基于化学分析与电子舌研究干燥方式对点柄粘盖牛肝菌鲜味的影响

doi:10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201818030

食品科学 ›› 2018, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (18): 192-198.doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201818030

基于化学分析与电子舌研究干燥方式对点柄粘盖牛肝菌鲜味的影响

魏云云1，宫雪1，辛广1,*，张晓玉1，于晓丹2，杨镇3，孙炳新1，孟宪军1

（1.沈阳农业大学食品学院，辽宁?沈阳 110866；2.沈阳农业大学生物科学技术学院，辽宁?沈阳 110866；3.辽宁省农业科学院，辽宁?沈阳 110034）

出版日期:2018-09-25 发布日期:2018-09-18
基金资助:
“十三五”国家重点研发计划重点专项（2018YFD0400205）；辽宁省沈阳农业大学高端人才引进基金项目（SYAU20160003）；辽宁科技厅重点研发计划项目（2017201012）

Effect of Different Drying Methods on the Umami Taste Components of Suillus granulatus Based on Chemical Analysis and Electronic Tongue Sensory Evaluation

WEI Yunyun1, GONG Xue1, XIN Guang1,*, ZHANG Xiaoyu1, YU Xiaodan2, YANG Zhen3, SUN Bingxin1, MENG Xianjun1

(1. College of Food Science, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang 110866, China;2. College of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang 110866, China;3. Liaoning Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Shenyang 110034, China)

Online:2018-09-25 Published:2018-09-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为研究干燥方式对点柄粘盖牛肝菌鲜味影响，分析经自然干燥、热风干燥、真空干燥、真空冷冻干燥后样品中非挥发性成分，用等鲜量值及电子舌味觉值评价其鲜味。结果表明：热风干燥菌管鲜味氨基酸（18.49?mg/g）和等鲜量值（113.18?g/100?g）、菌盖鲜味氨基酸（15.11?mg/g）、菌柄等鲜量值（27.66?g/100?g）均最高（P＜0.05）；真空干燥菌管、菌柄可溶性糖（26.35%、23.25%），菌柄鲜味氨基酸（10.04?mg/g），菌管、菌盖、菌柄鲜味核苷酸（3.63、3.06、2.84?mg/g），菌盖等鲜量值（39.51?g/100?g）均最高（P＜0.05）；真空冷冻干燥菌盖可溶性糖（30.29%），甜味、无味氨基酸总量（16.90、16.23?mg/g），菌柄甜味氨基酸总量（16.74?mg/g），菌管苦味氨基酸总量（27.66?mg/g）均最高（P＜0.05）；自然干燥菌盖鲜味味觉值（11.46）、苦味氨基酸总量（21.13?mg/g），菌柄苦味、无味氨基酸总量（37.48、17.44?mg/g）均最高（P＜0.05）。故在点柄粘盖牛肝菌鲜味剂等深加工中，对菌管及菌柄热风干燥适宜，菌盖真空干燥适宜。?

关键词: 点柄粘盖牛肝菌, 干燥方式, 鲜味成分, 化学分析, 电子舌

Abstract: In order to study the effect of different drying methods on the umami taste components in different parts of the fruiting body of Suillus granulatus, the contents of non-volatile components in the mushroom samples after natural drying (ND), hot air drying (HAD), vacuum drying (VD) and vacuum freeze drying (FVD) were determined. The umami taste was evaluated by equivalent umami concentration and umami taste scores from an electronic tongue. The results suggested that among four drying methods, HAD provided the highest umami amino acid content (18.49 mg/g) and equivalent umami concentration (EUC) (113.18 g/100 g) in Suillus granulatus tube, the highest umami amino acid content in pileus (15.11 mg/g) and the highest EUC value in stipe (27.66 g/100 g) (P < 0.05). After vacuum drying, the soluble sugar content of Suillus granulatus tube (26.35%) and stipe (23.25%), the umami amino acid content (10.04 mg/g) of stipe, the umami nucleotide contents of tube, pileus and stipe (3.63, 3.06 and 2.84 mg/g) and the EUC value (39.51 g/100 g) of stipe were all significantly higher than those from the other three drying methods (P < 0.05). After vacuum freeze drying, the soluble sugar content (30.29%) and the contents of sweet amino acids (16.90 mg/g) and non-taste-active amino acids (16.23 mg/g) in Suillus granulatus pileus, the sweet amino acid content (16.74 mg/g) of stipe, and the bitter amino acid content (27.66 mg/g) of tube were all significantly higher than those from the other three drying methods (P < 0.05). After natural drying, the umami taste score (11.46) and bitter amino acid content (21.13 mg/g) of Suillus granulatus pileus and the contents of bitter amino acids (37.48 mg/g) and non-taste-active amino acids (17.44 mg/g) in stipe were all significantly higher than those from the other three drying methods (P < 0.05). Therefore, during the deep processing of S. granulatus into umami seasonings, hot air drying is suitable for S. granulatus tube and stipe, while vacuum drying is suitable for S. granulatus pileus.

Key words: Suillus granulatus, drying methods, umami taste components, chemical analysis, electronic tongue

中图分类号:

TS255.3

魏云云，宫雪，辛广，张晓玉，于晓丹，杨镇，孙炳新，孟宪军. 基于化学分析与电子舌研究干燥方式对点柄粘盖牛肝菌鲜味的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2018, 39(18): 192-198.

WEI Yunyun, GONG Xue, XIN Guang, ZHANG Xiaoyu, YU Xiaodan, YANG Zhen, SUN Bingxin, MENG Xianjun. Effect of Different Drying Methods on the Umami Taste Components of Suillus granulatus Based on Chemical Analysis and Electronic Tongue Sensory Evaluation[J]. FOOD SCIENCE, 2018, 39(18): 192-198.

[1]	曹荣，胡梦月，谭志军，王联珠，刘淇. 基于电子舌和气相色谱-离子迁移谱分析坛紫菜与条斑紫菜的风味特征[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(8): 186-191.
[2]	罗佳峰，孙震，何俊，孙杨赢，曹锦轩，党亚丽，卢连水，潘道东. 腌制及烤制时间对蜜汁烤鸭腿风味物质的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(18): 191-198.
[3]	周子丹，彭文君，倪家宝，毕延祥，方小明，刘素纯. 不同干燥方式对油菜蜂花粉色泽、酚酸含量和抗氧化活性的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(17): 76-83.
[4]	程娇，孙敬，梁肖娜，钱冠林，岳喜庆，郑艳. 蛋白酶处理对脱脂乳感官品质及游离氨基酸的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(16): 14-22.
[5]	王宁宁，冯美琴，孙健. 低钠复合盐对发酵香肠理化特性及风味的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(16): 1-7.
[6]	王鹏，王文平，续丹丹，张欣，高航，张建，孙勇，王凤寰. 红腐乳发酵过程中滋味化合物分析及电子舌鉴别[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(14): 170-179.
[7]	张婷，祁路路，潘道东，杨正苍，党亚丽. 基于SPME-GC-MS和电子舌制备羊肉复合调味料[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(10): 225-234.
[8]	张凡，李书田，王显瑞，沈群. 不同品种小米蒸煮食味品质评价及比较[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(9): 23-29.
[9]	马璐瑶，林海峰，王喆，殷军艺. 干燥方式对不同生长时期秋葵果实营养品质及挥发性风味物质的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(8): 186-193.
[10]	杨姗姗，丁瑞雪，史海粟，洛雪，杨梅，岳喜庆，武俊瑞. 热处理条件对巴氏杀菌乳风味品质的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(24): 131-136.
[11]	高娟，杜佳馨，吴限，杨倩，方东路，郑惠华，赵立艳，胡秋辉. 羊肚菌酶解液制备美拉德反应肉味调味基料[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(24): 242-250.
[12]	赵金梅，孙蕊，巩丽莉，龚钰雯，焦扬，李彩霞，颉引引，后爱林. 干燥方式对沙枣花品质和挥发性风味成分的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(22): 265-270.
[13]	黄嘉丽，黄宝华，左珊珊，郭成龙，周金林，卢宇靖. 多种甜味剂的电子舌味觉评价[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(20): 227-233.
[14]	张铭铭, 江用文, 滑金杰, 王近近, 袁海波, 杨艳芹. 干燥方式对绿茶栗香的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(15): 115-123.
[15]	杜晨晖, 解玉军, 申晨曦, 裴香萍, 闫艳. 干燥方式对酸枣果肉活性物质及抗氧化能力的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2020, 41(15): 140-147.

基于化学分析与电子舌研究干燥方式对点柄粘盖牛肝菌鲜味的影响

Effect of Different Drying Methods on the Umami Taste Components of Suillus granulatus Based on Chemical Analysis and Electronic Tongue Sensory Evaluation

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价