Next Article in Journal
Economic Viability of Raffia in Black Pepper Crops: An Analysis Based on IRR, NPV, and Payback
Previous Article in Journal
Selection and Validation of Reference Candidate Genes for qRT-PCR Analysis in the Developing Fruit of Phyllanthus emblica L.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Horticulturae
Volume 11
Issue 9
10.3390/horticulturae11091056
horticulturae-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Management of Postharvest Diseases via Eco-Friendly Technologies: A Review of Recent Research

by
Fatih Kalkan
Food Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Ardahan University, Ardahan 75002, Türkiye
Horticulturae 2025, 11(9), 1056; https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11091056
Submission received: 25 July 2025 / Revised: 18 August 2025 / Accepted: 29 August 2025 / Published: 3 September 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Postharvest Biology, Quality, Safety, and Technology)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

Microbial diseases that emerge in fruits and vegetables during postharvest period cause serious losses in product quality and, consequently, significant economic losses; this condition poses a worrying threat to global food safety and food security. These diseases shorten shelf life of fruits and vegetables and negatively affect microbiological and physical quality of food offered to consumers. Growing regulatory restrictions on conventional chemical management practices and growing social demand for healthy, environmentally friendly foods have necessitated development of environmentally friendly alternative methods. In this context, sustainable technologies such as biological control agents, natural compounds, edible coatings, and physical applications play a significant role in enhancing food safety and food security and reducing postharvest losses. This review comprehensively looks at recently developed environmentally friendly practices and highlights current scientific trends toward effective and reliable management of postharvest diseases.

1. Introduction

Postharvest microbial spoilage in fruits and vegetables causes significant economic losses and food safety and food security problems worldwide. A large portion of these losses are caused by microbial diseases that develop in fruits and vegetables during the postharvest period, and determining the etiology of these diseases and common pathogen species is critical for the development of effective control strategies. Postharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables and pathogens that cause them are researched in [1]. These diseases and pathogens that affect them are as below in Table 1.
While widely used conventional chemical fungicides are effective against pathogens, they raise serious concerns in terms of residue problems, environmental toxicity, resistance development, and consumer health. Studies recently have revealed that multiple fungicide resistance is widespread in many pathogens, particularly Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium species; furthermore, the target of reducing pesticide use by 50% by 2030 in line with the European Green Deal strategy has further reinforced these concerns [2,3]. In this context, interest in environmentally friendly disease management strategies in line with sustainable agricultural practices is increasing. Droby et al. [4] and Janisiewicz et al. [5] reported that biocontrol agents such as yeast and bacteria offer effective and safe alternatives to chemical fungicides. Metschnikowia pulcherrima and related species have recently been shown to suppress rots in products such as citrus and grapes through iron competition, biofilm formation, and antimicrobial metabolites [6,7]. Sharma et al. [8] and Hariharan et al. [9] emphasized that microorganisms, including Trichoderma spp., interact with pathogens via competition, antibiosis, and enzymatic degradation mechanisms. Furthermore, antimicrobial properties of natural plant-derived compounds, including essential oils, are significant. Nazzaro et al. [10] stated that phenolic structures contained in these compounds provide effective protection by disrupting the pathogen membrane structure. Current findings show that essential oils formulated in nanoemulsions and edible coatings reduce decay in produce such as strawberries and citrus fruits by 70–80% and limit weight loss by more than 50% [11]. Furthermore, Dutta et al. [12] reported that edible coatings derived from biopolymers such as chitosan reduce microbial contamination and extend shelf life. Romanazzi et al. [13] point out that combining these methods with integrated approaches can provide synergistic and lasting success in disease management. Nanoemulsion formulations of essential oils, even when applied individually, show significant antifungal activity against important postharvest pathogens such as Botrytis cinerea and reduce rot and slow quality loss in strawberry [14]. Similarly, combination of biocontrol agents (BCAs) such as Bacillus and Candida and modified atmospheric conditions (high CO2 or high relative humidity) limits pathogen pressure and fruit tissue deterioration more strongly than single applications [4,7]. Indeed, edible coatings prepared with carnauba wax and palmarosa essential oil nanoemulsions on papaya preserved quality and sensory properties under high relative humidity conditions; similarly, nanocellulose–EO coatings have been reported to increase firmness and reduce weight loss in strawberries during storage [15,16]. As these findings are considered together, integration of essential oil nanoemulsions, biocontrol agents, and high CO2/RH treatments stands out as a synergistic strategy that more effectively reduces both pathogen density and quality loss compared to either method used individually. This study aims to evaluate current biological, natural, and physical techniques, to evaluate potential of environmentally friendly technologies in management of postharvest diseases.

1.1. Effects on Agricultural Economy

Around 14% of the world’s food production is lost from harvest to retail, and this percentage rises significantly when consumer waste is taken into account, according to the FAO’s study [17]. The highest losses are seen in fruit and vegetable group, while losses in cereals, legumes, rootsn and tubers can range from 10 to 40%. Losses are particularly high in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, while in Europe and North America, although production losses are relatively low, retail and consumer waste reaches serious levels. The most critical points of losses are harvest, storage, transportation, and packaging, and this situation becomes more pronounced, especially in tropical regions where there is a lack of cold chain; in addition, not only the physical but also the economic value of losses is important, since even small losses in low-volume but high-value products (such as strawberries) can lead to major economic losses. It is stated that losses in the global agricultural economy have serious and complex consequences not only in terms of quantity but also in economic, nutritional, and environmental terms, and that this problem is concentrated at the production and logistics stage in low-income countries and more at the consumption stage in high-income countries [17].

1.2. Effects on Public Health and Food Safety

Risk of residues is a public health concern related to chemicals used in control of postharvest fruit and vegetable diseases. Risk of health issues in long term may be elevated by these residues. These risks are exacerbated by misuse of pesticides and an absence of effective controls. Additionally, postharvest diseases can lead to the production of pollutants that compromise food safety and degrade the quality of fruits and vegetables. In conclusion, it is of utmost importance to create biological and environmentally benign alternative methods to mitigate pesticide residues and manage diseases. In this context, researchers asserted that employing a wax formulation with 2% sodium bicarbonate alongside biocontrol agent Candida oleophila presents a commercially viable and safe alternative to chemical treatments for papaya fruit. They stated that biologically and environmentally benign methods might enhance capacity to keep a product fresh by maintaining fruit quality [18].

1.3. Challenges of Conventional Methods

Growing consumer and regulatory concerns about use of chemical fungicides have led to stricter regulations, bans on certain groups of chemicals, and a shift by wholesalers, retailers, and consumers towards untreated products due to risks of chemical residues in food products. Synthetic conventional fungicides are still primary strategy for postharvest disease management. However, these chemicals carry risks such as the development of resistance, and even low levels of residues remaining on fruits and vegetables can increase the likelihood of fungicide resistance. Growing health concerns have driven the demand to reduce the risk of exposure of people and the environment to chemicals. While conventional fungicide applications remain the dominant control method, their use on postharvest agricultural products faces restrictions [19].

1.3.1. Overuse of Chemical Fungicides

Overuse of chemical fungicides, which are widely used in management of postharvest diseases in fruits and vegetables, leads to problems such as resistance development in pathogens, environmental damage, and risks to human health. Those who have conducted research on this issue emphasize that pathogens such as Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum rapidly gain resistance to chemical fungicides, fungicide residues reduce diversity and enzyme activities of soil microorganisms, and toxic or carcinogenic effects of some fungicides pose a risk to human health. Furthermore, consumer demand for residue-free foods will further restrict future use of chemical fungicides; therefore, a shift to sustainable alternatives such as biological control agents, plant extracts, and physical methods will become inevitable [20].

1.3.2. Resistance Development and Residual Problems

Excessive and repeated use of chemical fungicides against postharvest diseases in fruits and vegetables leads to development of multiple- and cross-resistance in pathogens, which reduces efficacy of these fungicides and complicates disease management; furthermore, as resistance increases, producers must apply more frequent and higher doses, which raises residue burden on products and poses both environmental risks and health concerns for consumers. Therefore, importance of alternative techniques such as integrated disease management and biological control was emphasized [21]. Researchers who have studied the fungicide resistance of fungi causing fruit rots in blueberries have found that some pesticides are no longer as effective as they once were in controlling these diseases and that some fungal species have developed resistance to these pesticides. The study revealed that a significant proportion of fungi causing fruit rot in blueberries are resistant to commonly used fungicide mixtures, which makes disease control difficult and suggests that producers should turn to alternative methods [22].

1.4. Rise and Challenges of Environmentally Friendly Approaches

Environmentally friendly approaches are becoming increasingly important in management of postharvest diseases in fruits and vegetables. Due to problems of chemical fungicides, such as leaving residues, harming human health, and developing resistance, alternative methods such as biological control agents, plant extracts, essential oils, edible coatings, UV-C irradiation, and nanotechnology come to fore. Commercial application of specific microorganisms for biological control is limited by factors including cost, stability, and formulation. Essential oils and plant extracts exhibit antifungal properties; however, they may adversely affect the color, odor, and flavor of products. Even though there is potential for effective protection at low doses, commercial adoption of nanotechnology remains limited. While environmentally friendly techniques offer a sustainable alternative to chemical applications for managing postharvest diseases, technical and economic challenges remain to be addressed [23].

2. Biological Control Approaches

2.1. Antagonistic Microorganisms

2.1.1. Yeast Species

Fungal diseases affecting fruits and vegetables during postharvest period shorten product shelf life and cause economic losses. These pathogens proliferate rapidly, particularly under favorable environmental conditions, posing a serious threat to product quality and food safety. Gray mold is one of the most important postharvest diseases of kiwifruit and can cause yield losses of up to 20–30%. Thanks to its high adaptability to environmental conditions, it enters plant through damage on fruit surface and invades tissues [24]. Blue mold similarly enters through damaged areas, causing decay and producing toxins such as patulin, posing serious risks to human health [25]. Black spot and black rot, caused by fungi such as Alternaria alternata, are important diseases characterized by black spots and tissue deterioration on fruit peel [26]. In addition, other fungal diseases, such as soft rot and ripe rot, lead to serious quality losses through symptoms such as waterlogging, tissue softening, and foul odor caused by pathogens, while diseases such as stem end rot, sour rot, and anthracnose negatively affect marketability of fruits. In this context, biological control methods are based on use of beneficial microorganisms that can prevent infections without harming human health and environment. Antagonistic yeast species, including Candida oleophila, Hanseniaspora uvarum, and Meyerozyma caribbica, have shown efficacy in managing postharvest diseases such as gray mold and black rot [27]. Yeasts provide biological control by competing with pathogens for nutrients and habitat, secreting volatile organic compounds, activating host plant defense systems, and suppressing pathogens via biofilm formation [28].

2.1.2. Bacterial Biocontrol Agents

Use of biological control agents as an alternative to chemical fungicides is becoming increasingly important. Janisiewicz and Korsten [28] examined role of biological agents in control of postharvest fruit diseases and emphasized importance of bacterial biocontrol agents. Researchers noted that bacteria such as Bacillus spp. and Pseudomonas spp. were particularly effective against necrotrophic pathogens that caused infection through wounding, through various mechanisms including antibiotic production, competition for nutrients and space, hydrolytic enzyme production, and induced resistance. Wound parts provide moist, nutrient-rich environments where antagonistic bacteria can rapidly colonize. Enterobacter cloacae and Pantoea agglomerans are also among other bacterial biocontrol agents. Biocontrol mechanisms often involve multiple modes of action; antibiotic production, hydrolytic enzymes, induced resistance, and, most importantly, competition for nutrients and space are prominent. Ability of antagonistic bacteria to rapidly proliferate and establish themselves at wound site when applied to fruit surface is critical to biocontrol success. However, some bacteria cannot show broad-spectrum effects on their own, requiring the use of mixtures, which creates disadvantages in terms of product stability and production costs in commercial applications.

2.1.3. Mechanisms of Action

Antagonistic microorganisms are critical to environmentally friendly control of postharvest fruit and vegetable diseases. They colonize injured tissue, competing for nutrients and space, inhibiting pathogen growth by secreting antibiotics or antifungal compounds (e.g., iturin, pyrrolenitrin), producing lytic enzymes (β-1,3-glucanase, chitinase) that degrade cell walls, activating plant defense responses, and forming biofilms to limit pathogen entry. An individual mechanism is often insufficient for disease controlling. A successful biocontrol management often rely on a combination of these mechanisms, achieving disease suppression without leaving chemical residue or environmental damage [28]. Droby et al. [4] agree with Janisiewicz and Korsten [28], but also point out that they have drawbacks such as inconsistent performance and formulation difficulties. Although effectiveness of biocontrol agents in disease management relies on multiple mechanisms, such as nutrient competition, antifungal compound production, lytic enzyme secretion, induced resistance, and biofilm formation, they criticize the fact that most research focuses on the same few microorganism species and emphasize need to discover new species. The authors argue that biocontrol should not be limited to use of microorganisms alone but should be supported by integrated approaches targeting disease process and microenvironment, suggesting a paradigm shift in this area; this offers an important perspective for environmentally friendly, sustainable agricultural practices [4].

2.2. Plant Extracts and Natural Compounds

Within the scope of environmentally friendly technologies, plant extracts and natural compounds demonstrate significant potential in biological control of postharvest decay in cherries. Chitosan and nettle extract, in particular, significantly reduce growth and the decay rate of major pathogens such as Monilinia laxa and Botrytis cinerea in both laboratory and fruit applications. The ability of chitosan to slow respiration by activating plant defense mechanisms makes this compound particularly attractive. However, it has been noted that some natural compounds, such as potassium bicarbonate, can be phytotoxic at high doses, emphasizing the critical importance of dose management. Plant extracts and natural compounds are promising alternatives that could replace synthetic fungicides in organic farming or integrated disease management without harming human health or the environment [29]. On the other hand, Tripathi and Dubey [30] reported that plant extracts and natural compounds are promising alternatives for the control of postharvest fungal decay but note some important limitations. While these compounds demonstrate high antifungal activity under laboratory conditions, they generally fail to replicate the same success in field applications. Furthermore, it is noted that effective doses can have negative effects on sensory qualities such as taste, odor, and color in fruits and vegetables; that some compounds pose a risk of phytotoxicity; and that the composition of plant extracts varies from batch to batch. Furthermore, lack of fully elucidated mechanisms of action for many compounds, lack of sufficient knowledge of their toxicological profiles, and difficulty of standardization are among major factors limiting their commercial application. Therefore, Tripathi and Dubey [30] emphasize that natural compounds cannot yet replace synthetic fungicides alone, but they can have a valuable role as complementary tools in integrated control programs. Feliziani et al. [29] take a more positive and practical approach, while Tripathi and Dubey [30] place a greater emphasis on difficulties encountered in field applications, sensory quality risks, and standardization problems. These limit the ability of plant extracts and natural compounds to replace synthetic fungicides alone but suggest that these compounds remain an important complementary option, particularly within integrated disease management strategies.

3. Physical and Physicochemical Methods

Techniques such as cold plasma, ultraviolet irradiation, pulsed electric fields, microwave heating, vacuum cooling, thermal-based, and ionizing radiation are effective in reducing the microbial load on the surfaces of products, inhibiting the growth of fungal and bacterial pathogens, and thus controlling postharvest diseases (Figure 1). Physical and physicochemical methods are presented as alternatives to chemical disinfectants, and their effects are supported by application examples in fruits and vegetables [31]. Hot water immersion has been reported to preserve quality by reducing blue and green mold rot in citrus. This method increases effectiveness of biological control agent Pichia membranaefaciens, limits pathogen growth, and increases levels of defensive enzymes and phenolic compounds in fruit [32]. Dry heat treatment slows rate of fruit ripening, balancing metabolic processes and preventing disease development. In fruits, it reduced tissue softening and rot by stabilizing cell wall polymers [33]. A combination of heat treatments with yeast antagonists has significantly reduced rot in apples. Heat both reduces the pathogen load and increases the effectiveness of biological agents. Heat treatments combined with biological agents offer an effective and environmentally friendly solution for reducing use of chemical fungicides [34]. UV-C light reduces microbial load on surfaces of fruits and vegetables and prevents proliferation of fungal spores by damaging their DNA [35]. LED lighting extended the shelf life of broccoli and increased its phenolic compounds and antioxidant content. LED lighting improves the storage quality by keeping the color, flavor, and nutritional value of fruits and vegetables [36]. Cold plasma reduces pathogens in foods without the use of chemicals and kills microorganisms through reactive active species. It significantly reduced Salmonella and E. coli in almonds [37]. Modified and controlled atmosphere techniques extend the shelf life of fruits and vegetables and slow quality losses by reducing respiration rates. Modified atmosphere packaging improves microbial quality in fresh-cut produce and extends the shelf life by inhibiting surface pathogen growth [38]. It is also stated that these methods can incur synergistic effects when used alone or in combination within a framework of barrier technology, but there are some technical and economic limitations depending on the product type in practice [31].

4. Chemical Alternatives: Natural-Origin Compounds

Edible films influence physiological changes in fruits and vegetables by providing effective barriers for oxygen, carbon dioxide, moisture, and water vapor. These coatings can prevent oxidative browning, discoloration, off-flavors, and microbial contamination. Studies have shown that coatings containing chitosan, alginate, starch, gelatin, and various plant extracts are effective against fungal pathogens in fruits and vegetables. It is important that edible coatings do not affect sensory properties of fruits and vegetables; therefore, it is stated that coating thickness, volatile oil concentrations, and application methods must be carefully optimized. In addition, edible coatings are considered environmentally friendly alternatives since they leave no residue in environment and are biodegradable [39]. Organic acids stand out among environmentally friendly chemical alternatives in postharvest disease management and attract attention with their potential to inhibit the growth of fungal pathogens on the surfaces of fruits and vegetables. Organic acids show antifungal properties by disrupting microorganism cell membranes with a low pH effect. Diverse organic acids impeded the growth of diseases such Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum in vitro [30,40]. The effect of organic acids generally varies depending on the concentration and application time; some studies indicate that concentrations between 1 and 5% are effective. However, it was also stated that high concentrations of organic acids may cause flavor changes and tissue damage in fruits. Use of organic acids in combination with biological agents or edible coatings can enhance pathogen control and prolong persistence time on fruit surface. In particular, combinations with chitosan-based coatings provide more effective results by combining antifungal effects of both organic acids and chitosan. However, in a study conducted by Romanazzi et al. [41], it was reported that organic acids alone were not effective in controlling gray mold in grapes; they provided significant protection when applied together with chitosan. On the other hand, essential oils, plant extracts, volatile aroma compounds, glucosinolates, and propolis are all natural substances that come from plants and are environmentally friendly biological agents. Tripathi and Dubey [30] found that volatile aroma molecules, such as hexanal, benzaldehyde, and acetaldehyde, can kill fungi, but only in small amounts. Glucosinolates and breakdown products of them are antifungal and shown to work against Penicillium expansum in pears. Pathogens such as Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum cannot grow when propolis is around. Some essential oils, such as thymol, peppermint, and carvone, have been shown to kill fungi when used in the gas phase. For example, thymol can kill gray mold and brown rot. Phenolic compounds such as kaempferol and flavonoids obtained from plant extracts have shown antifungal activity against Penicillium italicum. Plant-based antimicrobials offer advantages of low toxicity, biodegradability, and food safety acceptability. However, it has been noted that high concentrations can negatively impact fruit quality, making organoleptic testing and dosage adjustments important. Furthermore, it has been suggested that using plant compounds in combination can produce synergistic effects, resulting in stronger antifungal activity [30].

5. Hurdle Technologies

Synergistic use of environmentally friendly hurdle technologies in postharvest disease management of fruits and vegetables offers significant advantages in terms of extending the product shelf life and preventing quality loss. Wanakamol et al. [42] delayed microbial spoilage in leafy vegetables by applying vacuum pre-cooling and modified atmosphere packaging together and increased product shelf life by 200% with only 1.05% additional cost due to this synergistic approach. Another study assessed effects of UV-C and biocontrol yeast Meyerozyma guilliermondii on kiwifruit in terms of preventing natural infection and gray mold. As an individual treatment, M. guilliermondii or UV-C prevented the growth of natural infections and gray mold. More control efficacy was achieved with the combination of M. guilliermondii and UV-C treatment than with either treatment alone [43]. A combined application increased the expression of defense-related genes (polyphenol oxidase, peroxidase, β-1,3-glucanase) and strengthened host defenses by promoting flavonoid and lignin accumulation. The findings indicate that UV-C enhances the biocontrol efficacy of W. anomalus by activating host defense responses. Integrated use of biological and physical methods demonstrates high potential as an eco-friendly technology in potato tubers [44]. On the other hand, Zhang et al. [45] evaluated Cryptococcus laurentii and ultraviolet-C (UV-C) approaches in tomatoes. Cryptococcus laurentii and UV-C successfully reduced rot and natural infections from Botrytis cinerea and Alternaria alternata. The authors stated that the combination of Cryptococcus laurentii and UV-C was more effective than individual applications. All these studies show that using a combination of eco-friendly methods offers major benefits for product safety, energy savings, and market appeal, while also decreasing the reliance on chemicals.

6. Advantages and Limitations

Significant progress has been made in use of innovative, environmentally friendly technologies in postharvest disease management of fruits and vegetables. However, effectiveness of these technologies and their application challenges remain. Edible films and coatings significantly reduce water loss and microbial spoilage by creating a semi-permeable barrier on product surface. However, one of major problems encountered in field applications of these technologies is lack of parameter optimization and inadequate validation requirements required to ensure validity of these applications [39]. On the other hand, synergistic use of non-thermal treatments provides environmentally friendly microbial management with low energy consumption. However, standardization of processes for industrial-scale application of these technologies is not yet sufficient. This is a factor that may hinder widespread adoption and effective use of these innovative methods [46]. Moreover, physical techniques such as microwave, UV radiation, and ultrasound, as investigated by De Chiara et al. [31], presented encouraging outcomes for maintaining product quality. Nevertheless, there is insufficient field evidence to substantiate efficacy of these strategies, indicating that further research and implementation require additional data and experience. In result, to fully harness the promise of breakthrough technologies in this domain, additional research and development are necessary.

