張慧藝 汪麗霞 吳伊靜 畢旭燦 王剛 趙四清 徐昌杰 陳昆松
摘? ? 要:【目的】分析不同胡柚種質(zhì)間的果實品質(zhì)差異,建立并應(yīng)用果實品質(zhì)評價體系,篩選優(yōu)良胡柚種質(zhì)。【方法】以18份胡柚種質(zhì)為試驗材料,對單果質(zhì)量、可食率、種子數(shù)量、果形指數(shù)等果實外在品質(zhì)指標(biāo)以及可溶性固形物、可滴定酸含量等內(nèi)在品質(zhì)指標(biāo)進(jìn)行測定,應(yīng)用感官評定對果實皮色、肉質(zhì)、剝皮難易等感官指標(biāo)進(jìn)行分析,并利用層次分析法對胡柚果實品質(zhì)進(jìn)行綜合評價。【結(jié)果】不同胡柚種質(zhì)間果實品質(zhì)性狀存在差異,變異系數(shù)為3.07%~143.57%,分別以果形指數(shù)和種子數(shù)為最小和最大。單果質(zhì)量為184.32~423.20 g;果實為圓形,果形指數(shù)平均為0.89;果皮厚度和可食率分別為2.15~9.68 mm和50.33%~83.67%;可溶性固形物和可滴定酸含量(w,后同)分別為9.83%~15.40%和0.90%~1.57%;總酚含量為13.83~20.07 mg·g-1,類胡蘿卜素總量為2.29~8.66 μg·g-1;果實剝皮難易程度也存在較大差別。采用層次分析法構(gòu)建了胡柚果實品質(zhì)綜合評價模型,通過1~9標(biāo)度法計算得到各品質(zhì)指標(biāo)權(quán)重,其中甜酸風(fēng)味權(quán)重最高,為17.65%;果形指數(shù)最低,為2.29%。根據(jù)果實理化分析和感官評定指標(biāo)的計分規(guī)則計算出18份胡柚種質(zhì)的各指標(biāo)得分,并結(jié)合權(quán)重計算總得分,發(fā)現(xiàn)01-7b、01-7a、胡柚優(yōu)株b、胡柚優(yōu)株a和果5的總得分高,綜合品質(zhì)優(yōu)異,可作為胡柚新品種利用或作為進(jìn)一步選育的基礎(chǔ)?!窘Y(jié)論】不同胡柚種質(zhì)間果實品質(zhì)差異較大;建立了胡柚果實品質(zhì)綜合評價體系,具有指標(biāo)全覆蓋和權(quán)重賦分合理等優(yōu)點;對18份胡柚種質(zhì)進(jìn)行了品質(zhì)評價,篩選出5份綜合品質(zhì)優(yōu)異的種質(zhì)。
關(guān)鍵詞:胡柚;果實品質(zhì);層次分析法;綜合評價
中圖分類號:S666.3 文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)志碼:A 文章編號:1009-9980(2024)06-1033-11
Fruit quality analysis and comprehensive evaluation of 18 Huyou (Citrus changshanensis) accessions
ZHANG Huiyi1, WANG Lixia2#, WU Yijing3, BI Xucan2, WANG Gang2, ZHAO Siqing2, XU Changjie1, 3*, CHEN Kunsong1, 3
(1Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture and Biotechnology, Zhejiang University, Zhejiang 310058, Hangzhou, China; 2Changshan Agricultural Characteristic Industry Development Center, Changshan 324000, Zhejiang, China; 3Zhejiang Key Laboratory of Horticultural Crop Quality Improvement, Zhejiang 310058, Hangzhou, China)
Abstract: 【Objective】 Huyou (Citrus changshanensis K. S. Chen et C. X. Fu) is a local characteristic citrus resource in China. The main production area is in Changshan county, Quzhou City, Zhejiang province. Huyou has a history of commercial cultivation for over a hundred years, and now huyou has become a key industry of characteristic agriculture in Changshan county and an important source of income for local fruit growers. The evaluation of fruit quality is an important part of phenotypic characterization of huyou accessions, and also an important basis for screening excellent germplasm accessions. Currently in huyou, no systematic analysis and evaluation of fruit quality differences among different accessions have been carried out, and meanwhile, a comprehensive fruit quality evaluation system has not been developed, which impair the selection and industrial application of excellent accessions. The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the fruit quality of huyou, to establish a fruit quality evaluation system, and to provide a basis for the selection of high quality accessions. 【Methods】 Eighteen huyou accessions, with one typical tree for each accession, were involved in this study. For each tree, fifteen fruit evenly distributed in the crown were harvested when fruit were at commercial harvest maturity. A number of quality indicators, including the average fruit weight (AFW), fruit shape index (FSI), edible rate (ER), pericarp thickness, soluble solids content (SSC), titratable acid content (TAC), SSC/TAC ratio, vitamin C (Vc) content, flavanone neohesperidosides (FNs) content, flavanone rutinosides (FRs) content, and the contents of total phenolics, etc., were measured. SPSS and Excel were used for data analysis. Systematic description and sensory evaluation were used to analyze the fruit quality indicators such as peel appearance, flesh texture and peeling ability. The weights of quality indicators were determined by analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and the overall fruit quality of different accessions were evaluated and ranked by comprehensive score. 【Results】 The fruit quality of the 18 Huyou accessions varied in different degree, with coefficients of variation ranging from 3.07% to 143.57% for the different quality indicators analysed. Among all indicators, the number of seeds per fruit had the largest variation and the FSI had the smallest. The AFW ranged from 184.32 to 423.20 g, with Hongrou Huyou having the largest AFW and Guo 4 having the smallest. The longitudinal fruit diameter of all accessions was smaller than the transverse fruit diameter, and thus the FSI was less than 1, with an average of 0.89. Pericarp thickness and ER ranged from 2.15 to 9.68 mm and from 50.33% to 83.67%, respectively. The number of seeds per fruit varied greatly among the different accessions, with Cuihong having the lowest number, 0.22, while Guo 16 had the highest number, 22.67. SSC ranged from 9.83% to 15.40%, with Guo 4 being highest. TAC ranged from 0.90% to 1.57%, with Guo 8 having the highest TAC and Hongrou Huyou having the lowest. The SSC/TAC ratio varied widely among accessions, with the highest value of 12.73 for Guo 18 and the lowest value of 7.91 for Guo 7. The Vc content ranged from 35.88 to 72.95 mg·100 g-1. Guo 10 had the highest content of FNs, a class of bitter flavonoids, while Cuihong had the highest content of FRs, a class of non-bitter flavonoids, but non-detectable FNs, in consistency with the bitter flavor feeling of different accessions. The total carotenoids varied greatly among different accessions with contents ranging from 2.29 to 8.66 μg·g-1, and for the total phenolics, from 13.83 to 20.07 mg·g-1. The peeling ability of the fruit varied widely with Huyou elite plant a, with Hongrou Huyou, Guo 2 and Guo 11 being the easiest. A comprehensive evaluation model of fruit quality was constructed by AHP analysis and the weights of each quality indicator were calculated by 1 to 9 scale method. In this evaluation model, sweetness and sourness were given the highest weight, 17.65%, and fruit shape index was given the lowest, 2.29%. Based on the average value, maximum value and minimum value of each indicator, the variation of each measured indicator was determined, and meanwhile, fruit quality indicators such as peel appearance, flesh texture and peeling