食品科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (7): 232-242.doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20251010-035

• 成分分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

牡蛎呈味成分特征与品质综合评价:产地和育肥时间的影响

洪燕纯,张方圆,王李平,梁明明,张飞,何伟慧,黄启红,刘梦丹,罗以杰,周漪波,邹苑,阮奇珺   

  1. (1.广东省科学院测试分析研究所(中国广州分析测试中心),广东省化学测量与应急检测技术重点实验室,广东省保健食品功效成分检测与风险物质快速筛查工程技术研究中心,广东 广州 510070;2.华南农业大学食品学院,广东 广州 510642;3.大襟岛蚝业科技(台山)有限公司,广东 台山 529000)
  • 出版日期:2026-04-15 发布日期:2026-05-08
  • 基金资助:
    广东省“百千万工程”农村科技特派员项目(KTP20240415); 江门市2025年科技支撑“百千万工程”项目(江科[2025]172号); 江门市科技特派员科研项目(2024760000550010302);广东省科学院“百人计划”专项(2020GDASYL-20200102007)

Characteristics of Taste Components and Comprehensive Quality Evaluation of Oysters: Influence of Geographical Origin and Fattening Duration

HONG Yanchun, ZHANG Fangyuan, WANG Liping, LIANG Mingming, ZHANG Fei, HE Weihui, HUANG Qihong, LIU Mengdan, LUO Yijie, ZHOU Yibo, ZOU Yuan, RUAN Qijun   

  1. (1. Guangdong Provincial Engineering Research Center for Efficacy Component Testing and Risk Substance Rapid Screening of Health Food, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Chemical Measurement and Emergency Test Technology, Institute of Analysis, Guangdong Academy of Sciences (China National Analytical Center, Guangzhou), Guangzhou 510070, China; 2. College of Food Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China; 3. Dajindao Oyster Technology (Taishan) Co. Ltd., Taishan 529000, China)
  • Online:2026-04-15 Published:2026-05-08

摘要: 为探究不同产地牡蛎以及不同育肥时间牡蛎的呈味品质,对来自广东沿海8 个不同产地二倍体和三倍体牡蛎和在台山川岛海域育肥0~5 个月三倍体牡蛎的呈味物质含量及呈味品质指标(呈味活性值、味精当量值)进行比较分析,采用偏最小二乘判别分析筛选出影响牡蛎滋味的标志性差异物质,并结合因子分析法对牡蛎的呈味品质进行综合评价,建立牡蛎呈味品质的综合评价方法。不同产地的牡蛎呈味差异明显,差异呈味物质主要是鲜甜味氨基酸(Glu、Ala、Gly、Thr、Arg)和琥珀酸。因子分析共提取出4 个公因子,累计方差解释率为91.643%,综合得分表明湛江ZJ、台山HLW、潮州RPT、台山SCD呈味品质排名靠前,三倍体牡蛎SCD、RPT在鲜甜氨基酸因子和有机酸因子表现较好,二倍体牡蛎ZJ、HLW在核苷酸协同因子具有优势。不同育肥时间的牡蛎呈味也有所不同,差异呈味物质主要是鲜甜味氨基酸(Gly、Glu、Ala、Pro)和肌苷酸。结合因子分析共提取出3 个公因子,累计方差解释率94.402%,各育肥时间牡蛎的呈味品质综合得分表明育肥3 个月牡蛎品质已达到最佳,继续育肥至4 个月和5 个月品质下降。研究结果可为牡蛎的养殖加工与资源开发利用提供参考依据。

关键词: 牡蛎;产地;不同生产阶段;呈味物质;综合评价

Abstract: To investigate the differences in taste quality among oysters from various geographical origins and with different fattening durations, this study analyzed and compared the contents of taste compounds and taste quality indicators (taste activity value (TAV); equivalent umami concentration (EUC)) in diploid and triploid oysters from eight coastal regions in Guangdong and triploid oysters fattened in the waters of the Chuan islands, Taishan for up to 5 months. Partial least squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) was employed to identify key differential compounds influencing oyster taste. On this basis, factor analysis was used for comprehensive evaluation of the taste quality of oysters in order to establish a comprehensive evaluation method. Significant differences in taste were observed among oysters from different geographical origins. The main differential compounds contributing to umami and sweet tastes were glutamate (Glu), alanine (Ala), glycine (Gly), threonine (Thr), arginine (Arg), and succinic acid (SA). Four common factors were extracted through factor analysis, cumulatively explaining 91.643% of the variance. Oysters from Zhanjiang (ZJ), Taishan (HLW and SCD), and Chaozhou (RPT) ranked high in terms of overall scores for taste quality. Triploid oysters SCD and RPT showed superior performance in the umami/sweet amino acid and organic acid factors, while diploid oysters ZJ and HLW exhibited advantages in the nucleotide synergistic factor. Differences in taste quality were also noted among oysters with different fattening durations, with the main differential taste compounds being Gly, Glu, Ala, and proline (Pro), along with inosinic acid (IMP). Three common factors were extracted, cumulatively explaining 94.402% of the variance. The overall score for taste quality of oysters reached its highest value after 3 months of fattening and then declined with increasing fattening time to 4 and 5 months. These findings provide a scientific reference for the breeding, processing, and resource utilization of oysters.

Key words: oyster; geographical origin; different production stages; taste components; comprehensive evaluation

中图分类号: