The increasing demand for fresh flowers during festive occasions, religious ceremonies, and wedding seasons has led to the widespread use of chemical preservation techniques throughout the floral supply chain. Flowers – such as jasmine, rose, chrysanthemum, and marigold – are traditionally valued for their natural fragrance, freshness, and aesthetic appeal. However, to meet market demands and extend their commercial value, various chemical agents are increasingly applied to delay senescence and maintain visual quality during transportation and storage. This study investigates the types of chemicals used in flower preservation, their functional roles, and the potential health hazards associated with human exposure. Data were collected through field observations in flower markets and interviews with vendors, wholesalers, and transporters. The findings revealed the use of chemicals including formalin, synthetic dyes, aluminum sulfate, citric acid, paraffin coatings, and silver-based compounds. These substances help delay wilting, reduce microbial growth, prevent discoloration, and preserve freshness for up to four days, thereby minimizing post-harvest losses. Despite these benefits, exposure to chemically treated flowers may pose health risks to workers, vendors, florists, and consumers. Reported effects include skin irritation, allergic reactions, respiratory discomfort, eye irritation, and potential long-term health concerns associated with repeated exposure to certain chemicals. The study highlights the importance of raising public awareness regarding the safe handling and use of chemically preserved flowers. It also recommends the adoption of natural and eco-friendly preservation methods, such as botanical extracts and improved cold-chain management, as sustainable alternatives. Furthermore, the findings emphasize the need for regulatory guidelines, routine monitoring, and comprehensive toxicological studies to ensure consumer safety and promote environmentally responsible practices in the floriculture industry.

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Halevy AH, Mayak S. Senescence and postharvest physiology of cut flowers. Hortic Rev. 1981;3:59–143. doi: 1002/9781118060858.ch2.
2. van Doorn WG. Water relations of cut flowers. Hortic Rev. 1997;18:1–85. doi: 1002/9780470650608.ch1.
3. Reid MS. Advances in flower preservation techniques. Acta Hortic. 2009;847:45–56. doi: 17660/ActaHortic.2009.847.4.
4. Ichimura K. Improvement of postharvest life in cut flowers. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sci. 1998;67:102–110. doi: 2503/jjshs.67.102.
5. Rogers MN. Historical review of postharvest physiology. HortScience. 1973;8:189–194.
6. Nowak J, Rudnicki RM. Postharvest handling of cut flowers. Portland (OR): Timber Press; 1990.
7. Dole JM, Wilkins HF. Floriculture: Principles and species. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson; 2005.
8. Sacalis JN. Cut flowers: Prolonging freshness. Batavia (IL): Ball Publishing; 1993.
9. Ketsa S, Rugkong A. Role of preservatives in postharvest flower quality. Postharvest Biol Technol. 2000;19:93–100. doi: 1016/S0925-5214(00)00092-0.
10. World Health Organization. Formaldehyde: Health effects. Geneva: WHO; 2010.
11. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Chemical agents and related occupations. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Vol. 100F. Lyon: IARC; 2012.
12. European Chemicals Agency. Guidance on the safe use of chemicals. Helsinki: ECHA; 2012.
13. Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJR, Adeyi O, Arnold R, Basu N, et al. The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. Lancet. 2018;391:462–512. doi: 1016/S0140-6736(17)32345-0.
14. Gast KLB. Postharvest handling of cut flowers. Manhattan (KS): Kansas State University; 2000.
15. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile for formaldehyde. Atlanta (GA): ATSDR; 1999.
16. Ichimura K, Kojima K, Goto R. Effects of citric acid on the vase life of cut flowers. Postharvest Biol Technol. 2002;24:203–211. doi: 1016/S0925-5214(01)00131-3.
17. Jones RB, Hill M. Effects of pH on water uptake by cut flowers. Sci Hortic. 1993;53:75–84.
18. Hauptmann M, Lubin JH, Stewart PA, Hayes RB, Blair A. Mortality from solid cancers among workers exposed to formaldehyde. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:1652–1660. doi: 1093/jnci/djh281.
19. Zollinger H. Color chemistry: Syntheses, properties and applications of organic dyes and pigments. 3rd ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2003.
20. Chung KT. Azo dyes and human health: A review. J Environ Sci Health C. 2016;34:233–261.
21. Saratale RG, Saratale GD, Chang JS, Govindwar SP. Bacterial decolorization and degradation of azo dyes: A review. J Environ Manage. 2011;92:943–955.
22. Russell AD, Hugo WB. Antimicrobial activity and action of silver. Prog Med Chem. 1994;31:351–370.
23. Rai M, Yadav A, Gade A. Silver nanoparticles as a new generation of antimicrobials. Biotechnol Adv. 2009;27:76–83. doi: 1016/j.biotechadv.2008.09.002.
24. Klasen HJ. A historical review of the use of silver in the treatment of burns. Burns. 2000;26:117–130.
25. van Doorn WG. Role of carbohydrates in flower senescence. J Exp Bot. 2000;51:1317–1323.
26. McDonnell G, Russell AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: Activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12:147–179. doi: 1128/CMR.12.1.147.
27. Ichimura K, et al. Effect of silver nitrate on vase life of cut flowers. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sci. 1999;68.
28. Tang X, Bai Y, Duong A, Smith MT, Li L, Zhang L. Formaldehyde in China: Production, consumption, exposure levels, and health effects. Environ Health Perspect. 2009;117:719–725. doi: 1289/ehp.0800265.
29. Nielsen GD, Larsen ST. Formaldehyde and human health. Toxicol Lett. 2013;221:95–100. doi: 1016/j.toxlet.2013.05.002.
30. Halevy AH. Water balance treatments for cut flowers. Acta Hortic. 1976;64:223–230.
31. Smith KR, et al. Human exposure to indoor pollutants and health effects. Environ Health Perspect. 2014;122.
32. Durkin DJ. Water relations of cut flowers. HortScience. 1979;14:36–38.
33. Robinson T, McMullan G, Marchant R, Nigam P. Remediation of dyes in textile effluent: A critical review. Bioresour Technol. 2001;77:247–255.
34. Forgacs E, Cserháti T, Oros G. Removal of synthetic dyes from wastewaters: A review. Environ Int. 2004;30:953–971.
35. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Formaldehyde standard (29 CFR 1910.1048). Washington (DC): OSHA; 2011.

The increasing demand for fresh flowers during festive occasions, religious ceremonies, and wedding seasons has led to the widespread use of chemical preservation techniques throughout the floral supply chain. Flowers – such as jasmine, rose, chrysanthemum, and marigold – are traditionally valued for their natural fragrance, freshness, and aesthetic appeal. However, to meet market demands and extend their commercial value, various chemical agents are increasingly applied to delay senescence and maintain visual quality during transportation and storage. This study investigates the types of chemicals used in flower preservation, their functional roles, and the potential health hazards associated with human exposure. Data were collected through field observations in flower markets and interviews with vendors, wholesalers, and transporters. The findings revealed the use of chemicals including formalin, synthetic dyes, aluminum sulfate, citric acid, paraffin coatings, and silver-based compounds. These substances help delay wilting, reduce microbial growth, prevent discoloration, and preserve freshness for up to four days, thereby minimizing post-harvest losses. Despite these benefits, exposure to chemically treated flowers may pose health risks to workers, vendors, florists, and consumers. Reported effects include skin irritation, allergic reactions, respiratory discomfort, eye irritation, and potential long-term health concerns associated with repeated exposure to certain chemicals. The study highlights the importance of raising public awareness regarding the safe handling and use of chemically preserved flowers. It also recommends the adoption of natural and eco-friendly preservation methods, such as botanical extracts and improved cold-chain management, as sustainable alternatives. Furthermore, the findings emphasize the need for regulatory guidelines, routine monitoring, and comprehensive toxicological studies to ensure consumer safety and promote environmentally responsible practices in the floriculture industry.

🔒 This is a subscription article

Full text is available to subscribers and institutional members. Please choose an option below to access it.

1. Halevy AH, Mayak S. Senescence and postharvest physiology of cut flowers. Hortic Rev. 1981;3:59–143. doi: 1002/9781118060858.ch2.
2. van Doorn WG. Water relations of cut flowers. Hortic Rev. 1997;18:1–85. doi: 1002/9780470650608.ch1.
3. Reid MS. Advances in flower preservation techniques. Acta Hortic. 2009;847:45–56. doi: 17660/ActaHortic.2009.847.4.
4. Ichimura K. Improvement of postharvest life in cut flowers. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sci. 1998;67:102–110. doi: 2503/jjshs.67.102.
5. Rogers MN. Historical review of postharvest physiology. HortScience. 1973;8:189–194.
6. Nowak J, Rudnicki RM. Postharvest handling of cut flowers. Portland (OR): Timber Press; 1990.
7. Dole JM, Wilkins HF. Floriculture: Principles and species. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson; 2005.
8. Sacalis JN. Cut flowers: Prolonging freshness. Batavia (IL): Ball Publishing; 1993.
9. Ketsa S, Rugkong A. Role of preservatives in postharvest flower quality. Postharvest Biol Technol. 2000;19:93–100. doi: 1016/S0925-5214(00)00092-0.
10. World Health Organization. Formaldehyde: Health effects. Geneva: WHO; 2010.
11. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Chemical agents and related occupations. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Vol. 100F. Lyon: IARC; 2012.
12. European Chemicals Agency. Guidance on the safe use of chemicals. Helsinki: ECHA; 2012.
13. Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJR, Adeyi O, Arnold R, Basu N, et al. The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. Lancet. 2018;391:462–512. doi: 1016/S0140-6736(17)32345-0.
14. Gast KLB. Postharvest handling of cut flowers. Manhattan (KS): Kansas State University; 2000.
15. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile for formaldehyde. Atlanta (GA): ATSDR; 1999.
16. Ichimura K, Kojima K, Goto R. Effects of citric acid on the vase life of cut flowers. Postharvest Biol Technol. 2002;24:203–211. doi: 1016/S0925-5214(01)00131-3.
17. Jones RB, Hill M. Effects of pH on water uptake by cut flowers. Sci Hortic. 1993;53:75–84.
18. Hauptmann M, Lubin JH, Stewart PA, Hayes RB, Blair A. Mortality from solid cancers among workers exposed to formaldehyde. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:1652–1660. doi: 1093/jnci/djh281.
19. Zollinger H. Color chemistry: Syntheses, properties and applications of organic dyes and pigments. 3rd ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2003.
20. Chung KT. Azo dyes and human health: A review. J Environ Sci Health C. 2016;34:233–261.
21. Saratale RG, Saratale GD, Chang JS, Govindwar SP. Bacterial decolorization and degradation of azo dyes: A review. J Environ Manage. 2011;92:943–955.
22. Russell AD, Hugo WB. Antimicrobial activity and action of silver. Prog Med Chem. 1994;31:351–370.
23. Rai M, Yadav A, Gade A. Silver nanoparticles as a new generation of antimicrobials. Biotechnol Adv. 2009;27:76–83. doi: 1016/j.biotechadv.2008.09.002.
24. Klasen HJ. A historical review of the use of silver in the treatment of burns. Burns. 2000;26:117–130.
25. van Doorn WG. Role of carbohydrates in flower senescence. J Exp Bot. 2000;51:1317–1323.
26. McDonnell G, Russell AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: Activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12:147–179. doi: 1128/CMR.12.1.147.
27. Ichimura K, et al. Effect of silver nitrate on vase life of cut flowers. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sci. 1999;68.
28. Tang X, Bai Y, Duong A, Smith MT, Li L, Zhang L. Formaldehyde in China: Production, consumption, exposure levels, and health effects. Environ Health Perspect. 2009;117:719–725. doi: 1289/ehp.0800265.
29. Nielsen GD, Larsen ST. Formaldehyde and human health. Toxicol Lett. 2013;221:95–100. doi: 1016/j.toxlet.2013.05.002.
30. Halevy AH. Water balance treatments for cut flowers. Acta Hortic. 1976;64:223–230.
31. Smith KR, et al. Human exposure to indoor pollutants and health effects. Environ Health Perspect. 2014;122.
32. Durkin DJ. Water relations of cut flowers. HortScience. 1979;14:36–38.
33. Robinson T, McMullan G, Marchant R, Nigam P. Remediation of dyes in textile effluent: A critical review. Bioresour Technol. 2001;77:247–255.
34. Forgacs E, Cserháti T, Oros G. Removal of synthetic dyes from wastewaters: A review. Environ Int. 2004;30:953–971.
35. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Formaldehyde standard (29 CFR 1910.1048). Washington (DC): OSHA; 2011.