ability were scored via systematic description and sensory evaluation. Finally, based on the score and the weight of each indicator, the accessions were evaluated for overall fruit quality. The results showed that 01-7b, 01-7a, Huyou elite plant b, Huyou elite plant a and Guo 5 were the top five accessions with excellent overall fruit quality. Moreover, Cuihong is an ideal resource for breeding low bitter Huyou while Guo 10 is probably favorable to be used as a raw resource for production of traditional Chinese medicine Quzhou Aurantii Fructus (Qu Zhi Qiao). These can satisfy the demand for diversity in consumption. 【Conclusion】 The fruit quality of the analyzed 18 different accessions varied greatly. On the basis of the external and internal qualities, an AHP method was used to comprehensively evaluate the fruit quality, and as a result, five accessions with excellent overall quality were selected. The method established in this study improves the accuracy and effectiveness for the comprehensive evaluation of the fruit quality of Huyou, and provides a reference for further selection and breeding of elite Huyou accessions.
Key words: Huyou (Citrus changshanensis); Fruit quality; Analytic hierarchy process (AHP); Comprehensive evaluation
胡柚(Citrus changshanensis K. S. Chen et C. X. Fu)起源于浙江省常山縣,為柑橘屬的一個新種,系自然雜交而成,至今已有一百余年的栽培歷史,因其具有耐瘠、耐寒、耐貯等優(yōu)良性狀,被譽為“中華第一雜柑”[1-3]。胡柚果色金黃,口感酸甜清爽,風(fēng)味獨特,富含類黃酮等活性物質(zhì),因而深受廣大消費者青睞,成為浙江省重點開發(fā)的名特優(yōu)農(nóng)產(chǎn)品。由于胡柚源于天然雜交種的實生后代群體,且在產(chǎn)業(yè)發(fā)展早期主要采用實生繁殖,胡柚個體間差異較大[4],品質(zhì)參差不齊。因此優(yōu)質(zhì)成為胡柚新品種選育的重要目標(biāo)之一。
胡柚果實品質(zhì)指標(biāo)包括果實剝皮難易程度、單果質(zhì)量、果皮厚度、果形指數(shù)、種子數(shù)量、可溶性固形物含量、可滴定酸含量、維生素C含量等。其中苦味作為重要品質(zhì)性狀備受關(guān)注。目前已知柑橘苦味物質(zhì)分為兩大類,一類是檸檬苦素類似物,另一類是黃烷酮化合物[5]。黃烷酮是柑橘中含量最豐富的類黃酮,通常以糖苷形式存在,可分為黃烷酮新橘皮糖苷(FNs)和黃烷酮蕓香糖苷(FRs)。FNs具有苦味,主要包括柚皮苷、新橙皮苷、新圣草次苷等,而FRs則不具有苦味,主要包括蕓香柚皮苷、橙皮苷、圣草次苷等[6-9]。不同柑橘種質(zhì)中苦味物質(zhì)的成分和含量具有特異性[7-8]。胡柚果肉中檸檬苦素類物質(zhì)含量低,其苦味主要來源于FNs[10-11]。
由于品質(zhì)涉及多項指標(biāo),如何客觀、準(zhǔn)確、科學(xué)地評價胡柚果實品質(zhì)是急需解決的問題。果實品質(zhì)評價常用方法有方差分析[12-13]、感官評價[14-15]等,但這些方法較為簡單粗略,存在受主觀因素影響較大或評價的品質(zhì)指標(biāo)眾多致使主次難分等問題,從而使評價結(jié)果不穩(wěn)定,不同批次間的評價結(jié)果可比性差。層次分析法(AHP)是一種多準(zhǔn)則決策方法,在醫(yī)學(xué)[16]、農(nóng)業(yè)[17]和環(huán)境[18]等多個學(xué)科領(lǐng)域均有廣泛應(yīng)用。果實品質(zhì)評價中涉及多項指標(biāo),應(yīng)用AHP能夠解決主次難分的問題,提高評價結(jié)果的客觀性和穩(wěn)定性。其主要思路是將所需解決的問題分解成一個層次結(jié)構(gòu),最上層為目標(biāo)層(擬解決的問題),中間一層為準(zhǔn)則層(解決該問題需要考慮的指標(biāo)),最下一層為決策層(綜合比較形成的結(jié)論),在準(zhǔn)則層中,對所涉及的指標(biāo)進(jìn)行兩兩比較,建立判斷矩陣并計算權(quán)重,從而實現(xiàn)多指標(biāo)的客觀比較和綜合評價,有助于快速了解不同果樹種質(zhì)之間的果實品質(zhì)差異,使評價結(jié)果具有可比性和可解釋性[19]。運用這一方法,劉璇等[20]基于7個指標(biāo)對20個蘋果脆片進(jìn)行品質(zhì)綜合排名,發(fā)現(xiàn)紅玉蘋果脆片品質(zhì)最好;沈甜等[21]對10個無核鮮食葡萄的14個基本指標(biāo)進(jìn)行觀察測定,通過層次分析法得到各品質(zhì)指標(biāo)權(quán)重并對10個無核鮮食葡萄的品質(zhì)進(jìn)行綜合評價。黃正金等[22]對5個黑莓雜交品系及其雜交親本品種的生物學(xué)性狀和經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)性狀進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計和調(diào)查,采用層次分析法對黑莓雜交品系進(jìn)行綜合評價和等級排名。
目前,尚未有對不同胡柚種質(zhì)間的果實品質(zhì)差異開展系統(tǒng)分析和評價的報道,不利于優(yōu)良品種(品系)在生產(chǎn)上的應(yīng)用。筆者在本研究中以生產(chǎn)上具有代表性的18份胡柚為試驗材料,對單果質(zhì)量、果皮厚度、果形指數(shù)、可溶性固形物含量、可滴定酸含量、固酸比和維生素C含量等指標(biāo)進(jìn)行分析,對果實皮色、肉質(zhì)和剝皮難易等指標(biāo)進(jìn)行感官評價,比較不同胡柚種質(zhì)的果實品質(zhì)差異。同時,利用層次分析法建立各指標(biāo)權(quán)重。根據(jù)各指標(biāo)得分和權(quán)重,對胡柚果實品質(zhì)進(jìn)行綜合評價,旨在明晰胡柚種質(zhì)間品質(zhì)差異情況,篩選出綜合品質(zhì)優(yōu)良的種質(zhì),為品種選育提供參考依據(jù)。
1 材料和方法
1.1 供試材料
以浙西柑橘產(chǎn)區(qū)的18份胡柚種質(zhì)為試材,采自浙江大學(xué)(常山)現(xiàn)代發(fā)展研究中心試驗示范基地和骨干種植戶果場(表1)。果實于商業(yè)成熟期采收,當(dāng)日運至實驗室,選擇無機(jī)械損傷、無病蟲害、成熟度一致的完好果實進(jìn)行分析。每份種質(zhì)選取典型單株,在樹冠東南西北中五個方位均勻采集共15個果實,分為3個生物學(xué)重復(fù),每個重復(fù)包含5個果實。先就果實外觀等指標(biāo)進(jìn)行測定,然后將果肉用液氮冰凍后置于-40 ℃保存,用于后續(xù)果實品質(zhì)相關(guān)物質(zhì)的化學(xué)分析。
1.2 試驗方法
1.2.1 單果質(zhì)量、果皮厚度和種子數(shù)量測定 用電子天平稱量胡柚果實質(zhì)量,計算平均單果質(zhì)量。采用數(shù)顯游標(biāo)卡尺測定果皮厚度(果實赤道部)。采用人工計數(shù)法統(tǒng)計種子數(shù)量。
1.2.2 果實縱橫徑、果形指數(shù)和可食率測定 用數(shù)顯游標(biāo)卡尺測定果實縱橫徑,計算果形指數(shù);果形指數(shù)=果實縱徑/果實橫徑。采用電子天平測定果皮和種子質(zhì)量,計算可食率;可食率/%=(單果質(zhì)量-果皮質(zhì)量-種子質(zhì)量)/單果質(zhì)量。
1.2.3 可溶性固形物、可滴定酸含量測定和固酸比計算 可溶性固形物含量(SSC)使用便攜式手持糖度計PR-101α(ATAGO,日本)測定。可滴定酸含量(TAC)使用電位滴定儀(T890,Hanon,中國)用酸堿滴定法測定。固酸比=SSC/TAC。
1.2.4 維生素C含量測定 用2,6-二氯酚靛酚滴定法[23]測定果實鮮樣維生素C含量。
1.2.5 類胡蘿卜素總量測定 用分光光度法[24]測定果實鮮樣類胡蘿卜素總量。
1.2.6 總酚含量測定 用福林酚法[25]測定果實干樣總酚含量,以沒食子酸當(dāng)量表示為mg·g-1。
1.2.7 黃烷酮組分及含量測定 黃烷酮提取和測定參考Liu等[26]的方法。稱取0.1 g凍干樣品粉末,用1 mL 80%乙醇超聲輔助提取30 min,經(jīng)12 000 r·min-1離心10 min后收集上清液,重復(fù)超聲提取和離心步驟二次,合并上清液得到樣品液。采用Agilent(安捷倫,美國)HPLC系統(tǒng),以Waters ODS C18柱(SunFire 5 μm,4.6 mm×250.0 mm)為固定相;以色譜純乙腈(溶液A)和含有0.1%甲酸的超純水(溶液B)為流動相,線性梯度洗脫。檢測波長:280 nm;柱溫:25 ℃;進(jìn)樣量:10 μL;流速:1 mL·min-1。標(biāo)準(zhǔn)品圣草次苷、新圣草次苷、蕓香柚皮苷、柚皮苷、橙皮苷、新橙皮苷購于美國Sigma-Aldrich公司。
1.2.8 果實感官評價 由20位經(jīng)培訓(xùn)的人員組成評價小組,對供試樣品的肉質(zhì)、果實皮色和剝皮難易程度進(jìn)行打分評價,采用100分制。肉質(zhì)評價:根據(jù)果肉細(xì)膩多汁和質(zhì)地口感程度按六級賦分,級差20分;評價每個樣品后,均以清水漱口后再進(jìn)行下一個樣品的評定。果實皮色評價:根據(jù)果實整齊度、皮色均勻度、果面光潔度以及斑點或缺陷情況按六級賦分,級差20分。剝皮難易程度:根據(jù)剝皮難易程度按六級(易、較易、中等、較難、難、極難)賦分,級差20分。
1.3 數(shù)據(jù)處理
1.3.1 數(shù)據(jù)記錄和統(tǒng)計 利用Excel軟件對數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行記錄和統(tǒng)計,利用SPSS 23統(tǒng)計軟件對數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計分析。
1.3.2 指標(biāo)權(quán)重計算 由12位經(jīng)培訓(xùn)的人員采用1~9比例標(biāo)度法(即不同指標(biāo)的重要程度用1~9之間的整數(shù)表示)就各品質(zhì)指標(biāo)給出重要度值,并計算平均值,基于該平均值使用層次分析法軟件yaahp 10.3建立判斷矩陣,通過一致性檢驗后得出胡柚果實品質(zhì)指標(biāo)權(quán)重。
1.3.3 理化分析指標(biāo)得分計算 理化指標(biāo)分析結(jié)果按表2所述方案計算得分,使數(shù)據(jù)均一化。根據(jù)理化指標(biāo)類別(趨大指標(biāo)、趨小指標(biāo)和趨中指標(biāo))采用不同的計算公式。趨大指標(biāo)是指數(shù)值越大越好的指標(biāo),包括可食率、可溶性固形物含量、固酸比、維生素C含量、類胡蘿卜素總量、黃烷酮總量和總酚含量;趨小指標(biāo)是指數(shù)值越小越好的指標(biāo),包括種子數(shù)量和可滴定酸含量;趨中指標(biāo)是指適中數(shù)值(采取平均值作為適中值)為最佳的指標(biāo),包括果實質(zhì)量、果形指數(shù)、黃烷酮新橘皮糖苷含量。
2 結(jié)果與分析
2.1 胡柚果實品質(zhì)指標(biāo)權(quán)重的計算
由12位人員對胡柚果實品質(zhì)指標(biāo)給出重要度值,然后計算重要度值的平均值,基于該重要度平均值構(gòu)建判斷矩陣O-C。判斷矩陣中甜酸風(fēng)味包括可溶性固形物、可滴定酸含量和固酸比;苦味為黃烷酮新橘皮糖苷含量;營養(yǎng)包括類胡蘿卜素總量、黃烷酮總量和總酚含量。矩陣中值為1時代表兩品質(zhì)指標(biāo)同樣重要,值大于1時表明表格中位于橫列的品質(zhì)指標(biāo)比位于豎列的品質(zhì)指標(biāo)更重要,同理,值小于1則說明豎列品質(zhì)指標(biāo)更重要。對矩陣一致性進(jìn)行檢驗,計算結(jié)果表明,判斷矩陣一致性比率小于0.1,通過一致性檢驗(表3),說明所劃分權(quán)重有效。由表3最后一行可知,胡柚果實各品質(zhì)指標(biāo)中,甜酸風(fēng)味最為重要,權(quán)重值最高,達(dá)17.65%,果形指數(shù)最不重要,權(quán)重值最小,為2.29%。
2.2 果實外觀品質(zhì)分析
由表4可知,18份胡柚種質(zhì)果實外觀品質(zhì)指標(biāo)存在不同程度差異。單果質(zhì)量分布在184.32~423.20 g之間,其中紅肉胡柚的單果質(zhì)量最大,果4的單果質(zhì)量最小。果形指數(shù)差異不大,變異系數(shù)僅為3.06%;所有胡柚種質(zhì)的縱徑均小于橫徑,果形指數(shù)均小于1,平均為0.89,果形為圓形。果皮厚度和可食率分別為2.15~9.68 mm和50.33%~83.67%,其中脆紅的果皮最薄,可食率最高。果16的果皮最厚,可食率最低。不同胡柚種質(zhì)間種子數(shù)量差異大,脆紅的種子數(shù)量最少,平均每果種子數(shù)為0.22,而果16種子數(shù)量最多,達(dá)22.67。
2.3 果實內(nèi)在品質(zhì)分析
由表5可知,不同胡柚種質(zhì)果實內(nèi)在品質(zhì)差異也較大??扇苄怨绦挝锖吭?.83%~15.40%之間,果4的可溶性固形物含量顯著高于其他胡柚??傻味ㄋ岷糠秶鸀?.90%~1.57%,果8的可滴定酸含量最高,紅肉胡柚的可滴定酸含量最低。不同胡柚種質(zhì)間的固酸比差異較大,果18固酸比值最高(達(dá)12.73),果7的固酸比值最低(為7.91)。
維生素C含量在35.88~72.95 mg·100 g-1之間,果16的維生素C含量顯著高于其他胡柚,果2的維生素C含量最低。不同胡柚種質(zhì)間果肉類胡蘿卜素總量差異高達(dá)3.78倍;紅肉胡柚果肉橙紅,類胡蘿卜素總量達(dá)8.66 μg·g-1,顯著高于其他胡柚??偡雍课挥?3.83~20.07 mg·g-1之間,其中脆紅的總酚含量最高。黃烷酮總量范圍為3.71~9.65 mg·g-1,其中脆紅的黃烷酮總量最高。不同胡柚種質(zhì)間FNs(具苦味)和FRs(不具苦味)的變異系數(shù)均較大,分別為43.18%和52.48%;果10的FNs含量最高(5.39 mg·g-1),與品嘗感覺的苦味最重一致;脆紅的FRs含量最高,但果實中未檢測出FNs,與脆紅果肉品嘗不出苦味相一致。
2.4 果實感官評定分析
就果實剝皮難易、皮色、肉質(zhì)這三項指標(biāo)進(jìn)行了感官評價,結(jié)果如表6所示。不同胡柚種質(zhì)間果實剝皮難易程度差別大,其中胡柚優(yōu)株a、紅肉胡柚、果2和果11剝皮容易,果8極難剝皮。果實皮色得分差別也較大,01-7a、脆紅和果7果實整齊,著色均勻,表面光潔,得分高。果實肉質(zhì)得分差別不大,紅肉胡柚肉質(zhì)得分最高,為81.47。
2.5 果實品質(zhì)綜合評價
胡柚理化指標(biāo)得分如表6所示。其中甜酸風(fēng)味得分為可溶性固形物含量、可滴定酸含量和固酸比三者得分的平均值;苦味得分為黃烷酮新橘皮糖苷含量得分值;營養(yǎng)指標(biāo)得分為類胡蘿卜素總量、黃烷酮總量和總酚含量得分的平均值。按表2所示的理化指標(biāo)得分計算原則,各理化指標(biāo)最高可得100分,最低可得0分。對于趨中指標(biāo),可能存在兩份種質(zhì)得分為0,如紅肉胡柚和果10因果個過大和過小在單果質(zhì)量這個指標(biāo)上得分均為0。分析表明,不同胡柚種質(zhì)間果實品質(zhì)差異大,在不同指標(biāo)上表現(xiàn)出優(yōu)異性。
將18份胡柚種質(zhì)各品質(zhì)指標(biāo)的得分乘以對應(yīng)權(quán)重值(見表3最后一行)再相加得出胡柚果實品質(zhì)綜合評價的總得分,計算結(jié)果見表6。01-7b和01-7a總得分居前二,其多項單項品質(zhì)指標(biāo)得分也較高,具有果實大小適中、種子數(shù)量少和皮色美觀等特點,綜合性狀優(yōu),其中01-7b在甜酸風(fēng)味和苦味得分上更勝一籌。胡柚優(yōu)株b和果5雖果個偏大導(dǎo)致單果質(zhì)量得分較低,但具有苦味適中、種子數(shù)量少的優(yōu)點,其綜合得分分別列第3和第5。除果實甜酸風(fēng)味得分和維生素C含量得分外,胡柚優(yōu)株a多項指標(biāo)得分均靠前,具有果形優(yōu)美、皮色美觀和易剝皮的特點,其綜合得分列第4。脆紅綜合得分列第6,其可食率、種子數(shù)量和皮色等單項得分高。
3 討 論
數(shù)理統(tǒng)計方法通過數(shù)學(xué)原理結(jié)合測定理化指標(biāo)對果實品質(zhì)進(jìn)行評價,可減少人為主觀因素的影響,使評價更接近客觀真實值,數(shù)理統(tǒng)計的方法在百香果[27]、獼猴桃[28]、香梨[29]和橄欖[30]等果實品質(zhì)評價上均有應(yīng)用。目前,用于果實品質(zhì)綜合評價的數(shù)理統(tǒng)計方法有多種,如劉磊等[28]運用主成分分析法提取獼猴桃果實品質(zhì)的3個主成分,并根據(jù)主成分分析結(jié)果計算獼猴桃各品種(單株)綜合得分。位杰等[29]應(yīng)用“合理-滿意度”和多維價值理論的合并規(guī)則對不同產(chǎn)地庫爾勒香梨果實品質(zhì)進(jìn)行綜合比較分析。謝倩等[30]結(jié)合模糊數(shù)學(xué)感官評價方法、多頻脈沖電子舌技術(shù)及相關(guān)品質(zhì)理化指標(biāo)測定,構(gòu)建橄欖鮮食品質(zhì)預(yù)測模型。對本研究中的18份胡柚種質(zhì)果實品質(zhì)進(jìn)行綜合評價時,需考慮胡柚自身特點,用以上方法都存在一定誤區(qū),不能全面評估胡柚果實品質(zhì),如主成分分析法會導(dǎo)致相關(guān)信息指標(biāo)的丟失,不能保證評價結(jié)果的一致性[31]。此外,在對果實品質(zhì)進(jìn)行綜合評價時,品質(zhì)指標(biāo)賦權(quán)尤為關(guān)鍵。層次分析法是一種指標(biāo)全覆蓋且易操作的果實品質(zhì)評價方法,它在確定品質(zhì)指標(biāo)權(quán)重時能將人們主觀思維邏輯數(shù)字化、嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)化,從而獲得客觀、科學(xué)的結(jié)果。目前,該方法已被應(yīng)用于葡萄[21]、黑莓[22]、油桃[32]和金花梨[33]等果實品質(zhì)評價及影響果實品質(zhì)和產(chǎn)量的因素分析。因此,筆者在本研究中采用層次分析法,通過1~9比例標(biāo)度法建立判斷矩陣來確定不同指標(biāo)在果實品質(zhì)綜合評價中的權(quán)重,并對其進(jìn)行一致性檢驗。同時,對于理化分析指標(biāo),以各指標(biāo)的平均值為基準(zhǔn)、最大值和最小值為界限,確定各指標(biāo)得分,既避免指標(biāo)信息丟失,也考慮數(shù)據(jù)本身所反映的信息。筆者在本研究中的評價體系有效解決了果實品質(zhì)評價中涉及多項指標(biāo)時難以確定主次關(guān)系的問題,使果實品質(zhì)評價更加科學(xué)和合理。
胡柚種質(zhì)是胡柚品種改良的重要基礎(chǔ),不同資源之間果實品質(zhì)性狀的差異為育種材料的選擇和新產(chǎn)品的開發(fā)提供了重要參考依據(jù)。筆者在本研究中從外觀品質(zhì)、內(nèi)部風(fēng)味品質(zhì),以及營養(yǎng)品質(zhì)等方面統(tǒng)計胡柚多個品質(zhì)指標(biāo),結(jié)果表明,18份胡柚種質(zhì)的果實甜酸風(fēng)味、果實大小及種子數(shù)量等多個指標(biāo)存在不同程度差異。通過建立評價體系篩選得出01-7b、01-7a、胡柚優(yōu)株b、胡柚優(yōu)株a和果5綜合品質(zhì)優(yōu)異,具有果實大小適中,皮色美觀和甜酸風(fēng)味適中等優(yōu)點,可作為胡柚優(yōu)良品種在產(chǎn)業(yè)中直接應(yīng)用或作為進(jìn)一步選育的材料。通過對18份胡柚種質(zhì)的外觀品質(zhì)進(jìn)行分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)外觀品質(zhì)指標(biāo)變異系數(shù)介于3.07%~143.57%之間,分別以果形指數(shù)和種子數(shù)為最小和最大。此外,發(fā)現(xiàn)脆紅具有可食率高、種子數(shù)量少的優(yōu)點。對內(nèi)在品質(zhì)進(jìn)行分析后發(fā)現(xiàn),果8和果16的可滴定酸含量高,固酸比低,不適宜用作鮮食品種開發(fā),但可用于制汁等加工專用品種的育種材料。果17、果18和脆紅的類黃酮總量和總酚含量均高于其他胡柚種質(zhì),可作為提高功能性營養(yǎng)成分含量的優(yōu)良育種材料,滿足消費多樣性的需求。此外,本研究中的大部分胡柚種質(zhì)均含有具有苦味的黃烷酮新橘皮糖苷,但脆紅中只含有不具苦味的黃烷酮蕓香糖苷,可將脆紅作為培育不含苦味的胡柚的優(yōu)良育種材料;果10雖苦味最重不利于鮮食,但因黃烷酮新橘皮糖苷含量最高,可測定小青果黃烷酮新橘皮糖苷含量,評估其是否能更理想地用作“衢枳殼”中藥材原料。
筆者在本研究中對品種的評價僅關(guān)注品質(zhì),實際生產(chǎn)還需要考慮豐產(chǎn)性、抗逆性和貯藏性等其他農(nóng)藝性狀。另外,筆者在本研究中采集的胡柚種質(zhì)資源雖均來自管理水平相對較高的示范園和骨干種植戶果園,管理措施基本一致,但18份胡柚種質(zhì)的自然分布位置和自身樹齡有所不同,故其品質(zhì)性狀差異并不宜完全歸因于遺傳特性。目前已針對生產(chǎn)上自然散布的胡柚資源逐步建立資源圃,后續(xù)將作進(jìn)一步系統(tǒng)評價,以期為準(zhǔn)確篩選優(yōu)良胡柚品種資源奠定基礎(chǔ)。
4 結(jié) 論
筆者在本研究中采用層次分析法對胡柚果實11項品質(zhì)指標(biāo)的權(quán)重進(jìn)行賦值,發(fā)現(xiàn)甜酸風(fēng)味權(quán)重占比最高,果形指數(shù)占比最低。同時,對18份胡柚果實的各項理化指標(biāo)和感官性狀進(jìn)行評價分析,根據(jù)理化指標(biāo)計分規(guī)則對各項指標(biāo)進(jìn)行賦分,發(fā)現(xiàn)不同胡柚種質(zhì)資源間果實品質(zhì)差異大,在不同指標(biāo)上表現(xiàn)出優(yōu)異性。根據(jù)各指標(biāo)權(quán)重和得分計算得出18份胡柚種質(zhì)果實品質(zhì)綜合得分,發(fā)現(xiàn)01-7b、01-7a、胡柚優(yōu)株b、胡柚優(yōu)株a和果5綜合得分最高,可開發(fā)為優(yōu)良鮮食品種;果8和果16因高酸而適宜制汁等加工用途;脆紅可作為培育不含苦味的胡柚的優(yōu)良育種材料;果10可能更適宜用作“衢枳殼”中藥材原料。本研究可為胡柚新品種選育及綜合利用提供理論依據(jù),也可為其他果實的品質(zhì)綜合評價提供參考。
參考文獻(xiàn) References:
[1] 俞日梁,陳新建,葉杏元,楊興良,貝增明,鄭國民. 常山胡柚品種起源及栽培研究進(jìn)展[J]. 浙江林業(yè)科技,2006,26(3):83-86.
YU Riliang,CHEN Xinjian,YE Xingyuan,YANG Xingliang,BEI Zengming,ZHENG Guomin. Study on origin and cultivation of Citrus Changshan-huyou[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Forestry Science and Technology,2006,26(3):83-86.
[2] ZHANG J K,SUN C D,YAN Y Y,CHEN Q J,LUO F L,ZHU X Y,LI X,CHEN K S. Purification of naringin and neohesperidin from Huyou (Citrus changshanensis) fruit and their effects on glucose consumption in human HepG2 cells[J]. Food Chemistry,2012,135(3):1471-1478.
[3] XU C J,BAO L,ZHANG B,BEI Z M,YE X Y,ZHANG S L,CHEN K S. Parentage analysis of Huyou (Citrus changshanensis) based on internal transcribed spacer sequences[J]. Plant Breeding,2006,125(5):519-522.
[4] 龔潔強(qiáng),趙建明,繆天綱,葉杏元. 胡柚在實生繁殖下的遺傳變異調(diào)查[J]. 浙江柑桔,1989,6(1):31-32.
GONG Jieqiang,ZHAO Jianming,MIAO Tiangang,YE Xingyuan. Investigation on genetic variation of huyou under reproduction[J]. Zhejiang Citrus,1989,6(1):31-32.
[5] 陳嘉景. 柑橘中類黃酮新橘皮糖苷代謝關(guān)鍵基因分離和功能分析[D]. 武漢:華中農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué),2017.
CHEN Jiajing. Isolation and functional analysis of genes governing flavonoid neohesperidoside metabolism in citrus[D]. Wuhan:Huazhong Agricultural University,2017.
[6] FRYDMAN A,WEISSHAUS O,BAR-PELED M,HUHMAN D V,SUMNER L W,MARIN F R,LEWINSOHN E,F(xiàn)LUHR R,GRESSEL J,EYAL Y. Citrus fruit bitter flavors:Isolation and functional characterization of the gene Cm1,2RhaT encoding a 1,2 rhamnosyltransferase,a key enzyme in the biosynthesis of the bitter flavonoids of citrus[J]. The Plant Journal,2004,40(1):88-100.
[7] 陳嘉景,彭昭欣,石梅艷,徐娟. 柑橘中類黃酮的組成與代謝研究進(jìn)展[J]. 園藝學(xué)報,2016,43(2):384-400.
CHEN Jiajing,PENG Zhaoxin,SHI Meiyan,XU Juan. Advances in on flavonoid composition and metabolism in citrus[J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica,2016,43(2):384-400.
[8] CHEN J J,LI G,ZHANG H P,YUAN Z Y,LI W Y,PENG Z X,SHI M Y,DING W Y,ZHANG H X,CHENG Y J,YAO J L,XU J. Primary bitter taste of Citrus is linked to a functional allele of the 1,2-rhamnosyltransferase gene originating from Citrus grandis[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,2021,69(34):9869-9882.
[9] LI W Y,LI G,YUAN Z Y,LI M Y,DENG X X,TAN M L,MA Y H,CHEN J J,XU J. Illustration of the variation in the content of flavanone rutinosides in various citrus germplasms from genetic and enzymatic perspectives[J]. Horticulture Research,2022,9:uhab017.
[10] SUN C D,CHEN K S,CHEN Y,CHEN Q J. Contents and antioxidant capacity of limonin and nomilin in different tissues of citrus fruit of four cultivars during fruit growth and maturation[J]. Food Chemistry,2005,93(4):599-605.
[11] ABEYSINGHE D C,LI X,SUN C D,ZHANG W S,ZHOU C H,CHEN K S. Bioactive compounds and antioxidant capacities in different edible tissues of citrus fruit of four species[J]. Food Chemistry,2007,104(4):1338-1344.
[12] 吳婧,龔倩,丘賽,王華. 楊凌地區(qū)四個歐美鮮食葡萄品種綜合性狀比較[J]. 北方園藝,2012(18):48-50.
WU Jing,GONG Qian,QIU Sai,WANG Hua. Comapre of comprehensive characters of four table grapes varieties in Yangling area[J]. Northern Horticulture,2012(18):48-50.
[13] 龔倩,王華. 陜西關(guān)中地區(qū)鮮食葡萄引種觀察[J]. 北方園藝,2012(15):21-25.
GONG Qian,WANG Hua. Primary reports on introduction of table-grape in Guanzhong area of Shaanxi Province[J]. Northern Horticulture,2012(15):21-25.
[14] 張群,付復(fù)華,吳躍輝,朱玲風(fēng),單楊. 湖南雜柑品種外觀品質(zhì)與營養(yǎng)品質(zhì)及感官評價之間的相關(guān)性研究[J]. 食品工業(yè)科技,2014,35(23):100-106.
ZHANG Qun,F(xiàn)U Fuhua,WU Yuehui,ZHU Lingfeng,SHAN Yang. Study on the correlation among appearance quality,nutritional quality and sensory evaluation of hybrid citrus varieties in Hunan[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry,2014,35(23):100-106.
[15] 申素云,王周倩,張琦,楊潔,韓飛,鐘彩虹,王傳華,黃文俊. 36份獼猴桃種質(zhì)資源的果實品質(zhì)與感官評價分析[J]. 植物科學(xué)學(xué)報,2023,41(4):540-551.
SHEN Suyun,WANG Zhouqian,ZHANG Qi,YANG Jie,HAN Fei,ZHONG Caihong,WANG Chuanhua,HUANG Wenjun. Analysis of fruit quality and sensory evaluation of 36 kiwifruit (Actinidia) germplasm accessions[J]. Plant Science Journal,2023,41(4):540-551.
[16] CANCELA J,F(xiàn)ICO G,ARREDONDO WALDMEYER M T. Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to understand the most important factors to design and evaluate a telehealth system for Parkinsons disease[J]. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making,2015,15(Suppl. 3):S7.
[17] AKINCI H,?ZALP A Y,TURGUT B. Agricultural land use suitability analysis using GIS and AHP technique[J]. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,2013,97:71-82.
[18] XU S B,XU D S,LIU L L. Construction of regional informatization ecological environment based on the entropy weight modified AHP hierarchy model[J]. Sustainable Computing:Informatics and Systems,2019,22:26-31.
[19] 秦吉,張翼鵬. 現(xiàn)代統(tǒng)計信息分析技術(shù)在安全工程方面的應(yīng)用:層次分析法原理[J]. 工業(yè)安全與防塵,1999,25(5):44-48.
QIN Ji,ZHANG Yipeng. Application of cortemporary statistical information analysis method in safety engincering:The priciple of AHP[J]. Industrial Safety and Environmental Protection,1999,25(5):44-48.
[20] 劉璇,王沛,畢金峰,王軒,楊愛金,呂健. 基于層次分析法的晚熟品種蘋果脆片品質(zhì)評價[J]. 食品與機(jī)械,2012,28(5):46-50.
LIU Xuan,WANG Pei,BI Jinfeng,WANG Xuan,YANG Aijin,L? Jian. Quality evaluation of late maturity apple chips based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Food & Machinery,2012,28(5):46-50.
[21] 沈甜,牛銳敏,黃小晶,許澤華,陳衛(wèi)平. 基于層次-關(guān)聯(lián)度和主成分分析的無核鮮食葡萄品質(zhì)評價[J]. 食品工業(yè)科技,2021,42(3):53-60.
SHEN Tian,NIU Ruimin,HUANG Xiaojing,XU Zehua,CHEN Weiping. Quality assessment of seedless table grapes based on hierarchy-relation and principal component analysis[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry,2021,42(3):53-60.
[22] 黃正金,衛(wèi)云麗,張春紅,閭連飛,李維林,吳文龍. 基于層次分析法的5個黑莓雜交品系綜合評價[J]. 南京林業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(自然科學(xué)版),2019,43(1):135-140.
HUANG Zhengjin,WEI Yunli,ZHANG Chunhong,L? Lianfei,LI Weilin,WU Wenlong. Comprehensive evaluation of five blackberry hybrid strains by analytic hierarchy process (AHP)[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition),2019,43(1):135-140.
[23] 王傳芬,韓玉,王英博,王夢潔,王小君,馬文皎. 果蔬中維生素C含量的測定及比較[J]. 農(nóng)業(yè)與技術(shù),2020,40(18):44-46.
WANG Chuanfen,HAN Yu,WANG Yingbo,WANG Mengjie,WANG Xiaojun,MA Wenjiao. Determination and comparison of vitamin C content in fruits and vegetables[J]. Agriculture and Technology,2020,40(18):44-46.
[24] FADEEL A A. Location and properties of chloroplasts and pigment determination in roots[J]. Physiologia Plantarum,1962,15(1):130-146.
[25] 李巨秀,王柏玉. 福林-酚比色法測定桑椹中總多酚[J]. 食品科學(xué),2009,30(18):292-295.
LI Juxiu,WANG Baiyu. Folin-ciocalteu colorimetric determination of total polyphenols in mulberry fruits[J]. Food Science,2009,30(18):292-295.
[26] LIU X J,ZHAO C N,GONG Q,WANG Y,CAO J P,LI X,GRIERSON D,SUN C D. Characterization of a caffeoyl-CoA O-methyltransferase-like enzyme involved in biosynthesis of polymethoxylated flavones in Citrus reticulata[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany,2020,71(10):3066-3079.
[27] 馬文霞,倪玉潔,謝倩,何淑敏,葉清華,葉俊,陳清西. 鮮食百香果果實品質(zhì)綜合評價模型的建立及應(yīng)用[J]. 食品科學(xué),2020,41(13):53-60.
MA Wenxia,NI Yujie,XIE Qian,HE Shumin,YE Qinghua,YE Jun,CHEN Qingxi. Establishment and application of comprehensive evaluation model for quality of fresh passion fruit[J]. Food Science,2020,41(13):53-60.
[28] 劉磊,李爭艷,雷華,高本旺,趙佳,李薇. 30個獼猴桃品種(單株)主要果實品質(zhì)特征的綜合評價[J]. 果樹學(xué)報,2021,38(4):530-537.
LIU Lei,LI Zhengyan,LEI Hua,GAO Benwang,ZHAO Jia,LI Wei. Comprehensive evaluation of main fruit quality characteristics with 30 kiwifruit cultivars (strains)[J]. Journal of Fruit Science,2021,38(4):530-537.
[29] 位杰,馬建江,陳久紅,王小兵,任曉燕. 不同產(chǎn)地庫爾勒香梨果實品質(zhì)差異及綜合評價[J]. 食品科學(xué),2017,38(19):87-91.
WEI Jie,MA Jianjiang,CHEN Jiuhong,WANG Xiaobing,REN Xiaoyan. Quality differences and comprehensive evaluation of Korla fragrant pear from different habitats[J]. Food Science,2017,38(19):87-91.
[30] 謝倩,李易易,張詩艷,束燕萍,王威,陳清西. 基于模糊數(shù)學(xué)感官評價、理化特性與電子舌的橄欖鮮食品質(zhì)分析[J]. 食品科學(xué),2023,44(3):69-78.
XIE Qian,LI Yiyi,ZHANG Shiyan,SHU Yanping,WANG Wei,CHEN Qingxi. Quality analysis of table Cauarium album L. based on fuzzy mathematics sensory evaluation,physicochemical properties and electronic tongue[J]. Food Science,2023,44(3):69-78.
[31] 葉明確,楊亞娟. 主成分綜合評價法的誤區(qū)識別及其改進(jìn)[J]. 數(shù)量經(jīng)濟(jì)技術(shù)經(jīng)濟(jì)研究,2016,33(10):142-153.
YE Mingque,YANG Yajuan. Erroneous zone identification and improvement of synthesis evaluation based on principal component analysis[J]. The Journal of Quantitative & Technical Economics,2016,33(10):142-153.
[32] 焦藝,劉璇,畢金峰,陳芹芹,吳昕燁,阮衛(wèi)紅. 基于灰色關(guān)聯(lián)度和層次分析法的油桃果汁品質(zhì)評價[J]. 中國食品學(xué)報,2014,14(12):154-163.
JIAO Yi,LIU Xuan,BI Jinfeng,CHEN Qinqin,WU Xinye,RUAN Weihong. Quality evaluation of nectarine juice based on grey interconnect degree analysis and analytic hierarchy process[J]. Journal of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology,2014,14(12):154-163.
[33] 劉遵春,包東娥,廖明安. 層次分析法在金花梨果實品質(zhì)評價上的應(yīng)用[J]. 西北農(nóng)林科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(自然科學(xué)版),2006,34(8):125-128.
LIU Zunchun,BAO Donge,LIAO Mingan. Application of analytic hierarchy process in evaluating Jinhua pear quality[J]. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Natural Science Edition),2006,34(8):125-128.
收稿日期:2024-02-02 接受日期:2024-04-02
基金項目:浙江省“三農(nóng)九方”科技協(xié)作計劃項目(2022SNJF083);浙江大學(xué)全國農(nóng)業(yè)科技現(xiàn)代化先行縣(常山)建設(shè)項目(588970-Y12202);衢州市科技計劃項目(2022K25)
作者簡介:張慧藝,女,在讀碩士研究生。Tel:0571-88982223,E-mail:22116193@zju.edu.cn。#為共同第一作者。
*通信作者 Author for correspondence. Tel:0571-88982289,E-mail:chjxu@zju.edu.cn