Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Nanoemulsions have emerged as a promising technology for sustainable food preservation due to their ability to enhance the stability, bioavailability, and antimicrobial activity of bioactive compounds. With droplet sizes typically ranging from 20 to 200 nm, nanoemulsions provide a large interfacial area that facilitates improved dispersion and controlled release of active ingredients. However, challenges related to formulation standardization, reproducibility, and industrial scalability continue to limit their widespread adoption in food systems. Scope and approach This review provides a comprehensive analysis of nanoemulsion technologies for food preservation, focusing on three key dimensions of stability, scalability, and functionality. Current preparation methods are critically evaluated, including high- and low-energy methods. Key factors influencing nanoemulsion stability are also examined, including droplet size distribution, polydispersity index (<0.3), zeta potential (>|30| mV), surfactant composition, and interactions with complex food matrices, together with challenges related to large-scale production, regulatory compliance, and consumer acceptance. Key findings and conclusions Nanoemulsion-based preservation systems have demonstrated significant improvements in food stability across various matrices. To address current limitations, this review proposes a standardized development framework integrating formulation design, physicochemical characterization, stability testing, functional evaluation, and pilot-scale validation. By bridging laboratory research and industrial implementation, the framework provides a practical roadmap for advancing nanoemulsion-based food preservation technologies, ensuring reproducibility, regulatory compliance, and consumer acceptance. Addressing these research gaps is essential to advance the development and commercial viability of nanoemulsion-based food preservatives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Felicia et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: