A novel emulsion coating and its effects on internal quality and shelf life of eggs during room temperature storage

Effects of mineral oil (MO), chitosan solution (CH) and their emulsions (MO:CH = 75:25, 50:50, and 25:75 ratios) as coating materials in preserving internal quality of eggs were evaluated during a 5‐weeks storage at 25 °C. Consumers (n = 109) evaluated surface properties and purchase intent of freshly coated eggs. As storage time increased, Haugh unit and yolk index values decreased whereas weight loss increased. Noncoated eggs rapidly changed from AA to B and C grades after 1 and 3 weeks, respectively. However, all emulsion‐coated eggs maintained their A‐grade quality for 4 weeks. Compared with noncoated eggs, all emulsion coatings reduced weight loss of eggs by at least seven times (0.88–1.03% vs. 7.14%). Only MO:CH = 25:75 emulsion‐coated eggs were not sensorially glossier than noncoated eggs. All emulsion‐coated eggs had >80% positive purchase intent and were negative for Salmonella. This study demonstrated that MO:CH emulsion coatings preserved internal quality and prolonged shelf life of eggs.     

Mineral oil-chitosan emulsion coatings affect quality and shelf-life of coated eggs during refrigerated and room temperature storage

Effects of mineral oil (MO) and 4 emulsions (prepared with different emulsifier types) of MO and chitosan solution (CH) at a fixed ratio of MO:CH = 25:75 as coating materials in preserving the internal quality of eggs were evaluated during 5 wk at 25 °C and 20 wk at 4 °C. Generally, as storage time increased, Haugh unit and yolk index values decreased whereas weight loss increased. However, MO and/or 4 emulsion coatings minimized the weight loss (<1.5%) and preserved the albumen and yolk quality of eggs (with the final B grade) for at least 3 wk longer than those observed for noncoated eggs at 25 °C. At 4 °C, all coated eggs changed from AA to A grade after 5 wk and they maintained this grade for 10 wk (5 wk longer than that of noncoated eggs). Although refrigeration (4 °C) alone could maintain the B grade of noncoated eggs for up to 20 wk, coating treatments were necessary to keep the weight loss below 2%. Compared with 4 °C, the increasing weight loss showed stronger negative correlation (P < 0.01) with the decreasing Haugh unit (-0.46 to -0.89) and yolk index (-0.36 to -0.89) at 25 °C. The emulsifier type used in this study generally did not affect the internal quality of eggs. Salmonella spp. detection was negative for all coated and noncoated eggs. This study demonstrated that MO and MO:CH emulsion coatings preserved the internal quality, prolonged the shelf-life, and minimized weight loss (<2%) of eggs.     

Comparing effects of α‐ vs. β‐chitosan coating and emulsion coatings on egg quality during room temperature storage

Effects of α‐ and β‐chitosan (CH), soybean oil (SO) and their emulsions (CH:SO = 2:3) as coating materials on selected internal quality and sensory properties of eggs were evaluated during 5 weeks storage at 25 °C. After 3 weeks of storage, α‐ and β‐CH‐coated eggs changed to B grade, while SO‐ and emulsion‐coated eggs preserved grade A quality. Weight loss of eggs coated with SO and CH:SO emulsions was <2.0% vs. 5.3–5.8% for noncoated and CH‐coated eggs after 5 weeks of storage. β‐CH (0.9%) maintained lower weight loss of eggs than α‐CH (1.2%) only at 1‐week storage. Albumen pH of eggs coated with SO and CH:SO emulsions decreased progressively throughout storage. Eggs coated with β‐CH:SO emulsion and SO were significantly glossier than noncoated eggs. Consumers indicated positive purchase intent (69.17–76.67%) for all coated eggs. Overall, α‐CH:SO and β‐CH:SO emulsions extended egg shelf life by at least 3 weeks during room temperature storage.     

Soybean oil‐chitosan emulsion affects internal quality and shelf‐life of eggs stored at 25 and 4 °C

Effects of soybean oil (SO), chitosan solution (CH) and their emulsions (SO:CH = 60:40, 50:50 and 40:60 ratios) as coatings on internal quality of eggs stored at 25 and 4 °C, respectively, for 7 and 20 weeks, were evaluated. Eggs coated with SO and SO:CH emulsions maintained grade AA and/or A quality up to 7 weeks at 25 °C and 20 weeks at 4 °C, while noncoated eggs changed from AA to B grade after 2 weeks at 25 °C. Compared with noncoated eggs, shelf‐life of eggs stored at 25 °C was extended for 5 weeks by all SO:CH emulsions. Weight loss of eggs coated with SO:CH emulsions was <3% after 7 weeks at 25 °C and <5% after 20 weeks at 4 °C. SO:CH emulsion is alternatively an effective coating with possible shorter drying times for reducing weight loss and preserving the internal quality of eggs.     

Chitosan-soybean oil emulsion coating affects physico-functional and sensory quality of eggs during storage

Effects of soybean oil (SO) and chitosan-soybean oil (CH:SO = 40:60) emulsion as coating materials for preserving internal quality of eggs were evaluated during 7 and 15 weeks storage at 25 °C and 4 °C, respectively. Consumers (n = 150) assessed surface properties and purchase intent of freshly coated eggs. Noncoated eggs deteriorated from AA to B grade after 1 week while coated eggs retained A grade up to 5 weeks at 25 °C. Amongst coatings, CH:SO emulsion maintained a lower albumen pH while SO was better at reducing weight loss. Effect of refrigeration on albumen pH was minimal. Weight loss of coated eggs was <3% after 7 weeks at 25 °C. Emulsion capacity and emulsion viscosity were minimally affected by coating and refrigeration, and their trends were more correlated to the yolk index at 25 °C than at 4 °C. Only SO-coated eggs were not sensorially smoother than noncoated eggs; however, CH:SO emulsion-coated eggs had the least shell colour changes (ΔE^∗, values at day 0 as a reference) during storage at 25 °C. All coated eggs had 85% positive purchase intent. SO and CH:SO emulsion coatings significantly extended egg shelf-life compared to that of noncoated eggs at room and refrigerated storage.     

Oil Coating Affects Internal Quality and Sensory Acceptance of Selected Attributes of Raw Eggs during Storage

Four (coconut, palm, rice bran, and soybean) edible oils and glycerol were applied on eggshell. All noncoated and coated eggs were stored for 5 wk at 25 ± 2 °C and drawn weekly for quality evaluation. All oil coatings were more effective in preserving internal quality of eggs than was glycerol coating. As storage time increased, the preservative effects of edible oil coating on weight loss, and albumen and yolk quality were significantly noticed. Oil‐coated eggs had significantly lower weight loss (<0.43%) than did noncoated (3.87%) and glycerol‐coated (3.73%) eggs after 5 wk of storage. Based on the Haugh unit, oil‐coated eggs maintained AA grade up to 3 wk. After 5 wk of storage, noncoated, glycerol‐coated, and oil‐coated eggs changed from AA grade to below B, below B and A grade, respectively. The albumen pH of noncoated and glycerol‐coated eggs considerably increased from 8.23 to 9.51 and 9.42, respectively, while those of oil‐coated eggs either maintained or slightly increased to 8.32. The albumen viscosity of all eggs decreased with increased storage time. Consumers (N = 120) could differentiate surface glossiness of oil‐coated eggs from uncoated eggs (R‐index of 81.42% to 86.99%). All oil‐coated eggs were acceptable for surface glossiness (liking scores of 6.22 to 6.77) and surface odor (liking scores of 6.20 to 6.55) with overall liking scores of 6.34 to 7.03. Overall, this study demonstrated that edible oil (coconut, palm, rice bran, and soybean) coating could preserve internal quality of eggs (maintaining grade A) at least 4 wk longer than noncoated eggs. Practical Application: Freshness is a major contribution to the egg quality. The internal quality of eggs begins to deteriorate after they have been laid due to loss of moisture and carbon dioxide via the eggshell pores. Refrigeration is very effective in preserving egg quality. Surface coating is an alternative method to preserve egg quality, although it is much less effective than refrigeration. This study demonstrated that coconut, rice bran, soybean, and palm oils, which are abundant and commonly consumed in many parts of the world, could preserve the internal quality and reduce weight loss of oil‐coated eggs during room temperature storage.     

Internal quality and shelf life of eggs coated with oils from different sources

Selected internal quality and shelf life of eggs coated with oils from differences sources (mineral oil, canola oil, corn oil, grape seed oil, olive oil, soybean oil, and sunflower oil) were evaluated during 5 wk of storage at 25 °C. As the storage time increased, weight loss increased whereas Haugh unit and yolk index values decreased. Throughout the 5 wk of storage, eggs coated with oils, regardless of oil sources, possessed better albumen and yolk quality than the control noncoated eggs. Oil coating minimized weight loss of eggs (<0.8%) compared with that (7.26%) of the noncoated eggs after 5 wk of storage at 25 °C. No significant differences in internal quality (weight loss, Haugh unit, yolk index, and albumen pH) were generally observed among oil-coated eggs during 5 wk of storage. Based on the Haugh unit, the grade of noncoated eggs changed from AA at 0 wk to A at 1 wk and to B after 3 wk whereas that of oil-coated eggs from AA at 0 wk to A at 4 wk and maintained A grade until 5 wk. This study demonstrated that oil coating, irrespective of oil sources, preserved the internal quality, minimized weight loss (<0.8%), and extended the shelf life of eggs by at least 3 wk longer than observed for the noncoated eggs at 25 °C storage. Soybean oil was a more practical option as a coating material for eggs due to its low cost. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Eggs are highly perishable and susceptible to internal quality deterioration when stored above 7 °C. Refrigeration of eggs may be seldom practiced in some developing regions of the world. Therefore, an alternative method, that is inexpensive yet effective, to preserve the internal quality of eggs and to prevent microbial contamination is needed. Oil coating has been proven to preserve the internal quality, prolong shelf life, and minimize weight loss of eggs. This study demonstrated that, compared with other vegetable oils, soybean oil was a more practical option as a coating material for eggs during 5 wk of storage at 25 °C due to its low cost.     

Quality of eggs coated with oil–chitosan emulsion: Combined effects of emulsifier types,initial albumen quality,and storage

Effects of mineral oil:chitosan (MO:CH at 25:75) emulsions prepared with four different emulsifiers (2 water- and 2 oil-miscible) as coatings on the internal quality (weight loss, Haugh unit, yolk index, and albumen pH) of coated eggs were evaluated during 5 weeks at 25 ± 2 °C and 20 weeks at 4 ± 2 °C. Eggs with two initial albumen qualities [Haugh unit (HU): H = 87.8 and L = 70.9] were used. At 25 ± 2 °C, Haugh unit, yolk index, and albumen pH of all coated eggs decreased with increased storage time. Coated H- and L-eggs maintained an A-grade up to 4 weeks and 1 week, respectively. Weight loss of all coated eggs remained below 1.35% after 5 weeks of storage at 25 ± 2 °C. All coated eggs maintained an A-grade with less than 2.5% weight loss during 20 weeks of storage at 4 ± 2 °C. Emulsifier types marginally affected the internal quality of coated eggs regardless of storage temperatures.     

Efficacy of Antimicrobial Pullulan‐Based Coating to Improve Internal Quality and Shelf‐Life of Chicken Eggs During Storage

There has been a growing interest in the use of natural materials as a delivery mechanism for antimicrobials and coatings in foods. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of pullulan coatings to improve internal quality and shelf‐life of fresh eggs during 10 wk of storage at 25 and 4 °C. Three treatments of eggs were evaluated as follows; non‐coated (control; C), coated with pullulan (P), and coated with pullulan containing nisin (N). The effects of the pullulan coatings on microbiological qualities, physical properties, and freshness parameters were investigated and compared with non‐coated eggs. For non‐coated eggs, as storage time increased, yolk index, albumen index, and Haugh unit value decreased and weight loss increased. However, pullulan coatings (P or N) minimized weight loss (<1.5%) and preserved the albumen and yolk quality of eggs (with a final B grade) 3 wk longer than non‐coated eggs at 25 °C. At 4 °C, both P‐ and N‐coated eggs went from AA to A grade after 9 wk and maintained the grade for 10 wk (4 wk longer than that of non‐coated eggs). This study is the first to demonstrate that pullulan coatings can preserve the internal quality, prolong the shelf‐life, and minimize weight loss of fresh eggs.     

Effects of mineral oil coating on internal quality of chicken eggs under refrigerated storage

The selected internal qualities (weight loss, Haugh unit, yolk index, and albumen pH) of noncoated and mineral oil‐coated chicken eggs during 15 weeks of storage at 4 °C and/or during 5 weeks of storage at 25 °C were evaluated. Results indicated that, without refrigeration, the noncoated and mineral oil‐coated eggs rapidly changed from AA to C and B grades as measured by Haugh unit, respectively, after 5 weeks of storage. However, the AA quality of the noncoated eggs could be maintained under refrigerated storage (4 °C) for at least 5 weeks. The mineral oil coating and refrigerated storage (4 °C) synergistically minimised weight loss and preserved the albumen and yolk qualities of chicken eggs during a long‐term storage. At 4 °C, the mineral oil‐coated eggs preserved the initial AA grade for at least 15 weeks with l.19% weight loss.     

Edible coating affects physico‐functional properties and shelf life of chicken eggs during refrigerated and room temperature storage

Effects of chitosan, whey protein concentrate (WPC), mineral oil (MO) and/or soybean oil (SO) coating on egg quality were compared at 25 and 4 °C, respectively, during 5 and 20 weeks of storage. Storage time and temperature, and type of coating significantly affected Haugh unit, yolk index, weight loss, albumen pH and emulsifying capacity. Shelf life was extended 4 weeks by MO and SO and 2 weeks by chitosan and WPC longer than that observed for noncoated eggs at 25 °C. MO‐ and SO‐coated eggs maintained AA grade for 20 weeks at 4 °C. Weight loss of SO‐coated eggs was <1% after 5 weeks at 25 °C and after 20 weeks at 4 °C. Yolk index and emulsifying capacity were more correlated at 25 °C than at 4 °C. MO and SO were more effective coating materials, with SO providing a more cost‐effective coating for extending egg shelf life.     

Selected Quality and Shelf Life of Eggs Coated with Mineral Oil with Different Viscosities

ABSTRACT:  Selected quality and shelf life of eggs coated with mineral oil having 6 different viscosities (7, 11, 14, 18, 22, and 26 cP) were evaluated during 5 wk of storage at 25 °C. As the storage time increased, weight loss and albumen pH increased whereas Haugh unit and yolk index values decreased. After 5 wk of storage, eggs coated with 11, 14, 18, 22, or 26 cP oil possessed better quality than the control noncoated eggs and eggs coated with 7 cP oil. Oil coating, irrespective of viscosities, did not improve the emulsion capacity. There was an observable trend that coating with 26 cP oil was more effective in preventing weight loss and in maintaining the Haugh unit of eggs compared with coating with other viscosities of mineral oil. Based on the Haugh unit, the grade of noncoated eggs changed from "AA" at 0 wk to "C" after 3 wk whereas that of 26 cP oil-coated eggs from "AA" at 0 wk to "A" at 3 wk and "B" at 5 wk of storage. Coating with 26 cP oil reduced the weight loss of eggs by more than 10 times (0.85% compared with 8.78%) and extended the shelf life of eggs by at least 3 more weeks compared with the noncoated eggs.     

Viscosity changes of chitosan solution affect physico-functional properties and consumer perception of coated eggs during storage

Effects of storage of chitosan (CH) solution on physico-functional properties and consumer perception of CH-coated eggs were evaluated during 5- and 15-weeks storage at 25 °C and 4 °C, respectively. Seven treatments [CH0 (freshly-prepared), CH1 (stored for 1-week at 25 °C), CH1R (1-week, 4 °C), CH3 (3-weeks, 25 °C), CH3R (3-weeks, 4 °C), CH5 (5-weeks, 25 °C), CH5R (5-weeks, 4 °C)] were applied on eggshell. After 5-weeks storage, CH-solution viscosity decreased by 2.56 and 4.6 times, respectively, at 4 °C and 25 °C while pH slightly increased. CH0 preserved grade-A quality for 4-weeks vs. 1-week for noncoated eggs at 25 °C. After 5-weeks, weight loss (%) of coated eggs at 25 °C (6.04–5.59) was lower than that of noncoated eggs (7.44) but higher than that of all eggs at 4 °C (2.93–2.46). Albumen pH increased while emulsion capacity decreased with increased storage time; however, both were insignificantly affected by CH viscosity. Consumers perceived CH0- and CH1R-eggshell to be glossier than noncoated eggs after 5-weeks. Purchase intent was higher for CH-coated eggs (72–77.3%) than for noncoated eggs (61.3%). Overall, viscosity changes of CH-coating solution had lesser impact on quality of CH-coated eggs than did storage temperature/time of eggs.     

Whey protein isolate coating and concentration effects on egg shelf life

The influences of three different concentrations (6, 12 and 18%) of whey protein isolate (WPI) coatings on shelf‐life enhancements of the fresh egg quality (weight loss, pH, Haugh unit, yolk index and colors) and the shelf life were evaluated at room temperature. All coated eggs showed lower weight loss than uncoated eggs. Less weight loss (2.46 for 12% WPI and 2.38 for 18% WPI) was observed in WPI‐coated eggs. Haugh units (HU) indicated that coated eggs remained in grade ‘A’ during 3 weeks storage period, whereas uncoated (UC) changed from grade ‘A’ to ‘B’ after 1 week of storage. The HU and yolk‐index (YI) values of all WPI‐coated eggs were significantly higher than those of UC. Among the coated eggs, there were no significant differences in HU, but 12 and 18% WPI coated had higher YI than WPI 6% coated and UC. The albumen pH of the UC eggs was significantly higher than that of coated eggs. Yolk lightness (L*) and (b*); shell (a*) and (b*) of coated eggs were not different from UC after 4 weeks. Performance of WPI coatings depended on the concentration up to 12% but not between 12 and 18%. Results also indicated that WPI coatings served as protective barrier for shelf life of the eggs. Copyright © 2005 Society of Chemical Industry     

Effects of chitosan coating and storage position on quality and shelf life of eggs

Effects of chitosan coating and storage positions (small-end down, small-end up or horizontal) on internal quality and shelf life of eggs were evaluated during 5 weeks of storage at 25 °C. Compared with noncoated eggs, all chitosan-coated eggs, irrespective of storage positions, had significantly lesser weight loss, higher Haugh units and higher yolk index throughout the storage. Chitosan coating, irrespective of storage positions, extended the egg shelf life by at least 3 weeks at 25 °C compared with noncoated eggs. Noncoated and chitosan-coated eggs placed small-end down tentatively showed better quality than eggs placed small-end up after 3 and 4 weeks of storage. After 5 weeks of storage, storage positions did not significantly affect quality of noncoated and chitosan-coated eggs. There were no notable differences in total amino acid content of the albumen and fatty acid composition of the yolk between noncoated and chitosan-coated eggs after 5 weeks of storage.     

Effectiveness of chitosan‐based coating in improving shelf‐life of eggs

Despite eggs having a natural packaging—shell—they are perishable and can lose their quality during storage. Chitosan‐based coatings were applied to shell eggs to examine potential effects on egg quality properties (weight loss, Haugh unit, yolk index) during 4 weeks of storage. Mineral amounts in yolks were also evaluated after 4 weeks of storage. Three chitosan‐based coatings produced with organic acids (acetic‐(C‐AA), lactic‐(C‐LA), and propionic (C‐PA)) were evaluated on shelf‐life enhancements of fresh egg quality. All chitosan‐coated eggs showed greater interior quality than the non‐coated eggs. The coatings significantly maintained weight loss compared to the control specimen (4.96%). Lower weight loss (3.45% for C‐PA, 3.53% for C‐LA) was observed in the coated eggs. Eggshell chitosan coat containing lactic and propionic acids maintained higher Haugh unit and yolk index than eggs coated with acetic acid. Uncoated (UC) eggs changed from grade ‘A’ to ‘B’ after 1 week of storage. Chitosan‐based coating containing lactic and propionic acids maintained eggs in grade ‘A’ for 4 weeks. Haugh unit showed that C‐LA and C‐PA effectively maintained eggs at grade ‘A’ quality for at least 3 weeks more than control and 1 week more than C‐AA. Results also indicated that the chitosan coating maintained mineral amounts at nutritional values (especially calcium, iron and magnesium concentration) in yolks after 4 weeks storage. Copyright © 2006 Society of Chemical Industry     

Effect of Plasticizer Concentration and Solvent Types on Shelf-life of Eggs Coated with Chitosan

ABSTRACT:  Effects of plasticizer concentrations (0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0% glycerol) and solvent types (1% acetic and 1% lactic acid) on internal quality of eggs coated with 2% chitosan solution were evaluated during 5 wk of storage at 25 °C. In comparison of plasticizer concentrations, eggs coated with chitosan dissolved in acetic acid containing 2% glycerol showed significant reduction in weight loss compared with the noncoated eggs during 5 wk of storage. At 2% glycerol, the Haugh unit and yolk index values suggested that chitosan-coated eggs can be preserved for at least 3 wk longer than the control noncoated eggs during 5 wk of storage at 25 °C. Use of acetic acid rather than lactic acid as a chitosan solvent was more advantageous in view of shelf-life extension of eggs.     

Plasticizer types and coating methods affect quality and shelf life of eggs coated with chitosan

ABSTRACT:  Effects of different plasticizer types (glycerol, propylene glycol, and sorbitol) and coating methods (brushing, dipping, and spraying) on the internal quality and shelf life of chitosan-coated eggs were evaluated during 5 wk of storage at 25 °C. The Haugh unit and yolk index values suggested that chitosan coating, irrespective of the plasticizer types, extended the shelf life of eggs by almost 3 wk at 25 °C compared with noncoated eggs. After 5 wk of storage, plasticizer types did not significantly affect the quality (weight loss, Haugh unit, and yolk index) of chitosan-coated eggs. However, there was an observable trend indicating that use of sorbitol rather than propylene glycol and glycerol as a plasticizer was better in reducing weight loss (whole egg) of chitosan-coated eggs during a 5-wk storage. After a 5-wk storage, there were no significant differences in weight loss and weight of albumen and yolk among chitosan-coated eggs, regardless of the coating methods. However, both brushing and dipping methods yielded chitosan-coated eggs with better yolk (higher yolk index values) and albumen (lower pH) qualities than did the spraying method. During 3 to 5 wk of storage, the Haugh unit values of chitosan-coated eggs by the brushing method were higher than or comparable to those by dipping or spraying. Therefore, coating of eggs with chitosan using sorbitol as a plasticizer and by the brushing method may offer a protective barrier in preserving the internal quality and thus extending shelf life of eggs.     

The effect of edible eggshell coatings on egg quality and consumer perception

Effects of the various coatings (whey protein isolate, chitosan and shellac) on fresh eggs quality were evaluated based on the interior quality and sensory evaluation during 4 weeks of storage. During storage, all egg weights and albumen heights decreased and albumen pH increased. The lowest weight loss (0.75%) was observed in shellac‐coated eggs. Eggs coated with chitosan and whey protein also had significantly lower weight loss than uncoated (UC) eggs (p < 0.05). The albumen pH of the UC eggs was significantly higher than that of coated eggs and increased during storage time. The Haugh unit and yolk‐index values of all coated eggs were significantly higher than those of UC. Among the coated eggs, the shellac eggs had the highest value of Haugh unit and yolk index. Chitosan and shellac effectively maintained grade ‘A’ eggs for at least 2 weeks more than control and 1 week more than whey protein isolate. On the basis of sensory evaluation, shellac has highest glossiness, but lowest general acceptability. Eggs coated with whey protein had significantly higher general acceptability. Yolk lightness (L*)(a*) and (b*) of coated eggs were not different from UC after 4 weeks. The values of color differences were similar to controls. The study demonstrated that various coatings improved the shelf life of eggs. Copyright © 2005 Society of Chemical Industry     

Improving quality of fresh‐cut mango using polysaccharide‐based edible coatings

This study was aimed at evaluating the effect of coatings with alginate (AL), pectin (PE), carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) or chitosan (CH) on microbial stability, physicochemical attributes, total phenolics and carotenoids content, antioxidant capacity and sensory properties of fresh‐cut mango during 14 days at 4 ± 1 °C. Coated fresh‐cut mango kept microbial counts below 6 logs CFU g^?1, being CH‐coated fresh‐cut mango those that exhibited the lowest microbial counts (1 log CFU g^?1) along entire storage. AL, PE and CMC coatings maintained yellow colour of fresh‐cut mango throughout storage. AL and CH coatings, which have different monomers in their chain, improved the content of antioxidant compounds in fresh‐cut mango as related to uncoated. AL‐coated fresh‐cut mangoes were the toughest, among those coated, during 14 days. The highest consumer acceptance was achieved in AL (90.2%) coated fresh‐cut mango. CH would be the most suitable coating to extend the quality of fresh‐cut mango throughout storage.