食品科学 ›› 2022, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (2): 294-302.doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20210130-348

• 成分分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

18 个品种授粉‘鸭梨’果实品质和香气成分分析与评价

刘婉君,张莹,张玉星,杜国强   

  1. (1.河北农业大学园艺学院,河北 保定 071001;2.河北农业大学河北省梨工程技术研究中心,河北 保定 071001)
  • 出版日期:2022-01-25 发布日期:2022-01-29
  • 基金资助:
    河北省林业厅果树科技支撑项目(2016-2017);国家现代农业(梨)产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-28-09)

Analysis and Evaluation of Fruit Quality and Aroma Components of ‘Yali’ Pear (Pyrus bretschneideri Rehd.) Pollinated with Eighteen Pollinizers

LIU Wanjun, ZHANG Ying, ZHANG Yuxing, DU Guoqiang   

  1. (1. College of Horticulture, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071001, China;2. Pear Engineering and Technology Research Center of Hebei Province, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071001, China)
  • Online:2022-01-25 Published:2022-01-29

摘要: 研究不同品种授粉对‘鸭梨’果实品质和香气成分的影响,探究‘鸭梨’果实品质性状的花粉直感效应,为授粉品种筛选和‘鸭梨’果实品质改善提供依据。以30 a生‘鸭梨’为试材,分别以18 个不同品种特性花粉为‘鸭梨’进行人工授粉,其中以‘雪花梨’授粉果实为对照,测定果实单果质量、果点直径、果点密度、石细胞团含量、可溶性固形物、糖酸组分含量及香气组分相对含量等品质指标,利用主成分分析对不同品种的授粉效果进行综合评价。结果表明,不同品种授粉对‘鸭梨’果实外观品质、内在品质及香气成分均有影响,变幅在12.57%~96.10%之间;与‘雪花梨’授粉果实相比,‘南水’、‘丰水’和‘库尔勒香梨’授粉‘鸭梨’果实可溶性固形物、可溶性糖含量和固酸比均显著提高,分别提高了0.55%~0.76%、7.53~16.54 mg/g和1.96~4.54,改善‘鸭梨’果实营养品质;‘南水’、‘库尔勒香梨’、‘Crispel’、‘绿宝石’和‘翠玉’授粉‘鸭梨’果实酯类物质相对含量显著增加了7.77~17.85 倍,其中乙酸己酯相对含量显著提高了2.76~14.86 倍,同时检测出6 种特有酯类香气物质,分别为乙酸乙酯、己酸乙酯、丁酸乙酯、(E)-乙酸-2-己烯-1-醇酯、乙酸苯乙酯和反-2-顺-癸二烯酸乙酯,改善‘鸭梨’果实香味。与父本果实品质特性相比,授粉‘鸭梨’果实在石细胞团含量、果肉质地、可溶性固形物、可溶性糖及香气组分方面表现明显的花粉直感效应,而在单果质量、果点直径、果点密度及总酸含量方面无明显花粉直感效应;综合评价表明,‘南水’授粉效果最好,适宜为‘鸭梨’授粉树。

关键词: ‘鸭梨’;果实品质;香气组分;花粉直感;综合评价

Abstract: The objectives of this study were to investigate the effects of pollinizer cultivars on the quality and aroma components of ‘Yali’ pear fruits and to explore the effect of xenia on fruit quality attributes in order to provide a reference for screening for ‘Yali’ pear pollinizer cultivars for improved fruit quality. Thirty-year-old ‘Yali’ pear trees were pollinated artificially with pollen from 18 pollinizer cultivars with different characteristics, and those pollinated with pollen from ‘Xuahuali’ pear was used as a control group. Fruit quality attributes including individual fruit mass, dot diameter, dot density, stone cell content, total soluble solid content, soluble sugar content, total organic acid content, and aroma compounds in mature pear fruit were measured. The effects of different pollinizer cultivars were comprehensively evaluated by principal component analysis (PCA). The results showed that different pollinizer cultivars affected the external and internal quality attributes and aroma components of ‘Yali’ pear fruit, resulting in 12.57%–96.10% changes in them. For pollination with pollen from ‘Nansui’, ‘Housui’ and ‘Korla’ pear, the contents of total soluble solids (TSS) and soluble sugars and TSS-to-acid ratio in ‘Yali’ pear fruit were increased significantly by 0.55%–0.76%, 7.53–16.54 mg/g and 1.96–4.54, respectively, compared with the control group, indicating improved nutritional quality. Using ‘Nansui’, ‘Korla pear’, ‘Crispel’, ‘Lvbaoshi’ and ‘Cuiyu’ pear as pollinizers, the relative contents of volatile esters in ‘Yali’ pear fruit were significantly increased by 8.77–18.85 times relative to the control group. Notably, the relative content of hexyl acetate was increased significantly by 3.76–15.86 times. Furthermore, six unique esters including ethyl acetate, hexanoic acid ethyl ester, butanoic acid ethyl ester, (E)-acetate-2-hexen-1-ol ester, acetic acid-2-phenylethyl ester and ethyl 2-trans-4-cis-decadienoate were detected, which could contribute to improving the aroma of ‘Yali’ pear fruit. Compared with the fruit quality attributes of the male parent, an obvious xenia effect was observed in pollinated pear fruit in terms of stone cell content, fruit texture, TSS content, soluble sugar content, and aroma components but not individual fruit mass, dot diameter, dot density or total organic acid content. The comprehensive evaluation results showed that ‘Nansui’ could be the most suitable pollinizer cultivar for ‘Yali’ pear production.

Key words: Pyrus bretschneideri ‘Yali’; fruit quality; aroma components; xenia effect; comprehensive evaluation

中图分类号: