基于主成分分析与聚类分析的中、早熟桃品种制汁品质评价

doi:10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20190222-137

食品科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (17): 141-149.doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20190222-137

基于主成分分析与聚类分析的中、早熟桃品种制汁品质评价

张春岭，刘慧，刘杰超，吕真真，杨文博，王力荣，焦中高

（中国农业科学院郑州果树研究所，河南?郑州 450009）

出版日期:2019-09-15 发布日期:2019-09-23
基金资助:
中国农业科学院科技创新工程专项（CAAS-ASTIP-2019-ZFRI）；河南省重点研发与推广项目（182102110035）

Evaluation of Juice Quality of Mid-Early Ripening Peach Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis

ZHANG Chunling, LIU Hui, LIU Jiechao, Lü Zhenzhen, YANG Wenbo, WANG Lirong, JIAO Zhonggao

(Zhengzhou Fruit Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Zhengzhou 450009, China)

Online:2019-09-15 Published:2019-09-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为了探讨桃果实品种和成熟度对出汁率和桃汁品质的影响，选择适宜的制汁品种，对15?个中、早熟桃品种3?个成熟度（I、II、III）果实的出汁率以及桃汁的糖、酸组分及质量浓度、总酚质量浓度、褐变度等15?个指标进行测定，运用描述性分析、主成分分析和聚类分析对桃汁品质进行综合评价。结果表明：不同品种和成熟度桃果实制备的桃汁品质差异较大。主成分分析一共提取了5?个主成分，反映了原变量80.333%的信息。第一、第二主成分主要综合了糖、酸质量浓度的信息；第三、第四主成分主要综合了出汁率和色泽的信息；第五主成分主要综合了总酚质量浓度和褐变度的信息。在第一主成分和第二主成分得分图上，综合得分排名较高和较低的品种可以明显区分；通过第一主成分和第三主成分得分图可以将3?个成熟度很好地区分。聚类分析将45?个样品聚为6?类，与主成分分析结果基本一致。在所有样品中，综合得分排名第一的是‘中油桃12号’-III，排名最后的是‘中桃1号’-I。整体而言，黄肉品种桃汁的综合品质较好，中熟品种优于早熟品种，成熟度高的原料制得的桃汁品质较好。

关键词: 品种, 成熟度, 主成分分析, 聚类分析, 制汁品质

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of different varieties and maturities of peach on the yield and quality of peach juice and to select the optimal variety for juice processing. A total of 45 peach juices from 15 mid-early ripening cultivars harvested at 3 maturities (I, II and III) were measured for 15 quality indicators including sugar, acid, total phenols and browning degree and comprehensive evaluation of their quality was investigated by conventional descriptive statistics, principal component analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis (CA). The results showed that quality indicators varied significantly among different peach cultivars and maturities. A total of 5 principal components were extracted through PCA, which represented 80.333% of the total variability. The first and second principal components (PC1 and PC2) were related to total sugar and acid concentrations. The third and fourth principal components (PC3 and PC4) were related to juice yield and color. The fifth principal component was related to total phenolic concentration and browning degree. In the PC1 versus PC2 score plot, the cultivars with higher comprehensive scores were clearly separated from those with lower comprehensive scores. In the PC1 versus PC3 score plot, the three maturities were clearly discriminated. CA classified the 45 samples into 6 groups on the basis of the measured parameters and the results were consistent with the PCA. The white-fleshed nectarine cultivar ‘Zhongyoutao 12’ harvested at maturity III ranked first in terms of comprehensive score among all these samples, while the white-fleshed peach cultivar ‘Zhongtao 1’ harvested at maturity I ranked last. Overall, peach juice from the yellow-fleshed cultivars had better quality, and the mid-ripening varieties had better quality than the early-ripening varieties. The quality of peach juice was better at higher maturity levels.

Key words: cultivar, maturity, principal component analysis, cluster analysis, juice quality

中图分类号:

TS255.44

张春岭，刘慧，刘杰超，吕真真，杨文博，王力荣，焦中高. 基于主成分分析与聚类分析的中、早熟桃品种制汁品质评价[J]. 食品科学, 2019, 40(17): 141-149.

ZHANG Chunling, LIU Hui, LIU Jiechao, Lü Zhenzhen, YANG Wenbo, WANG Lirong, JIAO Zhonggao. Evaluation of Juice Quality of Mid-Early Ripening Peach Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis[J]. FOOD SCIENCE, 2019, 40(17): 141-149.

[1]	刘玉兰，舒垚，孙国昊，马宇翔，姜元荣，陈宁. 花生品种对花生酱风味及综合品质的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(9): 15-21.
[2]	梁慧珍，许兰杰，余永亮，谭政委，杨红旗，董薇，李磊，李春明，刘新梅，张收良. 红花籽油中脂肪酸组成评价与分析[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(6): 244-249.
[3]	蔡玮琦，左雯雯，陆杨，黄胜良，李存玉，郑云枫，彭国平. 红糖、白砂糖、赤砂糖与黑糖的HPLC指纹图谱与化学模式识别[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(6): 250-255.
[4]	马腾臻，宫鹏飞，史肖，牛见明，王春霞，翟文娟，张波，韩舜愈. 红枣发酵酒香气成分分析及感官品质评价[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(4): 247-253.
[5]	王鹤潼，潘泓杉，王朝，方东路，胡秋辉，马宁. 不同品种金针菇特征挥发性物质的差异分析[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(2): 193-199.
[6]	周慧敏，张顺亮，郝艳芳，陈松，潘晓倩，吴倩蓉，李素，朱宁，乔晓玲，赵冰. HS-SPME-GC-MS-O结合电子鼻对坨坨猪肉主体风味评价分析[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(2): 218-226.
[7]	王贺，赵玉红，杨凯. HS-SPME-GC-MS结合电子鼻对10 个品系红松籽油挥发性物质分析比较[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(18): 178-184.
[8]	符成刚，刘文玉，陈友志，李玉梅，李欢康，周靖，张孔雀，魏长庆. 加热温度对新疆马脂理化性质、脂肪酸及挥发性风味化合物的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(16): 54-60.
[9]	张丽媛，于英博，赵子莹，于润众，李志江，张东杰. 不同品种绿豆中代谢产物的分离鉴定及代谢机制分析[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(16): 169-175.
[10]	李欢康，杨佳玮，刘文玉，魏长庆. 不同工艺核桃油挥发性物质比对及关键香气成分表征[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(16): 185-192.
[11]	王丽艳，荆瑞勇，郭永霞，王鑫淼，赵行健，宋维民，杨佳霓，卫佳琪. 基于氨基酸含量的市售14 种食用蘑菇的综合评价[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(16): 203-208.
[12]	王华杰，滑金杰，余勤艳，江用文，王近近，杨艳芹，邓余良，袁海波. 基于IRAE-HS-SPME/GC-MS分析杀青方式对绿茶栗香形成的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(14): 209-217.
[13]	程国亭，常培培，王新宇，娄茜棋，Ahmed H. El-SAPPAH，张飞，梁燕. 果色和成熟度对樱桃番茄（Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme）果实挥发物分布的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(12): 173-183.
[14]	刘盼盼，郑鹏程，龚自明，叶飞，冯琳，高士伟，王雪萍，王胜鹏，滕靖，郑琳，桂安辉. 工夫红茶品质分析与综合评价[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(12): 195-205.
[15]	陈思睿，唐莹，董丹，蒋莹，何红英，王金玲. 红树莓果汁降酸发酵过程中活性成分的变化[J]. 食品科学, 2021, 42(10): 241-248.

基于主成分分析与聚类分析的中、早熟桃品种制汁品质评价

Evaluation of Juice Quality of Mid-Early Ripening Peach Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis

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