Search

Fresh produce is traditionally labeled with plastic price lookup (PLU) stickers that are attached to the produce surface using edible glue. However, both the stickers and glue are environmental contaminants, and the stickers can still easily detach from the produce surface during handling and disrupt traceability. An alternative method of labeling, the CO2 laser-labeling technology (LLT), has been gaining attention in recent years. However, engraving Quick Response (QR) code using LLT is unique, and the performance of this technology varies from produce item to produce item, and information on its effects on postharvest quality, microbial safety, and economic feasibility has not been reported. The objectives of this study were to investigate the effect of laser-labeling technology on (1) postharvest quality, (2) microbial safety, and (3) economic analysis of this technology. Three horticultural crops, ‘Red Delicious’ apple (Malus pumila), green bell pepper (Capsicum annuum), and cucumber (Cucumis sativus) were procured from a local grocery store. Each produce was engraved with a Quick Response (QR) code or 6-digit alphanumerical (text) code using the commercially available Trotec Speedy 300 CO2 laser engraver, followed by the application of edible wax. Fresh weight loss for laser-printed produce was higher compared to controls, but no difference in visual quality ratings was observed. The laser-labeled produce was assessed for microbial contamination by artificially inoculating rifampicin-resistant Escherichia coli (E. coli) log10 6 CFU/mL to the labeled fruit. The results showed that the population of rifampicin-resistant E. coli was statistically higher in all three products labeled with text code compared to the nontreated controls. The QR-coded treatments were similar to the controls. The wax application did not affect the microbial attachment on the laser-labeled produce. The CO2 laser labeling technology has the potential for industrial application.

Fresh produce is traditionally labeled with plastic price lookup (PLU) stickers that are attached to the produce surface using edible glue. However, both the stickers and glue are environmental contaminants, and the stickers can still easily detach from the produce surface during handling and disrupt traceability. An alternative method of labeling, the CO 2 laser-labeling technology (LLT), has been gaining attention in recent years. However, engraving Quick Response (QR) code using LLT is unique, and the performance of this technology varies from produce item to produce item, and information on its effects on postharvest quality, microbial safety, and economic feasibility has not been reported. The objectives of this study were to investigate the effect of laser-labeling technology on (1) postharvest quality, (2) microbial safety, and (3) economic analysis of this technology. Three horticultural crops, 'Red Delicious' apple (Malus pumila), green bell pepper (Capsicum annuum), and cucumber (Cucumis sativus) were procured from a local grocery store. Each produce was engraved with a Quick Response (QR) code or 6-digit alphanumerical (text) code using the commercially available Trotec Speedy 300 CO 2 laser engraver, followed by the application of edible wax. Fresh weight loss for laser-printed produce was higher compared to controls, but no difference in visual quality ratings was observed. The laser-labeled produce was assessed for microbial contamination by artificially inoculating rifampicin-resistant Escherichia coli (E. coli) log 10 6 CFU/mL to the labeled fruit. The results showed that the population of rifampicin-resistant E. coli was statistically higher in all three products labeled with text code compared to the nontreated controls. The QR-coded treatments were similar to the controls. The wax application did not affect the microbial attachment on the laser-labeled produce. The CO 2 laser labeling technology has the potential for industrial application., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)