(4), 871-877.
Bhowmik S, Agyei D, Ali A. 2024. Biodegradable chitosan hydrogel film incorporated with polyvinyl alcohol, chitooligosaccharides, and gallic acid for potential application in food packaging. Cellulose, 31(13), 8087-8103.
Cruz-Ortiz L, Escobar-Ventura K, Flores-Méndez M, Urbina-Reyes ME, Vázquez-Ovando A. 2021. Recubrimientos con cera de abeja, extractos de ajo y sauce para aumentar la vida postcosecha del banano Gran Enano. Informador Técnico, 85(2), 172-183.
Escamilla-García M, Rodríguez-Hernández MJ, Hernández-Hernández HM, Delgado-Sánchez LF, García-Almendárez BE, Amaro-Reyes A, Regalado-González C. 2018. Effect of an edible coating based on chitosan and oxidized starch on shelf life of Carica papaya L., and its physicochemical and antimicrobial properties. Coatings, 8(9), 318.
Farzana T, Abedin MJ, Abdullah ATM, Reaz AH. 2023. Exploring the impact of pumpkin and sweet potato enrichment on the nutritional profile and antioxidant capacity of noodles. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 14, 100849.
Hajji S, Younes I, Affes S, Boufi S, Nasri M. 2018. Optimization of the formulation of chitosan edible coatings supplemented with carotenoproteins and their use for extending strawberries postharvest life. Food Hydrocolloids, 83, 375-392.
Hossain MS, Iqbal A. 2016. Effect of shrimp chitosan coating on postharvest quality of banana (Musa sapientum L.) fruits. International Food Research Journal, 23(1), 277-283.
Monzón-Ortega K, Salvador-Figueroa M, Gálvez-López D, Rosas-Quijano R, Ovando-Medina I, Vázquez-Ovando A. 2018. Characterization of Aloe vera-chitosan composite films and their use for reducing the disease caused by fungi in papaya Maradol. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 55, 4747-4757.
Nenadis N, Wang LF, Tsimidou M, Zhang HY. 2004. Estimation of scavenging activity of phenolic compounds using the ABTS•+ assay. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 52(15), 4669-4674.
Priyadarshi R, El-Araby A, Rhim JW. 2024. Chitosan-based sustainable packaging and coating technologies for strawberry preservation: A review. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 278, 134859.
Riseh RS, Vatankhah M, Hassanisaadi M, Kennedy JF. 2023. Chitosan-based nanocomposites as coatings and packaging materials for the postharvest improvement of agricultural product: A review. Carbohydrate Polymers, 309, 120666.
Salgado-Cruz MDLP, Salgado-Cruz J, García-Hernández AB, Calderón-Domínguez G, Gómez-Viquez H, Oliver-Espinoza R, Fernández-Martínez MC, Yáñez-Fernández J. 2021. Chitosan as a coating for biocontrol in postharvest products: A bibliometric review. Membranes, 11(6), 421.
Sikder MBH, Islam MM. 2019. Effect of shrimp chitosan coating on physico-chemical properties and shelf life extension of banana. International Journal of Engineering Technology and Sciences, 6(1), 41-54.
Subramani G, Manian R. 2024. Bioactive chitosan films: Integrating antibacterial, antioxidant, and antifungal properties in food packaging. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 278, 134596.
Suseno N, Savitri E, Sapei L, Padmawijaya KS. 2014. Improving shelf-life of cavendish banana using chitosan edible coating. Procedia Chemistry, 9, 113-120.
Vasile C, Baican M. 2021. Progresses in food packaging, food quality, and safety—controlled-release antioxidant and/or antimicrobial packaging. Molecules, 26(5), 1263.
Vazquez-Olivo G, López-Martínez LX, Contreras-Angulo L, Heredia JB. 2019. Antioxidant capacity of lignin and phenolic compounds from corn stover. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 10, 95-102.
Vilaplana R, Chicaiza G, Vaca C, Valencia-Chamorro S. 2020. Combination of hot water treatment and chitosan coating to control anthracnose in papaya (Carica papaya L.) during the postharvest period. Crop Protection, 128, 105007.
Vilvert JC, de Freitas ST, Ferreira MAR, Costa CDSR, Leite RHDL, dos Santos FKG, Aroucha EM. M. 2023. Preservation of quality and bioactive compounds in mangoes using chitosan-graphene-oxide-based biodegradable packaging. Horticulturae, 9(10), 1145.
Won JS, Lee SJ, Park HH, Song KB, Min SC. 2018. Edible coating using a chitosan‐based colloid incorporating grapefruit seed extract for cherry tomato safety and preservation. Journal of Food Science, 83(1), 138-146.
Zam W. 2019. Effect of alginate and chitosan edible coating enriched with olive leaves extract on the shelf life of sweet cherries (Prunus avium L.). Journal of Food Quality, 2019(1), 8192964.
Zhu LS, Shan W, Wu CJ, Wei W, Xu H, Lu WJ, Chen JY, Su XG, Kuang JF. 2021. Ethylene-induced banana starch degradation mediated by an ethylene signaling component MaEIL2. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 181, 111648.