7. Future Perspectives

Yeasts are among the most important microorganisms in the field of biological control owing to their environmental friendliness, strong antagonistic effects, stress resistance, genetic diversity, and established production systems. Future research may considered, focused on screening yeast strains that exhibit parasitic activity against pathogens and developing various functional types of yeast-based biocontrol agents [47]. This assessment is not limited to yeasts; it also applies to the other antagonistic plant extracts, natural antifungal compounds, and bacteria. Antagonistic microorganisms of both yeast and bacterial origin have significant potential in controlling fungal pathogens encountered in postharvest fruits and vegetables. It would be beneficial to expand the biocontrol potential of antagonist yeasts, especially Wickerhamomyces anomalus, to different application areas. Integrating biocontrol agents with potent antifungal natural compounds such as thymol, carvacrol, eugenol, and cinnamaldehyde to develop multimodal mechanisms of action may be a promising strategy. Such integrated applications may enable synergistic reductions in effective dosages and minimization of potential side effects [20]. On the other hand, nanotechnology-based antifungal edible coatings made with zein and chitosan nanostructures provide an eco-friendly and effective way to manage diseases in fruits and vegetables after harvest, helping to keep them safe from germs and last longer [48]. In addition, non-thermal technologies are increasingly being researched to control microbial contamination in fresh fruits and vegetables, providing effective disinfection with low energy consumption. These methods have the potential to extend the shelf life of foods while preserving their nutritional value and sensory properties. Furthermore, integration of these technologies into industrial production lines increases their applicability through automation and modular systems, facilitating process control. These approaches offer sustainable and efficient alternatives, particularly for food safety; their integration with sensor-based systems will become even more important in the future [49]. These developments highlight the future potential of integrated and environmentally friendly disease management approaches within sustainable agricultural production systems.

8. Conclusions

Environmentally friendly technologies developed to control postharvest diseases in fruits and vegetables with sustainable methods have been subject of multidimensional research recently, especially within framework of the ‘Hurdle Technology’ approach. This approach offers combined systems using a combination of biological, physical, and chemical treatments to overcome the limitations of individual techniques [45]. Yeasts, bacteria, natural antifungal substances, coatings using nanotechnology, and non-thermal physical treatments are used together in these systems. In the literature, it is emphasized that these technologies provide an effect against common pathogens in sensitive products such as grapes, cherry tomatoes, and blueberries, and they also positively maintain quality parameters [50,51,52]. However, there are important structural gaps in the transfer of these techniques from laboratory conditions to industrial-scale applications [31,53]. These gaps are exacerbated by factors such as lack of product-based optimization of parameters such as dose, duration, temperature, and pH of technology components; high application costs; difficulty of integration into packaging and storage systems; regulatory uncertainties in nanomaterial and genetic applications; and lack of risk communication regarding consumer perception [53]. Therefore, in order to close the gap between research and application, it is of great importance to plan multi-center pilot application studies.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Coates, L.; Johnson, G.I. Postharvest diseases of fruit and vegetables. In Postharvest Handling: A Systems Approach, 2nd ed.; Johnson, G.I., Le Van, G.R., Hofman, A.D., Bachmann, N.J., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007; pp. 533–580. [Google Scholar]
  2. Schneider, K.; Barreiro-Hurle, J.; Rodriguez-Cerezo, E. Pesticide reduction amidst food and feed security concerns in Europe. Nat. Food 2023, 6, 746–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Yin, Y.; Miao, J.; Shao, W.; Liu, X.; Zhao, Y.; Ma, Z. Fungicide resistance: Progress in understanding mechanisms, monitoring, and management. Phytopathology 2023, 113, 707–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Droby, S.; Wisniewski, M.; Macarisin, D.; Wilson, C. Twenty years of postharvest biocontrol research: Is it time for a new paradigm? Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2009, 52, 137–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Janisiewicz, W.J.; Conway, W.S.; Leverentz, B. Biological control of postharvest decays of apple can prevent growth of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in apple wounds. J. Food Prot. 1999, 62, 1372–1375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wang, S.; Tan, Z.; Wang, C.; Liu, W.; Hang, F.; He, X.; Ye, D.; Li, L.; Sun, J. Iron competition as an important mechanism of pulcherrimin-producing Metschnikowia sp. strains for controlling postharvest fungal decays on citrus fruit. Foods 2023, 12, 4249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. He, Y.; Degraeve, P.; Oulahal, N. Bioprotective yeasts: Potential to limit postharvest spoilage and to extend shelf life or improve microbial safety of processed foods. Heliyon 2024, 10, e24929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sharma, R.R.; Singh, D.; Singh, R. Biological control of postharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables by microbial antagonists: A review. Biol. Control 2009, 50, 205–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hariharan, G.; Rifnas, L.M.; Prasannath, K. Role of Trichoderma spp. in biocontrol of plant diseases. In Microbial Biocontrol: Food Security and Post-Harvest Management; Kumar, A., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 39–78. [Google Scholar]
  10. Nazzaro, F.; Fratianni, F.; De Martino, L.; Coppola, R.; De Feo, V. Effect of essential oils on pathogenic bacteria. Pharmaceuticals 2013, 6, 1451–1474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kebriti, I.; Solgi, M.; Velashjerdi, M. Improving quality of strawberry by novel essential oil nanoemulsions of Echinophora platyloba combined with Aloe vera gel and gum arabic. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 1731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dutta, P.K.; Tripathi, S.; Mehrotra, G.K.; Dutta, J. Perspectives for chitosan based antimicrobial films in food applications. Food Chem. 2009, 114, 1173–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Romanazzi, G.; Sanzani, S.M.; Bi, Y.; Tian, S.; Martínez, P.G.; Alkan, N. Induced resistance to control postharvest decay of fruit and vegetables. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2016, 122, 82–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Javanmardi, Z.; Koushesh Saba, M.; Nourbakhsh, H.; Amini, J. Efficiency of nanoemulsion of essential oils to control Botrytis cinerea on strawberry surface and prolong fruit shelf life. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2023, 384, 109979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. De Oliveira Filho, J.G.; Da Cruz Silva, G.; Oldoni, F.C.A.; Miranda, M.; Florencio, C.; De Oliveira, R.M.D.; De Paula Gomes, M.; Ferreira, M.D. Edible coating based on carnauba wax nanoemulsion and Cymbopogon martinii essential oil on papaya postharvest preservation. Coatings 2022, 12, 1700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Karimi Dehbakri, S.; Ehtesham Nia, A.; Mumivand, H.; Rastegar, S. Effect of nanocellulose-based edible coatings enriched with α-pinene and myrtle essential oil on the postharvest quality of strawberry. BMC Plant Biol. 2025, 25, 812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. FAO. The State of Food and Agriculture 2019: Moving Forward on Food Loss and Waste Reduction; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gamagae, S.U.; Sivakumar, D.; Wijesundera, R.L.C. Evaluation of postharvest application of sodium bicarbonate incorporated wax formulation and Candida oleophila for the control of anthracnose of papaya. Crop Prot. 2004, 23, 575–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Romanazzi, G.; Smilanick, J.L.; Feliziani, E.; Droby, S. Integrated management of postharvest gray mold on fruit crops. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2016, 113, 69–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Raynaldo, R.; Luan, F.; Zhang, J.; Wang, H.; Xu, X. Biological control and other alternatives to chemical fungicides in postharvest management of fruit diseases: A review. Food Innov. Adv. 2024, 3, 135–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ahmad, T.; Xing, F.; Nie, C.; Cao, C.; Xiao, Y.; Yu, X.; Moosa, A.; Liu, Y. Biocontrol potential of lipopeptides produced by the novel Bacillus subtilis strain Y17B against postharvest Alternaria fruit rot of cherry. Front. Microbiol. 2023, 14, 1150217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Beg, M.A.; Lewis, K.J.; Oliver, J.E. Fungicide resistance profiles of Alternaria spp. associated with fruit rot of blueberry in Georgia, USA. Front. Plant Sci. 2025, 16, 1524586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wang, Z.; Wu, M.; Liao, Q.; Wang, Y.; Sui, Y.; Gong, C. Current status and future trends of eco-friendly management of postharvest fungal decays in tomato fruit. NPJ Sci. Food 2025, 9, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bardas, G.A.; Veloukas, T.; Koutita, O.; Karaoglanidis, G.S. Multiple resistance of Botrytis cinerea from kiwifruit to SDHIs, QoIs and fungicides of other chemical groups. Pest Manag. Sci. 2010, 66, 967–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Loncaric, A.; Sarkanj, B.; Gotal, A.M.; Kovac, M.; Nevistic, A.; Fruk, G.; Babojelic, M.S.; Babic, J.; Milicevic, B.; Kovac, T. Penicillium expansum impact and patulin accumulation on conventional and traditional apple cultivars. Toxins 2021, 13, 703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Troncoso-Rojas, R.; Tiznado-Hernández, M.E. Alternaria alternata (Black Rot, Black Spot). In Postharvest Decay: Control Strategies; Bautista-Baños, S., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 147–187. [Google Scholar]
  27. Li, J.; Yang, T.; Yuan, F.; Lv, X.; Zhou, Y. Inhibitory effect and potential antagonistic mechanism of isolated epiphytic yeasts against Botrytis cinerea and Alternaria alternata in postharvest blueberry fruits. Foods 2024, 13, 1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Janisiewicz, W.J.; Korsten, L. Biological control of postharvest diseases of fruits. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2002, 40, 411–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Feliziani, E.; Santini, M.; Landi, L.; Romanazzi, G. Pre- and postharvest treatment with alternatives to synthetic fungicides to control postharvest decay of sweet cherry. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2013, 78, 133–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tripathi, P.; Dubey, N.K. Exploitation of natural products as an alternative strategy to control postharvest fungal rotting of fruit and vegetables. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2004, 32, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. De Chiara, M.L.V.; Castagnini, J.M.; Capozzi, V. Cutting-edge physical techniques in postharvest for fruits and vegetables: Unveiling their power, inclusion in ‘hurdle’ approach, and latest applications. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2024, 151, 104619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhou, Y.; Deng, L.; Zeng, K. Enhancement of biocontrol efficacy of Pichia membranaefaciens by hot water treatment in postharvest diseases of citrus fruit. Crop Prot. 2014, 63, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Paull, R.E.; Chen, N.J. Heat treatment and fruit ripening. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2000, 21, 21–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Conway, W.S.; Leverentz, B.; Janisiewicz, W.J.; Saftner, R.A.; Camp, M.J. Improving biocontrol using antagonist mixtures with heat and/or sodium bicarbonate to control postharvest decay of apple fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2005, 36, 235–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Allende, A.; Tomas-Barberan, F.A.; Gil, M.I. Minimal processing for healthy traditional foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2006, 17, 513–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Jiang, A.; Zuo, J.; Zheng, Q.; Guo, L.; Gao, L.; Zhao, S.; Wang, Q.; Hu, W. Red LED irradiation maintains the postharvest quality of broccoli by elevating antioxidant enzyme activity and reducing the expression of senescence-related genes. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 251, 73–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Misra, N.N.; Tiwari, B.K.; Raghavarao, K.S.M.S.; Cullen, P.J. Nonthermal plasma inactivation of food-borne pathogens. Food Eng. Rev. 2011, 3, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sandhya. Modified atmosphere packaging of fresh produce: Current status and future needs. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2010, 43, 381–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chavan, P.; Lata, K.; Kaur, T.; Jambrak, A.R.; Sharma, S.; Roy, S.; Sinhmar, A.; Thory, R.; Singh, G.P.; Aayush, K.; et al. Recent advances in the preservation of postharvest fruits using edible films and coatings: A comprehensive review. Food Chem. 2023, 418, 135916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Sholberg, P.L. Fumigation of fruit with short-chain organic acids to reduce the potential of postharvest decay. Plant Dis. 1998, 82, 689–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Romanazzi, G.; Gabler, F.M.; Margosan, D.; Mackey, B.E.; Smilanick, J.L. Effect of chitosan dissolved in different acids on its ability to control postharvest gray mold of table grape. Postharvest Pathol. Mycotoxins 2009, 99, 1028–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Wanakamol, W.; Kongwong, P.; Chuamuangphan, C.; Bundhurat, D.; Boonyakiat, D.; Poonlarp, P. Hurdle approach for control of enzymatic browning and extension of shelf life of fresh-cut leafy vegetables using vacuum precooling and modified atmosphere packaging: Commercial application. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Cheng, L.; Zhou, L.; Li, D.; Gao, Z.; Teng, J.; Nie, X.; Guo, F.; Wang, C.; Wang, X.; Li, S.; et al. Combining the biocontrol agent Meyerozyma guilliermondii with UV-C treatment to manage postharvest gray mold on kiwifruit. Biol. Control 2023, 180, 105198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Leng, J.; Dai, Y.; Qiu, D.; Zou, Y.; Wu, X. Utilization of the antagonistic yeast, Wickerhamomyces anomalus, combined with UV-C to manage postharvest rot of potato tubers caused by Alternaria tenuissima. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2022, 377, 109782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhang, C.; Chen, K.; Wang, G. Combination of the biocontrol yeast Cryptococcus laurentii with UV-C treatment for control of postharvest diseases of tomato fruit. BioControl 2013, 58, 269–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Masilamani, S.; Natarajan, V.; Radhakrishnan, M. Recent advances in nonthermal hurdle approach in the food sector. Qual. Assur. Saf. Crops Foods 2025, 17, 19–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Wu, F.; Wang, H.; Lin, Y.; Feng, S.; Li, X. Biocontrol mechanisms of antagonistic yeasts on postharvest fruits and vegetables and the approaches to enhance the biocontrol potential of antagonistic yeasts. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2025, 430, 111038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Almeida, L.B.; Ferreira, M.S.; de Oliveira, T.A.M.F.; Viana, A.C.; de Araújo, A.A.; Soares, B.L.; Pereira, A.G. Antifungal edible coatings for fruits based on zein and chitosan nanowhiskers. J. Food Sci. 2024, 89, 793–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sasikumar, R.; Kumar, S.T.; Mangang, I.B.; Kaviarasu, G. A comprehensive review on cold plasma applications in the food industry. Sustain. Food Technol. 2025, 3, D5FB00148J. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Xiang, Q.; Zhang, R.; Fan, L.; Ma, Y.; Wu, D.; Li, K.; Bai, Y. Microbial inactivation and quality of grapes treated by plasma-activated water combined with mild heat. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 126, 109336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bremenkamp, I.; Ramos, A.V.; Lu, P.; Patange, A.; Bourke, P.; Sousa-Gallagher, M.J. Combined effect of plasma treatment and equilibrium modified atmosphere packaging on safety and quality of cherry tomatoes. Future Foods 2021, 3, 100011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Wang, J.; Wu, Z. Combined use of ultrasound-assisted washing with in-package atmospheric cold plasma processing as a novel non-thermal hurdle technology for ready-to-eat blueberry disinfection. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2022, 84, 105960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bigi, F.; Maurizzi, E.; Quartieri, A.; De Leo, R.; Gullo, M.; Pulvirenti, A. Non-thermal techniques and the “hurdle” approach: How is food technology evolving? Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2023, 132, 11–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Horticulturae 11 01056 g001
Figure 1. Representative demonstration of irradiation application on fresh tomatoes.
Figure 1. Representative demonstration of irradiation application on fresh tomatoes.
Horticulturae 11 01056 g001
Table 1. Postharvest diseases and causal pathogens of fruits and vegetables.
Table 1. Postharvest diseases and causal pathogens of fruits and vegetables.
Fruits and VegetablesDiseasePathogen(s)
Pome fruitsBlue moldPenicillium spp.
Gray moldBotrytis cinerea, Botryotinia fuckeliana
Bitter rotColletotrichum gloeosporioides, Glomerella cingulata
Alternaria rotAlternaria spp.
Mucor rotMucor piriformis
Stone fruitsBrown rotMonilia spp., Monilinia fructicola
Rhizopus rotRhizopus spp.
Gray moldBotrytis cinerea
Blue moldPenicillium spp.
Alternaria rotAlternaria alternata
GrapesGray moldBotrytis cinerea, Botryotinia fuckeliana
Blue moldPenicillium spp.
Rhizopus rotRhizopus spp.
Strawberries and similar fruitsGray moldBotrytis cinerea
Rhizopus rotRhizopus spp.
Cladosporium rotCladosporium spp.
Blue moldPenicillium spp.
Subtropical citrus fruitsBlue moldPenicillium italicum
Green moldPenicillium digitatum
Black center rotAlternaria citri
Stem end rotPhomopsis citri, Diaporthe citri
Brown rotPhytophthora citrophthora, P. parasitica
AvocadoAnthracnoseColletotrichum gloeosporioides, C. acutatum, Glomerella cingulata
Stem end rotDothiorella spp., Botryosphaeria spp., Lasiodiplodia theobromae, Stilbella cinnabarina, Thyronectria pseudotrichia, Phomopsis perseae
Bacterial soft rotErwinia carotovora
Tropical fruitsBanana anthracnoseColletotrichum musae
Crown rotFusarium spp., Verticillium spp., Acremonium sp., Colletotrichum musae
Ceratocystis fruit rotThielaviopsis paradoxa, Ceratocystis paradoxa
MangoAnthracnoseColletotrichum gloeosporioides, C. acutatum, Glomerella cingulata
Stem end rotDothiorella spp., Botryosphaeria spp., Lasiodiplodia theobromae, Phomopsis mangiferae, Pestalotiopsis mangiferae
Other pathogensRhizopus stolonifer, Aspergillus niger, Alternaria alternata, Botrytis cinerea, Penicillium expansum, Mucor circinelloides
PapayaAnthracnoseColletotrichum spp.
Black rotPhoma caricae-papayae, Mycosphaerella caricae
Phomopsis rotPhomopsis caricae-papayae
Rhizopus rotRhizopus stolonifer
Phytophthora fruit rotPhytophthora palmivora
PineappleWater blister rotThielaviopsis paradoxa, Ceratocystis paradoxa
Fruit core rotPenicillium funiculosum, Fusarium moniliforme var. subglutinans, Gibberella fujikuroi var. subglutinans
Yeast rotSaccharomyces spp.
Bacterial brown rotErwinia spp.
CucurbitsBacterial soft rotErwinia spp., Bacillus polymyxa, Pseudomonas syringae, Xanthomonas campestris
Gray moldBotrytis cinerea, Botryotinia fuckeliana
Fusarium rotFusarium spp.
Alternaria rotAlternaria spp.
Charcoal rotMacrophomina phaseolina
Cottony rotPythium spp.
Rhizopus rotRhizopus spp.
Tomato, eggplant, pepperBacterial soft rotErwinia spp., Bacillus polymyxa, Pseudomonas spp., Xanthomonas campestris
Gray moldBotrytis cinerea, Botryotinia fuckeliana
Fusarium rotFusarium spp.
Alternaria rotAlternaria alternata
Cladosporium rotCladosporium spp.
Rhizopus rotRhizopus spp.
Watery soft rotSclerotinia spp.
Cottony rotPythium spp.
Sclerotium rotSclerotium rolfsii, Athelia rolfsii
LegumesGray moldBotrytis cinerea, B. fabae, Botryotinia fuckeliana
White mold/Watery soft rotSclerotinia spp.
Cottony rotPythium spp.
Sclerotium rotSclerotium rolfsii, Athelia rolfsii
CrucifersBacterial soft rotErwinia spp., Bacillus spp., Pseudomonas spp., Xanthomonas campestris
Gray moldBotrytis cinerea, Botryotinia fuckeliana
Alternaria rotAlternaria spp.
Watery soft rotSclerotinia spp.
Phytophthora rotPhytophthora spp.
Leafy vegetablesBacterial soft rotErwinia spp., Pseudomonas spp., Xanthomonas spp.
Gray moldBotrytis cinerea
Water rotSclerotinia spp.
OnionBacterial soft rotErwinia spp., Lactobacillus spp., Pseudomonas spp.
Black mold rotAspergillus niger
Fusarium basal rotFusarium oxysporum f. sp. cepae
Smudge diseaseColletotrichum circinans
CarrotBacterial soft rotErwinia spp., Pseudomonas spp.
Rhizopus rotRhizopus spp.
Gray moldBotrytis cinerea, Botryotinia fuckeliana
Watery rotSclerotinia spp.
Chalara and Thielaviopsis rotsChalara thielavioides, Thielaviopsis basicola
PotatoBacterial soft rotErwinia spp.
Dry rotFusarium spp.
GangrenePhoma exigua var. exigua, var. foveata
Black scurfRhizoctonia solani
Silver scurfHelminthosporium solani
Skin spotPolyscytalum pustulans
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kalkan, F. Management of Postharvest Diseases via Eco-Friendly Technologies: A Review of Recent Research. Horticulturae 2025, 11, 1056. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11091056

AMA Style

Kalkan F. Management of Postharvest Diseases via Eco-Friendly Technologies: A Review of Recent Research. Horticulturae. 2025; 11(9):1056. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11091056

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kalkan, Fatih. 2025. "Management of Postharvest Diseases via Eco-Friendly Technologies: A Review of Recent Research" Horticulturae 11, no. 9: 1056. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11091056

APA Style

Kalkan, F. (2025). Management of Postharvest Diseases via Eco-Friendly Technologies: A Review of Recent Research. Horticulturae, 11(9), 1056. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11091056

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop