Emerging trends in biopolymer edible coatings for enhancing the shelf life of neglected and underutilized crops

Abstract

Neglected and underutilized species (NUS) are nutrient-dense crops, offering high concentrations of essential nutrients relative to their calorie content. These crops are increasingly explored for their potential to meet global consumption demands while promoting ecosystem biodiversity sustainably. However, their commercialization has been limited by short shelf life and significant postharvest losses. One promising solution is the use of biopolymer edible coatings as an alternative to plastic packaging, which could extend the shelf life of these crops. This review examines research conducted over the past decade on preserving underutilized crops with biopolymer coatings and suggests potential directions for future studies. It covers the sources of biopolymer coatings, their benefits and drawbacks, application methods, and strategies to overcome challenges associated with different biopolymers. While various coating formulations have shown promising results, the commercialization of these coatings for underutilized crops remains limited. The review also identifies key research gaps that must be addressed to bridge this gap.

1 Introduction

A key challenge for global food systems is producing food sustainably while satisfying the increasing nutritional needs of a growing population. Today’s agricultural scene is mostly made up of large-scale industrial systems focused on a few main crops, mainly wheat, rice, and maize, which make up about 60% of the world’s caloric intake (Sood et al., 2023). This heavy dependence has caused significant problems, including malnutrition, especially in low- and middle-income countries, along with land degradation, loss of biodiversity, and environmental pollution (Hunter et al., 2019).

One promising approach to tackling these issues is integrating neglected and underutilized species (NUS) of nutrient-rich fruits and vegetables traditionally grown in specific regions but ignored mainly by agricultural research, policy, and markets (Hunter et al., 2019; Sood et al., 2023; Onawo and Egboduku, 2025). These species are often well-suited to harsh environments and provide significant nutritional and ecological advantages. Although they are minimally present in mainstream agriculture, NUS can boost dietary diversity, enhance climate-resilient farming systems, and support smallholder farmers’ livelihoods. Their potential also reaches emerging sectors, such as functional foods and sustainable technologies, including biopolymer-based edible coatings that extend shelf life and reduce postharvest losses (Mawoneke et al., 2025).

NUS have long been consumed in regions where they are locally grown for their nutritive and medicinal value and their contribution to local biodiversity. However, researchers, policymakers, and breeders have typically overlooked these species (Hunter et al., 2019). Despite their numerous dietary benefits, their market potential is often hindered by their perishable nature, leading to significant postharvest losses. Traditional methods of reducing postharvest decay, such as modified atmospheric packaging, hypobaric storage, and controlled atmosphere, are often costly and challenging to implement in developing countries (Gol et al., 2015). Moreover, the need for refrigerated storage throughout the supply chain results in further economic strain and increased waste, especially for underutilized fruits prone to rapid spoilage and chilling injury.

A more cost-effective and sustainable alternative to conventional plastic packaging for extending such crops’ shelf life is using edible biopolymer coatings (Krishnan et al., 2025). These coatings, formulated with specific additives to address the unique characteristics of each fruit or vegetable, offer a practical solution to reduce spoilage and enable storage at room temperature. Research into edible coatings from various natural sources is essential, as each biopolymer offers distinct benefits and limitations. Identifying the most suitable coating for different fruits and vegetables is necessary, as no single coating works universally (Vargas-Torres et al., 2017; Krishnan et al., 2025). This is particularly important in light of the growing concerns about the environmental and health impacts of non-biodegradable synthetic coatings (Dey et al., 2023).

Tropical fruits are generally divided into three groups: (1) underutilized species that are not grown commercially but are consumed locally; (2) locally marketed fruits with limited worldwide distribution, such as pitahaya (Selenicereus spp.); and (3) fruits that are widely cultivated for both local and global markets. The third group can be further subdivided into major fruits that lead in global production and minor fruits with limited international trade (Md Nor and Ding, 2020). While earlier reviews mainly focused on major tropical and climacteric fruits (Olunusi et al., 2024), this review addresses edible biopolymer coatings used on NUS. This section examines the sources, application methods, functional benefits, and regulatory aspects of biopolymer-based edible coatings, highlighting their role in extending shelf life and preserving the postharvest quality of NUS. It also discusses recent patented formulations and assesses emerging trends in designing and commercializing coatings specifically for underutilized fruits and vegetables.

2 Classification and benefits of NUS

NUS represent a diverse group of locally important plants globally marginalized in research, policy development, and commercial markets. These species (see Table 1) can be classified based on their taxonomy, cultivation status, and ecological roles (Sood et al., 2023; Hunter et al., 2019).

Despite their significant nutritional and ecological value, NUS occupy only a small fraction of global agricultural land. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), although more than 30,000 plant species are considered edible, only 150 crops are widely cultivated, and a mere 30 crops account for 95% of human caloric intake (Hunter et al., 2019). Most NUS are grown for subsistence, catering to local consumption rather than global markets.

3 Biopolymer edible coatings for NUS: sources, applications, and functional properties

Edible coatings made from natural biopolymers are a promising approach to enhance postharvest quality, especially in tropical and underused crops (Figure 1). These coatings are created using materials from plants, animals, algae, and microbial fermentation products (Hoque et al., 2021; Santhosh et al., 2021; Pillai et al., 2024; Kocira et al., 2024; Yousuf et al., 2022; Liyanapathiranage et al., 2023; Usman et al., 2025).

FIGURE 1

3.1 Polysaccharide-based coatings

Polysaccharides are among the most common biopolymers used because of their ability to form films, biodegradability, and compatibility with antimicrobial agents (Nunes et al., 2023). These compounds come from various sources such as seeds (gums), tubers (starches), seaweed (alginate), and agro-industrial residues.

Cellulose, hemicellulose, and pectin are essential parts of plant cell walls, and can be sustainably extracted from food waste like peels and stems. For example, pectin from citrus peels and apple pomace has been used in packaging films (Frosi et al., 2023), while pectin from Phyllanthus acidus pomace shows high antioxidant activity (John and Maharaj, 2024; Pillai et al., 2024). Nanocellulose obtained from lignocellulosic waste is also gaining popularity as a packaging material (Ahmad Khorairi et al., 2023; Yadav et al., 2023). Table 2 highlights key biopolymers, their sources, properties, and uses related to NUS.

3.1.1 Chemically modified cellulose

The limited water solubility of native cellulose restricts its direct use in edible coatings. Chemical modifications enhance its functionality and processability. Common derivatives include methylcellulose (MC), carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), hydroxypropylcellulose (HPC), and hydroxypropylmethylcellulose (HPMC) (Nunes et al., 2023). CMC, in particular, is water-soluble, structurally stable, and effective in coatings for tropical fruits (Panahirad et al., 2021; Perez-Vazquez et al., 2023; Xu et al., 2024; Bahmid et al., 2024).

3.1.2 Starch

Starch can be thermoplastically processed with plasticizers, allowing its use in flexible films (Pillai et al., 2024). It is commonly sourced from cassava, potato, sweet potato, corn, wheat, and rice (Ortega et al., 2022; Oyom et al., 2022; Luciano et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2025). The performance of starch-based coatings is often improved with additives that enhance mechanical, barrier, or sensory properties (Majeed et al., 2023; Rashwan et al., 2024; Rob et al., 2024).

3.1.3 Chitosan

Chitosan, obtained from the deacetylation of chitin in crustacean shells and fungal cell walls, shows broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity and maintains good structural integrity (Adiletta et al., 2021). Its use is limited by low water solubility and high vapor permeability, but functional improvements have been made by adding plant extracts (Muñoz-Tebar et al., 2023; Nxumalo et al., 2024; Lafeuillee and Maharaj, 2025).

3.1.4 Algal polysaccharides

Edible coatings made from seaweed-derived polysaccharides, alginate, agar, and carrageenan, are GRAS-classified, abundant, and have excellent gelling and barrier properties (Jayakody et al., 2022). Alginate from brown algae and carrageenan from red algae are particularly prominent.

3.1.5 Microbial exopolysaccharides

Microbial exopolysaccharides (EPSs) such as pullulan, xanthan, gellan, dextran, and bacterial cellulose provide biodegradable, mechanically stable coating matrices (Zikmanis et al., 2021; Singh et al., 2008; Ganduri, 2020). Pullulan, produced by Aureobasidium pullulans, offers high tensile strength and excellent adhesion without negatively interacting with the food matrix.

3.1.6 Natural gums

Natural plant gums, including guar, Arabic, locust bean, tara, and tragacanth, are extensively used in edible coatings because of their biocompatibility and non-toxicity (Nehra et al., 2023; Khezerlou et al., 2021; Salehi, 2020; Liyanapathiranage et al., 2023). Gum-based coatings with 1% gum and 20% glycerol (w/w) have proven effective in extending shelf life. For example, 4.5% Albizia gum helped maintain guava quality during storage (Gull et al., 2024).

3.2 Protein-based coatings

Proteins offer strong mechanical strength and gas barrier properties. They come from sources like animal proteins (e.g., casein, whey, gelatin) and plant proteins (e.g., soy, zein, wheat gluten). Their physicochemical properties, such as moisture retention, tensile strength, and vapor permeability, impact their effectiveness in edible films (Mihalca et al., 2021; Kandasamy et al., 2021; Thakur et al., 2024).

3.3 Lipid-based coatings

Lipid-based coatings use waxes (e.g., beeswax, carnauba), vegetable oils (e.g., sunflower, safflower), fatty acids, and aceto-glycerides to create hydrophobic barriers (Yousuf et al., 2022; Milani and Nemati, 2022; Pashova, 2023). They offer excellent water resistance and gloss, but are usually thicker and more brittle. Lipids can also act as plasticizers or emulsifiers in multilayer systems.

3.4 Composite coatings

Composite biopolymer coatings combine different types of polymers, usually polysaccharides, proteins, and/or lipids, to harness synergistic interactions and surpass individual limitations. These coatings are applied as bilayers or emulsions, with their effectiveness depending on interpolymer compatibility and the type of product (Dhall, 2016; Yaashikaa et al., 2023).

3.5 Environmental sustainability and circular bioeconomy potential of biopolymer sources

An estimated 5 billion metric tons of agricultural waste are produced each year, much of which remains underutilized (Ahmad Khorairi et al., 2023). Valorizing this waste through biorefineries into functional biopolymers supports circular economy principles. Agroindustrial residues such as banana peels, pomegranate rinds, and apple cores have been successfully used in coating formulations, contributing to waste reduction, longer shelf life, and environmental sustainability (Yadav et al., 2023).

3.6 Application to NUS

Certain biopolymers display functional traits particularly suited for use with NUS, especially those with high respiration rates or prone to postharvest losses. Chitosan, for example, provides antimicrobial protection for tropical fruits like jamun and guava (Adiletta et al., 2021; Gull et al., 2024). Cassava starch has been applied to root crops, while zein has been effective in decreasing browning in phalsa and jamun due to its hydrophobicity and compatibility with antioxidants (Ferreira et al., 2020; Baraiya et al., 2015).

4 Methods of application of edible coatings

The effectiveness of edible coatings in preserving perishable produce depends not only on the material composition but also on how they are applied (Ali et al., 2025). This is especially important for NUS, which often have high respiration rates, thin or uneven skins, high surface moisture, and a tendency to degrade after harvest. Therefore, choosing the correct application method must be based on the morphological and physiological traits of each crop. Recent studies highlight a variety of application methods, each with specific advantages and limitations when used on NUS and other tropical fruits. Table 3 summarizes these methods about typical NUS examples, outlining their operational benefits, drawbacks, and relevant information from the literature.

4.1 Dipping

Dipping involves immersing the produce in a coating solution for a specific time (usually 30 s to 5 min), then draining and drying (Gurdal and Cetinkaya, 2023). This method provides even coverage, especially on uneven or textured surfaces, and is commonly used for fruits such as jamun, guava, and phalsa (Gol et al., 2015; Perez-Vazquez et al., 2023). Its simplicity and low cost make it suitable for small-scale operations. However, dipping can result in coatings that are too thick, which can block gas exchange and increase contamination risk when the dip bath is reused (Suhag et al., 2020).

4.2 Spraying

Spray coating is the most commonly used method at the commercial level, especially for fruits that are sensitive to mechanical damage. It allows for the application of controlled, thin, and uniform layers through air spray atomization, pressure systems, or air-assisted nozzles (Das et al., 2024; Suhag et al., 2020). Spraying is particularly suitable for ber fruit and Indian jujube because of their delicate skins. However, the method is less effective on fruits with highly curved or hairy surfaces and works best with low-viscosity coating solutions (Pham et al., 2023; Ju et al., 2019).

4.3 Vacuum impregnation (VI)

VI enhances coating penetration into porous tissues by immersing fruit in a coating solution under reduced pressure. The vacuum displaces gases in the intercellular spaces, allowing the coating to permeate the matrix once atmospheric pressure is restored (Escobedo-Avellaneda et al., 2018). This method has proven effective for jackfruit and starfruit, improving internal barrier properties without affecting external appearance (Minh et al., 2019; Soares et al., 2018). However, VI requires specialized equipment and may alter texture and firmness (Senturk Parreidt et al., 2018).

4.4 Spreading

In the spreading method, coatings are manually or mechanically applied to the surface of sliced or processed products, such as cassava chips or yam slices. While spreading provides flexibility and is easy to implement, it can lead to uneven application due to manual variation and irregularities on the fruit surface (Díaz-Montes and Castro-Muñoz, 2021; Pham et al., 2023). Optimizing viscosity, applicator design, and drying conditions is essential for achieving consistent results and performance.

4.5 Electrospraying

Electrospraying uses a high-voltage electric field to produce fine, charged droplets that coat surfaces, creating ultra-thin, uniform films (Pham et al., 2023; Khan et al., 2017). This process needs minimal coating material and works well on delicate fruits like strawberries (Cakmak et al., 2019) and starfruit (Khan et al., 2017; Peretto et al., 2017). Electrospraying allows precise control over droplet size and film thickness, but its use is still mainly limited to laboratory settings because of scalability challenges.

4.6 Layer-by-layer (LbL) deposition

The LbL method deposits layers of oppositely charged biopolymers onto the fruit surface in a sequence, allowing for customized control of gas exchange and microbial growth (Arnon-Rips and Poverenov, 2018; Gupta et al., 2024). This technique has been used on mango, pear, and sweet cherry, with combinations such as chitosan and alginate (Yan et al., 2019; Hira et al., 2022; Adhikari et al., 2023). Although LbL systems extend shelf life and improve coating durability, they are technically challenging and require careful formulation of polyelectrolytes and pH conditions (Aloui and Khwaldia, 2016; Treviño-Garza et al., 2017).

4.7 Cross-linked coatings

Cross-linking is performed after deposition using agents that strengthen the internal structure of protein- or polysaccharide-based coatings through covalent and non-covalent interactions. For example, gluconolactone has been used to cross-link whey protein isolate and sodium alginate, resulting in self-healing and water-resistant films (Deng et al., 2024). Cross-linked coatings have been effectively applied to pears, sweet cherries, and rose apples, enhancing their mechanical strength and barrier properties (Dai et al., 2020; Duong et al., 2023; Gutiérrez-Jara et al., 2021).

Therefore, selecting the proper coating application method is essential for maintaining postharvest quality in NUS. These species often have unique surface textures, high perishability, and physiological variability. As a result, application strategies must be tailored to each crop’s specific morphological and compositional traits. Pilot-scale validation and crop-specific optimization are crucial for ensuring consistent performance and scalability in real-world conditions.

5 Mechanisms of action of edible coatings in NUS: species-specific challenges and gaps

Edible biopolymer coatings play a crucial role in reducing postharvest losses by functioning as semi-permeable barriers that regulate mass and gas exchange, enzymatic activity, and oxidative stress. These coatings help extend shelf life and preserve quality attributes of fresh produce through various interconnected mechanisms, especially important for perishable fruits with sensitive anatomical and physiological characteristics. The multiple physiological and biochemical effects of edible biopolymer coatings are summarized in Table 4, illustrating their mechanisms of action, postharvest advantages, and specific relevance for NUS.

5.1 Regulation of water loss and respiration

One of the leading causes of postharvest deterioration is water loss, which occurs due to vapor pressure gradients across the fruit’s outer layer. This moisture loss speeds up metabolic activity, leading to ripening, softening, and aging (Gol et al., 2015). Edible coatings reduce the diffusion of water vapor and oxygen, lowering transpiration and slowing down respiration processes. By keeping internal oxygen levels above the critical threshold, these coatings help prevent anaerobic respiration, which can harm flavor, texture, and nutritional value (Kader and Yahia, 2011). Edible coatings reduced weight loss in several NUS such as mangaba (Ferreira et al., 2020), hog plum (Shakil et al., 2023), ber (Ramana Rao et al., 2016), and jamun (Gol et al., 2015).

5.2 Preservation of antioxidants and phytochemicals

Biopolymer coatings also preserve endogenous antioxidant compounds such as ascorbic acid, anthocyanins, phenols, flavonols, and pigments by limiting oxygen exposure and subsequent oxidative reactions (Baraiya et al., 2015). Phenolic compounds, in particular, enhance overall antioxidant capacity and have antimicrobial properties that help control microbial growth after harvest (Gol et al., 2015). Ascorbic acid, a key dietary antioxidant, is stabilized by reducing oxidative degradation and decreasing metabolic consumption during ripening. Similarly, anthocyanins, responsible for the visual appeal of many pigmented fruits, are protected from oxidative breakdown, which maintains color integrity (Gol et al., 2015). In jamun, composite coatings made from chitosan, alginate and CMC kept the antioxidant capacity maintained (Gol et al., 2015).

5.3 Inhibition of enzymatic browning and color degradation

Color changes, especially enzymatic browning, are mainly driven by the oxidation of phenolic substrates catalyzed by polyphenol oxidase (PPO). Coating-induced oxygen restriction decreases PPO activity, thereby limiting the formation of brown pigments and maintaining the fruit’s sensory quality (Baraiya et al., 2015). Edible coatings helped to reduce browning in fruits such as starfruit, which prolonged its shelf life (Shapawi et al., 2023).

5.4 Modulation of texture and cell wall integrity

Fruit softening is closely linked to the enzymatic breakdown of the cell wall, involving pectinolytic and cellulolytic enzymes like pectinesterase, polygalacturonase, cellulase, β-galactosidase, and pectate lyase. Edible coatings create a microenvironment with reduced oxygen and increased carbon dioxide levels, which inhibit these enzymes’ activity and slow the conversion of pectins and starches into water-soluble forms (Baraiya et al., 2015). This helps maintain firmness and slows the rise of soluble sugar content. Edible coatings decreased the activity of cell-wall degrading enzyme, which extended the shelf life of jamun fruit (Gol et al., 2015).

5.5 Maintenance of organic acid content and pH

During ripening, organic acids are metabolized as respiratory substrates, which decreases acidity and raises pH. Edible coatings slow this process by reducing organic acid breakdown, helping to maintain sourness longer and delaying aging (Gol et al., 2015). Edible coatings delayed the ripening process in mangaba fruits which helped preserve them longer (Felicio et al., 2021; Ferreira et al., 2020).

5.6 Enhancement of antioxidant enzyme activity

In addition to preserving non-enzymatic antioxidants, edible coatings enhance the activity of enzymatic antioxidants involved in detoxifying reactive oxygen species (ROS). These include catalase (CAT), which breaks down hydrogen peroxide; superoxide dismutase (SOD), which neutralizes superoxide radicals; and ascorbate peroxidase (APX), which is central to the ascorbate–glutathione cycle (Hu et al., 2022; Huan et al., 2016). The stabilization of ascorbic acid by edible coatings further supports the sustained activity of APX and other antioxidant enzymes, strengthening the fruit’s inherent defense against oxidative stress.

5.7 Antimicrobial and antifungal protection

Many biopolymer coatings also act as carriers for antifungal and antimicrobial agents, boosting their effectiveness against spoilage organisms. This dual function, physical protection and biochemical inhibition, has been extensively reviewed and highlights the versatility of edible coatings in postharvest disease management (Aloui and Khwaldia, 2016). For example, starch-chitosan composite coatings reduced the growth of both naturally occurring and artificially introduced microbes on the surface of mangaba fruits, which prolonged its shelf life (Vargas-Torres et al., 2017).

5.8 Considerations for NUS

Although the mechanisms described above are well-established in conventional fruits, applying them to NUS requires crop-specific adjustments. NUS often have high water activity, rapid ethylene-driven ripening, thin cuticles, and irregular surface textures, making them highly vulnerable to postharvest quality loss. For example, jamun and phalsa are susceptible to quick enzymatic browning and anthocyanin breakdown, while the ber fruit often suffers from epidermal shriveling and microbial growth. These traits demand coating systems that offer both moisture retention and antioxidative protection. Despite this need, there is limited data on enzyme modulation, such as PPO or pectinase inhibition, in NUS treated with edible coatings. Additionally, few studies have systematically measured how coatings impact phytochemical stability (e.g., anthocyanins, carotenoids, phenolic acids) in these fruits. Improving postharvest preservation strategies for NUS will require research focused on customizing coating formulas to match the physiological characteristics of each species. Studying the biochemical and structural responses of NUS to different coating systems could help develop tailored biopolymer matrices that reduce oxidative stress, enzymatic breakdown, and nutrient loss. These efforts are vital for enhancing the value and market presence of NUS with high nutraceutical potential.

6 Application of edible coatings on underutilized fruits and vegetables

Non-typically consumed NUS fruits and vegetables are often highly perishable due to their thin skins, high water content, and susceptibility to microbial spoilage. Edible biopolymer coatings have emerged as a sustainable postharvest solution to extend the shelf life of these crops by reducing moisture loss, preventing microbial contamination, and delaying ripening. Many of these coatings are derived from plant-based polysaccharides and proteins, making them both vegan-friendly and environmentally sustainable.

Table 5 summarizes recent research from the past decade on extending the shelf life of selected underutilized crops in tropical regions. These crops usually have thin skins and mesocarps with high water activity, making them susceptible to rotting caused by fungal and bacterial infections. Hydrophobic biopolymer composite coatings help prevent water loss and, as a result, weight loss. It lists various plant-based carbohydrate and protein polymers used at concentrations ranging from 1% to 6% (w/v), ensuring that the coatings are vegan-friendly.

To further enhance preservation, preservatives such as potassium sorbate, salicylic acid, lactic acid, basil oil, and other plant extract essential oils can be incorporated into the coatings for their antimicrobial properties, ensuring microbes do not proliferate beneath the coating. Polyols like glycerol, sorbitol, and mannitol serve as plasticizers to strengthen the coating, while stabilizers improve adhesion to the fruit surface.

Although the coatings act as practical barriers, refrigeration in some experiments further contributed to the longevity of the fruits. On average, these coatings extended the shelf life of the fruits by about 1 week. This additional shelf life could provide more time for shipping, increasing the potential for exporting these highly perishable, underutilized fruits and, in turn, boosting revenue.

It is essential to recognize that the effectiveness of biopolymer coatings in extending the shelf life of underutilized crops depends on various external factors, including cold chain availability, ambient storage conditions, and the intended market destination (local versus export). Coating performance is therefore not absolute, and shelf life data should be interpreted within the specific context of the postharvest system and its infrastructure.

6.1 Key insights for commercialization

7 Challenges and future perspectives of biopolymer edible coatings

Although biopolymer edible coatings show potential to reduce postharvest losses, their use on NUS remains limited in practice. This is mainly due to technical, infrastructural, and socioeconomic challenges specific to local and regional contexts. Table 6 outlines common limitations of different biopolymer types, while Table 7 provides examples of performance-enhancing additives used to address these limitations (Matloob et al., 2023; Díaz-Montes and Castro-Muñoz, 2021).

While much of the current research highlights export-focused systems, this section examines the challenges and opportunities for locally adopting biopolymer coatings in areas where NUS are grown and consumed, especially in Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia.

7.1 Technical challenges

In tropical and subtropical regions, high ambient humidity significantly diminishes the effectiveness of hydrophilic coatings made from polysaccharides and proteins. These coatings tend to absorb moisture, which damages film integrity, increases microbial risks, and shortens shelf life. Although lipid-based coatings provide better moisture resistance, they are susceptible to cracking and are often more costly to produce. Additionally, low-tech preparation and application methods are essential for local use. Many regions producing non-urban supplies lack access to atomization equipment, vacuum drying, or continuous coating lines. Instead, practical methods include manual dipping, brushing, or spraying, which require coatings with stable viscosities, quick drying times, and strong adhesion to a variety of skin types and surfaces.

7.2 Regulatory alignment and food-grade approval at the national scale

Most countries producing NUS depend on their national food safety agencies rather than international regulatory frameworks. Still, even local use requires that coatings be made with GRAS-certified, food-grade ingredients, mainly when they include antimicrobial agents, essential oils, or nanoparticles. The absence of standardized national guidelines for biopolymer coatings can reduce confidence among smallholders and microenterprises. Additionally, fragmented approval processes may discourage the adoption of formulations developed in academic settings. Efforts to harmonize food-grade additive registries at the regional level (e.g., Comunidad Andina, ECOWAS) could boost scalability.

7.3 Consumer perception and sociocultural acceptance

Consumer trust is vital for expanding into local markets. Many small-scale producers and vendors avoid coated produce because they fear consumer rejection or have misconceptions about “artificial” coatings. Sometimes, coatings that change the appearance, such as glossiness or opacity, or that affect the perceived naturalness of fruits, may lower purchase intentions. Religious or cultural dietary preferences must also be considered. Coatings made from animal-based ingredients like gelatin or casein may be unacceptable in specific communities. Therefore, plant-based, culturally appropriate formulations should be prioritized. Clear labeling and affordable educational campaigns aimed at traditional markets can help increase familiarity and acceptance.

7.4 Commercial barriers and distribution limitations

Even when coatings are technically effective, their commercial adoption is limited by cost, infrastructure, and access to inputs. Functional additives, such as essential oils and cross-linkers, may be too expensive or unavailable in rural areas. Additionally, the lack of cold storage infrastructure, especially in tropical climates, reduces the overall shelf-life benefits of coatings. Unlike global fruit markets, most NUS are sold through short-distance, informal supply chains. In these systems, the motivation to extend shelf life beyond 5–7 days may be minimal. However, reducing postharvest losses during transit or display at ambient temperature remains a significant opportunity for coatings. Finally, the absence of open-access technologies and the dominance of patented formulations limit innovation at the local level. Support for open-source, low-cost coating protocols, ideally based on locally available materials such as cassava starch and plant mucilage, is crucial.

7.5 Context-specific future directions

Therefore, the future of edible coatings for NUS lies in their local adaptation, affordability, and social acceptability rather than in technological complexity alone.

8 Commercialization and patents on edible coatings: trends and implications for NUS

Over the past decade, the commercialization of edible biopolymer coatings has increased markedly, driven by advances in formulation, functionality, and sustainability. An analysis of patents and commercially available products shows that most innovations focus on high-value, globally traded fruits such as apples, bananas, avocados, berries, and citrus (Md Nor and Ding, 2020). These coatings are generally tailored to specific physiological traits, including moisture content, cuticle thickness, and surface microstructure, allowing for longer shelf life and improved marketability (Table 8).

Recent patents show a rising trend toward bio-based and multifunctional coatings that include natural antioxidants, antimicrobial agents, and cross-linking components. Common additives such as essential oils, sucrose esters, and emulsifiers improve water resistance, adhesion, and microbial protection, matching consumer demands for clean-label and plant-based products (Perez et al., 2017). For example, Apeel™, a commercial lipid-based coating made from depolymerized plant cutin, provides moisture retention and oxidative stability, and is vegan- and allergen-friendly. These innovations respond to global trends in veganism and organic produce consumption, highlighting the market’s movement toward sustainable and inclusive food preservation technologies.

By contrast, many academic and research-stage coatings remain in the exploratory phase, focusing on new bioactive ingredients like pomegranate seed oil, algal polysaccharides, or bacterial biosurfactants. These formulations often show improved biodegradability or nutraceutical benefits but need further development to meet regulatory and scalability standards. While commercial coatings target export-focused fruits with high market visibility, academic research is increasingly exploring coatings for underused crops in tropical and subtropical regions.

Despite these scientific advances, the use of edible coatings on NUS remains limited. An analysis of patent databases (e.g., USPTO, EPO, WIPO) conducted in 2024 shows that less than 3% of edible coating patents mention or directly target indigenous fruits such as Syzygium cumini (jamun), Ziziphus mauritiana (ber), Grewia asiatica (phalsa), or Hancornia speciosa (mangaba).

Table 8 shows that there are a few commercial patents and many developed from university researchers. While most coatings were not tested on NUS, this dataset is an excellent starting point for future studies, as it helps to understand why commercial coatings have gained more traction than those produced from universities. A key distinction between commercial patents and those filed by university research teams is that commercial coatings are generally more complex, often incorporating a wider variety of additives. This allows the formulation to be adapted to different types of fruits and vegetables depending on their characteristics. Therefore, important considerations for future research include developing scalable, cost effective methods to obtain biopolymers from agro-industrial waste and designing flexible edible coating formulations using bio-based additives such as natural plant antioxidants and antimicrobials. Such innovations should be used across most NUS with minimal modification to the formula, thereby supporting circular bioeconomy principles while expanding preservation strategies to more regionally important crops.

8.1 Barriers to intellectual property development for NUS

8.2 Toward inclusive and open innovation models

9 Regulation of biopolymer edible coatings

The regulation of biopolymer edible coatings varies significantly across different regulatory bodies, with the FDA (United States) and EFSA (European Union) implementing distinct frameworks. The FDA follows a “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) approach, which allows the use of edible coatings and additives under good manufacturing practices (GMP), provided they meet safety standards. In contrast, the EFSA enforces more stringent guidelines, requiring comprehensive toxicological evaluations and safety assessments before approval. Additionally, countries such as Canada, Australia, and China have specific regulations and permissible limits for food contact materials, creating challenges for global commercialization and regulatory harmonization.

The acceptable limits for additives depend on the type of substance and its intended function. For example, antimicrobial agents like potassium sorbate and sodium benzoate are commonly permitted in edible coatings, with regulatory bodies defining maximum allowable concentrations. Plasticizers such as glycerol and sorbitol, used to enhance coating flexibility, are generally accepted but must adhere to specific limits to prevent migration into food beyond the acceptable daily intake (ADI) levels. Essential oils, widely used as natural antimicrobial and antioxidant agents, often occupy a regulatory gray area, as they are classified as flavoring agents and preservatives. This dual classification leads to inconsistent regulations across different jurisdictions.

Emerging concerns surrounding nanomaterials in edible coatings have prompted increased scrutiny from regulatory authorities. Using nano-sized antimicrobial agents, nano-emulsions, and nano-cellulose composites raises questions about potential toxicity, bioaccumulation, and long-term health effects. The FDA has not yet established specific regulatory guidelines for nanomaterials in edible coatings, while the EFSA requires thorough risk assessments to evaluate the safety of engineered nanoparticles before approval. The lack of global consensus on the safety of nanomaterials remains a critical issue, underscoring the need for further research, standardized testing protocols, and precise labeling requirements to ensure consumer safety and regulatory compliance worldwide (Bizymis and Tzia, 2021; Priya et al., 2023).

10 Conclusion

NUS are important to help combat the growing food crisis and increase biodiversity, but their highly perishable nature impedes their commercial potential. Biopolymer-based edible coatings are a promising way to reduce postharvest losses and extend the shelf life of NUS, many of which are grown in tropical and subtropical regions with limited resources. These coatings, made from polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids, provide biodegradable, non-toxic, and often locally available alternatives to traditional packaging and synthetic materials preservatives.

To fully realize the potential of edible coatings for NUS, future efforts must focus on developing solutions that are specific to the context, low-cost, and culturally acceptable. These efforts should include utilizing agro-industrial residues as sources of biopolymers, creating open-access formulations, and encouraging participatory innovation involving smallholders, local markets, and national regulatory bodies.

By aligning coating technologies with the needs of decentralized, short food supply chains, it is possible to enhance the postharvest resilience, marketability, and nutritional quality of NUS, thus contributing to biodiversity conservation, food security, and circular bioeconomy strategies particularly in the Global South.

References

• 1

  Adhikari M. Koirala S. Anal A. K. (2023). Edible multilayer coating using electrostatic layer‐by‐layer deposition of chitosan and pectin enhances shelf life of fresh strawberries. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol.58, 871–879. 10.1111/ijfs.15704

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  Adiletta G. Di Matteo M. Petriccione M. (2021). Multifunctional role of chitosan edible coatings on antioxidant systems in fruit crops: a review. Int. J. Mol. Sci.22, 2633. 10.3390/ijms22052633

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  Ahmad Khorairi A. N. S. Sofian-Seng N.-S. Othaman R. Abdul Rahman H. Mohd Razali N. S. Lim S. J. et al (2023). A review on agro-industrial waste as cellulose and nanocellulose source and their potentials in food applications. Food Rev. Int.39, 663–688. 10.1080/87559129.2021.1926478

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  Ali M. Ali A. Ali S. Chen H. Wu W. Liu R. et al (2025). Global insights and advances in edible coatings or films toward quality maintenance and reduced postharvest losses of fruit and vegetables: an updated review. Comp. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.24, e70103. 10.1111/1541-4337.70103

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  Aloui H. Khwaldia K. (2016). Natural antimicrobial edible coatings for microbial safety and food quality enhancement. Comp. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.15, 1080–1103. 10.1111/1541-4337.12226

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  Arnon-Rips H. Poverenov E. (2018). Improving food products’ quality and storability by using layer-by-layer edible coatings. Trends Food Sci. Technol.75, 81–92. 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.03.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  Bahmid N. A. Siddiqui S. A. Ariyanto H. D. Sasmitaloka K. S. Rathod N. B. Wahono S. K. et al (2024). Cellulose-based coating for tropical fruits: method, characteristic, and functionality. Food Rev. Int.40, 1069–1092. 10.1080/87559129.2023.2209800

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  Baraiya N. S. Rao T. V. R. Thakkar V. R. (2014). Enhancement of storability and quality maintenance of carambola (Averrhoa carambola L.) fruit by using composite edible coating. Fruits69, 195–205. 10.1051/fruits/2014010

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  Baraiya N. S. Rao T. V. R. Thakkar V. R. (2015). Improvement of postharvest quality and storability of jamun fruit (Syzygium cumini L. var. Paras) by zein coating enriched with antioxidants. Food Bioprocess Technol.8, 2225–2234. 10.1007/s11947-015-1577-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  Biswal A. K. Chakraborty S. Saha J. Panda P. K. Pradhan S. K. Behera P. K. et al (2024). Process optimization, fabrication, and characterization of a starch-based biodegradable film derived from an underutilized crop. ACS Food Sci. Technol.4, 1844–1863. 10.1021/acsfoodscitech.4c00149

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  Bizymis A.-P. Tzia C. (2021). Edible films and coatings: properties for the selection of the components, evolution through composites and nanomaterials, and safety issues. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr.31, 8777–8792. 10.1080/10408398.2021.1934652

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  Cakmak H. Kumcuoglu S. Tavman S. (2019). Electrospray coating of minimally processed strawberries and evaluation of the shelf-life quality properties. J. Food Process. Eng.42, e13082. 10.1111/jfpe.13082

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  Chinnaswamy S. Rudra S. G. Reddy V. R. Awasthi O. P. Kaur C. (2023). Shelf life extension of Grewia berries using layer-by-layer edible coatings. Vegetos36, 1326–1336. 10.1007/s42535-022-00527-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  Dai L. Zhang J. Cheng F. (2020). Cross-linked starch-based edible coating reinforced by starch nanocrystals and its preservation effect on graded Huangguan pears. Food Chem.311, 125891. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.125891

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  Das K. Sanchis E. Dinh K. (2024). Reducing post-harvest losses of fruit and vegetable through edible coatings: an effective strategy for global food security and sustainability. IJIRT10, 1042–1064. Available online at: https://ijirt.org/publishedpaper/IJIRT162420_PAPER.pdf.

  • Google Scholar

• 16

  Dave R. Rao T. V. R. Nandane A. S. (2016). RSM-based optimization of edible-coating formulations for preserving post-harvest quality and enhancing storability of phalsa (Grewia asiatica L.). J. Food Process. Pres.40, 509–520. 10.1111/jfpp.12630

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  Deng P. Zhang Y. Deng Q. Sun Y. Li Y. Wang Z. et al (2024). Multifunctional sodium alginate-based self-healing edible cross-linked coating for banana preservation. Food Hydrocoll.151, 109753. 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2024.109753

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  Dey P. Bhattacharjee S. Yadav D. K. Hmar B. Z. Gayen K. Bhowmick T. K. (2023). Valorization of waste biomass for synthesis of carboxy-methyl-cellulose as a sustainable edible coating on fruits: a review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.253, 127412. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.127412

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  Dhall R. K. (2016). “Biobased and environmental benign coatings,” in Biobased and environmental benign coatings. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 87–119. 10.1002/9781119114176.ch4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  Díaz-Montes E. Castro-Muñoz R. (2021). Edible films and coatings as food-quality preservers: an overview. Foods10, 249. 10.3390/foods10020249

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  Duong N. T. C. Uthairatanakij A. Laohakunjit N. Jitareerat P. Kaisangsri N. (2023). Cross-linked alginate edible coatings incorporated with hexyl acetate: film characteristics and its application on fresh-cut rose apple. Food Biosci.52, 102410. 10.1016/j.fbio.2023.102410

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  Escobedo-Avellaneda Z. García-García R. Valdez-Fragoso A. Mújica-Paz H. Welti-Chanes J. (2018). “Fruit preservation: novel and conventional technologies,” in Fruit preservation: novel and conventional technologies. Editors RosenthalA.DelizaR.Welti-ChanesJ.Barbosa-CánovasG. V. (New York, NY: Springer), 335–349. 10.1007/978-3-319-60136-5_15

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  Felicio N. T. F. Ferreira S. M. de Oliveira T. M. de Moraes E. R. Soares D. S. B. (2021). Effect of biodegradable coatings on the shelf life of Hancornia speciosa. Pesqui. Agropecu. Trop.51, e64825. 10.1590/1983-40632021v5164825

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  Ferreira D. C. M. Molina G. Pelissari F. M. (2020). Effect of edible coating from cassava starch and babassu flour (Orbignya phalerata) on Brazilian Cerrado fruits quality. Food Bioprod. Process.13, 172–179. 10.1007/s11947-019-02366-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  Frazão G. G. S. Blank A. F. de Aquino Santana L. C. L. (2017). Optimisation of edible chitosan coatings formulations incorporating Myrcia ovata Cambessedes essential oil with antimicrobial potential against foodborne bacteria and natural microflora of mangaba fruits. LWT - Food Sci. Technol.79, 1–10. 10.1016/j.lwt.2017.01.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  Frosi I. Balduzzi A. Moretto G. Colombo R. Papetti A. (2023). Towards valorization of food-waste-derived pectin: recent advances on their characterization and application. Molecules28, 6390. 10.3390/molecules28176390

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  Ganduri V. S. R. (2020). Evaluation of pullulan-based edible active coating methods on Rastali and Chakkarakeli bananas and their shelf-life extension parameters studies. J. Food Process. Pres.44, e14378. 10.1111/jfpp.14378

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  Gol N. B. Vyas P. B. Ramana Rao T. V. (2015). Evaluation of polysaccharide-based edible coatings for their ability to preserve the postharvest quality of Indian blackberry (Syzygium cumini L.). Int. J. Fruit. Sci.15, 198–222. 10.1080/15538362.2015.1017425

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  Gull S. Ejaz S. Ali S. Ali M. M. Hussain S. Sardar H. et al (2024). A novel edible coating based on Albizia [Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth.] gum delays softening and maintains quality of harvested guava fruits during storage. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.277, 134096. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.134096

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  Gupta D. Lall A. Kumar S. Dhanaji Patil T. Gaikwad K. K. (2024). Plant-based edible films and coatings for food-packaging applications: recent advances, applications, and trends. Sustain. Food Technol.2, 1428–1455. 10.1039/D4FB00110A

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  Gurdal A. A. Cetinkaya T. (2023). Advancements in edible films for aquatic product preservation and packaging. Rev. Aquacult.16, 997–1020. 10.1111/raq.12880

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  Gutiérrez-Jara C. Bilbao-Sainz C. McHugh T. Chiou B.-S. Williams T. Villalobos-Carvajal R. (2021). Effect of cross-linked alginate/oil nanoemulsion coating on cracking and quality parameters of sweet cherries. Foods10, 449. 10.3390/foods10020449

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  Habib M. Singh S. Jan S. Jan K. Bashir K. (2025). The future of the future foods: understandings from the past towards SDG-2. npj Sci. Food9, 138. 10.1038/s41538-025-00484-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  Hassan B. Chatha S. A. S. Hussain A. I. Zia K. M. Akhtar N. (2018). Recent advances on polysaccharides, lipids and protein-based edible films and coatings: a review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.109, 1095–1107. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.11.097

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  Hazrati K. Z. Sapuan S. M. Zuhri M. Y. M. Jumaidin R. (2021). Effect of plasticizers on physical, thermal, and tensile properties of thermoplastic films based on Dioscorea hispida starch. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.185, 219–228. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.06.099

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  Hira N. Mitalo O. W. Okada R. Sangawa M. Masuda K. Fujita N. et al (2022). The effect of layer-by-layer edible coating on the shelf life and transcriptome of ‘Kosui’ Japanese pear fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol.185, 111787. 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2021.111787

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  Hoque M. Gupta S. Santhosh R. Syed I. Sarkar P. (2021). “Food, medical, and environmental applications of polysaccharides,” in Food, medical, and environmental applications of polysaccharides. Editors PalK.BanerjeeI.SarkarP.BitA.KimD.AnisA.MajiS. (Elsevier), 81–107. 10.1016/B978-0-12-820974-3.00004-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  Hu W. Sarengaowa Feng K. (2022). Effect of edible coating on the quality and antioxidant enzymatic activity of postharvest sweet cherry (Prunusavium L.) during storage. Coatings12, 581. 10.3390/coatings12050581

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  Huan C. Jiang L. An X. Yu M. Xu Y. Ma R. et al (2016). Potential role of reactive oxygen species and antioxidant genes in the regulation of peach fruit development and ripening. Plant Physiol. Biochem.104, 294–303. 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.05.013

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  Hunter D. Borelli T. Beltrame D. M. O. Oliveira C. N. S. Coradin L. Wasike V. W. et al (2019). The potential of neglected and underutilized species for improving diets and nutrition. Planta250, 709–729. 10.1007/s00425-019-03169-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 41

  Jayakody M. M. Vanniarachchy M. P. G. Wijesekara I. (2022). Seaweed-derived alginate, agar, and carrageenan-based edible coatings and films for the food industry: a review. Food Meas. Charact.16, 1195–1227. 10.1007/s11694-021-01277-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  Jodhani K. A. Nataraj M. (2025). The combined effects of Aloe vera gel enriched with Adhatoda vasica Nees. Leaves extract edible coating on improving postharvest shelf-life and quality of jamun fruit (Syzygium cumini L. Skeels). Int. J. Biol. Macromol.298, 139965. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2025.139965

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43

  John C. Maharaj R. (2024). Phyllantus acidus: novel source of pectin with significant antioxidant and emulsion potential. Food Meas. Charact.19, 316–327. 10.1007/s11694-024-02970-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  Ju J. Xie Y. Guo Y. Cheng Y. Qian H. Yao W. (2019). Application of edible coating with essential oil in food preservation. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr.59, 2467–2480. 10.1080/10408398.2018.1456402

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 45

  Kader A. A. Yahia E. M. (2011). “Postharvest biology and technology of tropical and subtropical fruits,” in Postharvest biology and technology of tropical and subtropical fruits. Editor YahiaE. M. (Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing), 79–111.

  • Google Scholar

• 46

  Kandasamy S. Yoo J. Yun J. Kang H.-B. Seol K.-H. Kim H.-W. et al (2021). Application of whey protein-based edible films and coatings in food industries: an updated overview. Coatings11, 1056. 10.3390/coatings11091056

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  Kaur K. Gupta N. Mahajan M. Jawandha S. K. Kaur N. (2023). A novel edible coating of beeswax impregnated with karonda polyphenol rich extract maintains the chemical and bioactive potential of fresh ber fruit during storage at low temperature. Hort. Environ. Biotechnol.64, 1001–1014. 10.1007/s13580-023-00533-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  Khaliq G. Saleh A. Bugti G. A. Hakeem K. R. (2020). Guggul gum incorporated with basil essential oil improves quality and modulates cell wall-degrading enzymes of jamun fruit during storage. Sci. Hortic.273, 109608. 10.1016/j.scienta.2020.109608

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  Khan M. K. I. Nazir A. Maan A. A. (2017). Electrospraying: a novel technique for efficient coating of foods. Food Eng. Rev.9, 112–119. 10.1007/s12393-016-9150-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  Khezerlou A. Zolfaghari H. Banihashemi S. A. Forghani S. Ehsani A. (2021). Plant gums as the functional compounds for edible films and coatings in the food industry: a review. Polym. Adv. Technol.32, 2306–2326. 10.1002/pat.5293

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  Kocira A. Kozłowicz K. Panasiewicz K. Staniak M. Szpunar-Krok E. Hortyńska P. (2024). Polysaccharides as edible films and coatings: characteristics and influence on fruit and vegetable quality—a review. Agronomy11, 813. 10.3390/agronomy11050813

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  Krishnan R. R. Olasupo A. D. Patel K. H. Bolarinwa I. F. Oke M. O. Okafor C. et al (2025). Edible biopolymers with functional additives coatings for postharvest quality preservation in horticultural crops: a review. Front. Sustain. Food Syst.9, 1569458. 10.3389/fsufs.2025.1569458

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  Lafeuillee C. Maharaj R. (2025). A preliminary investigation of the properties of plantain starch-chitosan composite films containing Panadol leaf extracts. Discov. Food.5, 5. 10.1007/s44187-025-00270-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54

  Liyanapathiranage A. Dassanayake R. S. Gamage A. Karri R. R. Manamperi A. Evon P. et al (2023). Recent developments in edible films and coatings for fruits and vegetables. Coatings13, 1177. 10.3390/coatings13071177

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  Luciano C. G. Caicedo Chacon W. D. Valencia G. A. (2022). Starch-based coatings for food preservation: a review. Starch – Stärke74, 2100279. 10.1002/star.202100279

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  Majeed T. Dar A. H. Pandey V. K. Dash K. K. Srivastava S. Shams R. et al (2023). Role of additives in starch-based edible films and coating: a review with current knowledge. Prog. Org. Coat.181, 107597. 10.1016/j.porgcoat.2023.107597

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  Matche R. S. Adeogun O. O. (2022). Physicochemical characterizations of nanoencapsulated Eucalyptus globulus oil with gum Arabic and gum Arabic nanocapsule and their biocontrol effect on anthracnose disease of Syzygium malaccense fruits. Sci. Afr.18, e01421. 10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01421

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58

  Matloob A. Ayub H. Mohsin M. Ambreen S. Khan F. A. Oranab S. et al (2023). A review on edible coatings and films: advances, composition, production methods, and safety concerns. ACS Omega8, 28932–28944. 10.1021/acsomega.3c03459

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59

  Mawoneke K. G. Makumbirofa H. M. Rusike T. (2025). Harnessing neglected and underutilized crop species in Sub-Saharan Africa: a pathway to food security and sustainable agriculture. IV. International Congress of the Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, Niğde, Türkiye. Gönderen. Available online at: https://www.turjaf.com/index.php/TURSTEP/article/view/737 Accessed February 25, 2025.

  • Google Scholar

• 60

  Md Nor S. Ding P. (2020). Trends and advances in edible biopolymer coating for tropical fruit: a review. Food Res. Int.134, 109208. 10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109208

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61

  Mihalca V. Kerezsi A. D. Weber A. Gruber-Traub C. Schmucker J. Vodnar D. C. et al (2021). Protein-based films and coatings for food industry applications. Polymers13, 769. 10.3390/polym13050769

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  Milani J. M. Nemati A. (2022). Lipid-based edible films and coatings: a review of recent advances and applications. J. Package Technol. Res.6, 11–22. 10.1007/s41783-021-00130-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  Minh N. P. Vo T. T. Dung H. T. B. Ngoc T. T. Duong L. C. Nghi T. T. (2019). Preservation of jackfruit bulb by transglutaminase crosslinked whey protein/pectin as edible film coating. J. Pharm. Sci. Res. Available online at: https://www.pharmainfo.in/jpsr/Documents/Volumes/vol11issue04/jpsr11041942.pdf Accessed February 25, 2025.

  • Google Scholar

• 64

  Mohd Suhaimi N. I. Mat Ropi A. A. Shaharuddin S. (2021). Safety and quality preservation of starfruit (Averrhoa carambola) at ambient shelf life using synergistic pectin-maltodextrin-sodium chloride edible coating. Heliyon7, e06279. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06279

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 65

  Muñoz-Tebar N. Pérez-Álvarez J. A. Fernández-López J. Viuda-Martos M. (2023). Chitosan edible films and coatings with added bioactive compounds: antibacterial and antioxidant properties and their application to food products: a review. Polym15, 396. 10.3390/polym15020396

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  Nehra A. Biswas D. Siracusa V. Roy S. (2023). Natural gum-based functional bioactive films and coatings: a review. Int. J. Mol. Sci.24, 485. 10.3390/ijms24010485

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  Nunes C. Silva M. Farinha D. Sales H. Pontes R. Nunes J. (2023). Edible coatings and future trends in active food packaging–fruits’ and traditional sausages’ shelf life increasing. Foods12, 3308. 10.3390/foods12173308

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  Nxumalo K. A. Fawole O. A. Aremu A. O. (2024). Development of chitosan-based active films with medicinal plant extracts for potential food packaging applications. Processes12 (1), 23. 10.3390/pr12010023

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 69

  Olunusi S. O. Ramli N. H. Fatmawati A. Ismail A. F. Okwuwa C. C. (2024). Revolutionizing tropical fruits preservation: emerging edible coating technologies. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.264, 130682. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130682

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70

  Onawo O. L. Egboduku W. O. (2025). Highlighting the untapped potential of neglected and underutilized crop species for sustainable food security. J. Underutil. Legum.7, 73–79. Available online at: https://www.julegumes.org/index.php/jul/article/view/126/64.

  • Google Scholar

• 71

  Ortega F. Versino F. López O. V. Garcia M. A. (2022). Biobased composites from agro-industrial wastes and by-products. Emerg. Mater.5, 873–921. 10.1007/s42247-021-00319-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  Oyom W. Zhang Z. Bi Y. Tahergorabi R. (2022). Application of starch-based coatings incorporated with antimicrobial agents for preservation of fruits and vegetables: a review. Prog. Org. Coat.166, 106800. 10.1016/j.porgcoat.2022.106800

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  Panahirad S. Dadpour M. Peighambardoust S. H. Soltanzadeh M. Gullón B. Alirezalu K. et al (2021). Applications of carboxymethyl cellulose- and pectin-based active edible coatings in preservation of fruits and vegetables: a review. Trends Food Sci. Technol.110, 663–673. 10.1016/j.tifs.2021.02.025

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  Pashova S. (2023). Application of plant waxes in edible coatings. Coatings13, 911. 10.3390/coatings13050911

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  Pawar N. Singh O. (2021). Efficacy of Aloe vera based composite edible coatings to maintain the post-harvest appearance of Ber fruits (Zizyphus mauritiana) cv. Umran. Int. J. Chem. Stud.9, 2357–2362. 10.22271/chemi.2021.v9.i1ag.11578

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  Peretto G. Du W.-X. Avena-Bustillos R. J. Berrios J. D. J. Sambo P. McHugh T. H. (2017). Electrostatic and conventional spraying of alginate-based edible coating with natural antimicrobials for preserving fresh strawberry quality. Food Bioprocess Technol.10, 165–174. 10.1007/s11947-016-1808-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  Perez L. Mol C. Bakus R. C. Rogers J. Rodriguez G. (2017). Plant extract compositions for forming protective coatings. World Intellect. Prop. Organ. WO2017100636 A1.

  • Google Scholar

• 78

  Perez-Vazquez A. Barciela P. Carpena M. Prieto M. A. (2023). Edible coatings as a natural packaging system to improve fruit and vegetable shelf life and quality. Foods12, 3570. 10.3390/foods12193570

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  Pham T. T. Nguyen L. L. P. Dam M. S. Baranyai L. (2023). Application of edible coating in extension of fruit shelf life: review. AgriEngineering.5, 520–536. 10.3390/agriengineering5010034

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  Pillai A. R. S. Eapen A. S. Zhang W. Roy S. (2024). Polysaccharide-based edible biopolymer-based coatings for fruit preservation: a review. Foods13, 1529. 10.3390/foods13101529

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  Prathiba S. C. Vasudeva K. R. Suresha G. J. Sadananda G. K. (2019). Influence of pretreatment on quality and shelf life of fresh cut jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus L.) bulbs. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem.8, 2524–2527. Available online at: https://www.phytojournal.com/archives/2019/vol8issue1/PartAP/8-1-307-752.pdf.

  • Google Scholar

• 82

  Priya K. Thirunavookarasu N. Chidanand D. V. (2023). Recent advances in edible coating of food products and its legislations: a review. J. Agric. Food Res.12, 100623. 10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100623

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 83

  Rahmawatti S. Mustapa K. Suherman Diah A. W. M. Supriadi Jura M. R. et al (2023). Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus) seed starch with sorbitol as a plasticizer and rosella flower antioxidant in the making edible film (Hibiscus sabdariffa). Int. J. Des. Nat. Ecodyn.18, 443–448. 10.18280/ijdne.180223

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  Ramana Rao T. V. Baraiya N. S. Vyas P. B. Patel D. M. (2016). Composite coating of alginate-olive oil enriched with antioxidants enhances postharvest quality and shelf life of Ber fruit (Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk. Var. Gola). J. Food Sci. Technol.53, 748–756. 10.1007/s13197-015-2045-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  Rashwan A. K. Younis H. A. Abdelshafy A. M. Osman A. I. Eletmany M. R. Hafouda M. A. et al (2024). Plant starch extraction, modification, and green applications: a review. Environ. Chem. Lett.22, 2483–2530. 10.1007/s10311-024-01753-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  Rob M. M. Pappu M. M. H. Arifin M. S. Era T. N. Akhi M. Z. Bhattacharjya D. K. et al (2024). Application and evaluation of plant-based edible active coatings to enhance the shelf-life and quality attributes of Jara lebu (Citrus medica). Discov. Food.4, 26. 10.1007/s44187-024-00094-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 87

  Salehi F. (2020). Edible coating of fruits and vegetables using natural gums: a review. Int. J. Fruit. Sci.20, S570–S589. 10.1080/15538362.2020.1746730

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88

  Santhosh R. Hoque M. Syed I. Sarkar P. (2021). “Food, medical, and environmental applications of polysaccharides,”. Editors PalK.BanerjeeI.SarkarP.BitA.KimD.AnisA.MajiS. (Elsevier), 109–133.

  • Google Scholar

• 89

  Saurabh V. Barman K. Singh A. K. (2019). Synergistic effect of salicylic acid and chitosan on postharvest life and quality attributes of jamun (Syzygium cumini Skeels) fruit. Acta Physiol. Plant.41, 89. 10.1007/s11738-019-2884-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90

  Senturk Parreidt T. Schmid M. Müller K. (2018). Effect of dipping and vacuum impregnation coating techniques with alginate-based coating on physical quality parameters of cantaloupe melon. J. Food Sci.83, 929–936. 10.1111/1750-3841.14091

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  Shakil M. Islam S. Yasmin S. Sarker M. S. H. Noor F. (2023). Effectiveness of aloe vera gel coating and paraffin wax-coated paperboard packaging on post-harvest quality of hog plum (Spondias mangifera L.). Heliyon9, e17738. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17738

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  Shapawi Z.-I. A. Ariffin S. H. Shamsudin R. How M. S. Baharom A. H. (2023). The effect of edible coatings (spirulina and chitosan) on the quality and shelf life of starfruit (Averrhoa carambola L. cv. B10) throughout storage. Pertinika J. Trop. Agric. Sci.46, 707–720. 10.47836/pjtas.46.2.19

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 93

  Singh R. S. Saini G. K. Kennedy J. F. (2008). Pullulan: microbial sources, production, and applications. Carbohydr. Polym.73, 515–531. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2008.01.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 94

  Soares A. de S. Ramos A. M. Vieira É. N. R. Vanzela E. S. L. de Oliveira P. M. Paula D. de A. (2018). Vacuum impregnation of chitosan-based edible coating in minimally processed pumpkin. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol.53, 2229–2238. 10.1111/ijfs.13811

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95

  Sood S. Malhotra N. Tripathi K. Laibach N. Rosero A. (2023). Editorial: food of the future: underutilized foods. Front. Nutr.10, 1307856. 10.3389/fnut.2023.1307856

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96

  Sothornvit R. (2013). Effect of edible coating on the qualities of fresh guava. Acta Hortic., 453–459. 10.17660/actahortic.2013.1012.58

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97

  Suhag R. Kumar N. Petkoska A. T. Upadhyay A. (2020). Film formation and deposition methods of edible coating on food products: a review. Food Res. Int.136, 109582. 10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109582

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 98

  Surolia R. Singh A. (2022). Underutilized sources of pectin as edible coating. Lett. Appl. NanoBioSci12, 83. 10.33263/lianbs123.083

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99

  Thakur D. Rana P. Singh S. K. Bakshi M. Kumar S. Singh S. (2024). Nanoemulsion edible coating for shelf-life improvement and quality control in perishable products. Plant Nano Biol.10, 100114. 10.1016/j.plana.2024.100114

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 100

  Treviño-Garza M. Z. García S. Heredia N. Alanís-Guzmán M. G. Arévalo-Niño K. (2017). Layer-by-layer edible coatings based on mucilages, pullulan and chitosan and its effect on quality and preservation of fresh-cut pineapple (Ananas comosus). Postharvest Biol. Technol.128, 63–75. 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2017.01.007

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101

  Trivedi C. H. Patel M. Mehta K. J. Panigrahi J. (2023). Improvement of shelf-life quality of ivy gourd (Coccinia grandis L. Voigt) using an exogenous coating of mannitol and sorbitol. Food Chem. Adv.2, 100260. 10.1016/j.focha.2023.100260

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102

  Usman I. Sana S. Jaffar H. M. Munir M. Afzal A. Sukhera S. et al (2025). Recent progress in edible films and coatings: toward green and sustainable food packaging technologies. Appl. Food Res.5, 101070. 10.1016/j.afres.2025.101070

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 103

  Vandana A. K. Suresha G. J. Archana T. J. Swamy G. S. K. (2019). Influence of environment-friendly bio-preservative Aloe vera gel coating on quality parameters of jamun fruits. Acta Hortic.1241, 699–704. 10.17660/ActaHortic.2019.1241.101

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 104

  Vargas-Torres A. Becerra-Loza A. S. Sayago-Ayerdi S. G. Palma-Rodríguez H. M. García-Magaña M. de L. Montalvo-González E. (2017). Combined effect of the application of 1-MCP and different edible coatings on the fruit quality of jackfruit bulbs (Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam) during cold storage. Sci. Hortic.214, 221–227. 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.11.045

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105

  Wang Y. Ju J. Diao Y. Zhao F. Yang Q. (2025). The application of starch-based edible film in food preservation: a comprehensive review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr.14, 2731–2764. 10.1080/10408398.2024.2349735

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106

  Xu Y. Deng Q. Ruan C. Xu D. Zeng K. (2024). Application of carboxymethyl cellulose and its edible composite coating in fruit preservation. Packag. Technol. Sci.37, 781–792. 10.1002/pts.2822

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107

  Yaashikaa P. R. Kamalesh R. Senthil Kumar P. Saravanan A. Vijayasri K. Rangasamy G. (2023). Recent advances in edible coatings and their application in food packaging. Food Res. Int.173, 113366. 10.1016/j.foodres.2023.113366

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 108

  Yadav A. Kumar N. Upadhyay A. Anurag R. K. (2023). Edible packaging from fruit processing waste: a comprehensive review. Food Rev. Int.39, 2075–2106. 10.1080/87559129.2021.1940198

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109

  Yan J. Luo Z. Ban Z. Lu H. Li D. Yang D. et al (2019). The effect of the layer-by-layer (LBL) edible coating on strawberry quality and metabolites during storage. Postharvest Biol. Technol.147, 29–38. 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2018.09.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 110

  Yousuf B. Sun Y. Wu S. (2022). Lipid and lipid-containing composite edible coatings and films. Food Rev. Int.38, 574–597. 10.1080/87559129.2021.1876084

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111

  Zikmanis P. Juhņeviča-Radenkova K. Radenkovs V. Segliņa D. Krasnova I. Kolesovs S. et al (2021). Microbial polymers in edible films and coatings of garden berry and grape: current and prospective use. Food Bioprocess Technol.14, 1432–1445. 10.1007/s11947-021-02666-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar