树体流胶程度与‘沪油018’果实耐贮性的相关性

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb16030066

中国农学通报 ›› 2016, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (19): 182-188.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb16030066

所属专题：园艺

树体流胶程度与‘沪油018’果实耐贮性的相关性

周慧娟,叶正文

上海市农业科学院林木果树研究所,上海市农业科学院林木果树研究所

收稿日期:2016-03-09 修回日期:2016-04-22 接受日期:2016-05-05 出版日期:2016-07-15 发布日期:2016-07-15
通讯作者: 周慧娟
基金资助:
国家农业部项目“国家桃产业技术体系”(CARS-31)；上海市农委项目“上海市果业产业技术体系”(2121316)。

Correlation Between Tree Body Gummosis and Storability of‘Huyou 018’Nectarine

Received:2016-03-09 Revised:2016-04-22 Accepted:2016-05-05 Online:2016-07-15 Published:2016-07-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究树体流胶程度与果实品质及耐贮性相关性,筛选客观的评价指标,以期为桃树体流胶的防控提供量化依据。[方法]设置以下流胶程度：Ⅰ级：一级枝、二级枝或三级枝上有散生流胶点或1-2个较大流胶块(流胶直径＜3cm)；Ⅲ级：一级枝、二级枝和三级枝合计支数1/4以下的枝条有连片流胶,无法区分各流胶点；V级：一级枝、二级枝和三级枝合计支数1/4-1/2的枝条有连片流胶,无法区分各流胶点；Ⅶ级：一级枝、二级枝和三级枝合计枝数1/2-3/4的枝条有连片流胶,无法区分各流胶点。研究树体流胶对果实采收品质及贮藏品质(果肉组织硬度、可溶性固形物含量、可滴定酸含量和腐烂率等)的影响,并以采后腐烂率为主要评价指标,分析果肉组织硬度和可滴定酸含量与采后腐烂率的相关性,筛选客观的评价指标,建立评价体系。[结果]采收时,树体流胶对果实硬度无显著性影响,流胶程度高的树体(Ⅴ-Ⅶ)显著降低了果实可溶性固形物含量和果皮色泽；冷藏期间,发病程度高的树体(Ⅲ- Ⅶ果实腐烂率显著(P<0.05)>发病程度为Ⅰ>对照果实。树体流胶对果实果肉组织硬度无显著性影响。不同流胶病树体果实可滴定酸含量有一定的差异,但与发病程度无线性关系。对照和流胶程度为Ⅴ级的树体果实采后腐烂率与果肉组织硬度呈显著性负相关,R值分别为0.92和0.848(P<0.05)。对照树体果实采后腐烂率与果实可滴定酸含量呈极显著负相关,R值为0.93,流胶程度为Ⅴ级的树体果实采后腐烂率与果实可滴定酸含量呈负相关,但不显著,R值为0.76。[结论]Ⅴ级为桃树体流胶病的关键点,显著影响了果实采收和贮藏品质；腐烂率结合果实果肉组织硬度和可滴定酸可作为果实耐贮性的客观评价指标。

关键词: 马铃薯A病毒, 马铃薯A病毒, 反转录-环介导等温扩增, 检测

Abstract: This study was undertaken to research the correlation between tree body gummosis and fruit quality, screen the objective evaluation index, and provide quantitative basis for preventing peach gummosis. [Method] Degree of peach gummosis：Ⅰ Scattering gummosis point or 1-2 more gummosis pieces on primary branches, secondary branch or tertiary branches; Ⅲ The total of scattering gummosis pieces were less than a quarter on Primary branches, secondary branch and tertiary branches , unable to distinguish the gummosis point;V The total of scattering gummosis pieces were 1/4-1/2 on Primary branches, secondary branch and tertiary branches , unable to distinguish the gummosis point;Ⅶ The total of scattering gummosis pieces were 1/2-3/4 on Primary branches, secondary branch and tertiary branches , unable to distinguish the gummosis point.The quality and storability(pulp firmness, total soluble solids,titratable acid and decay rate)were investigated of different degree gummosis during storage. Making decay rate be the major evaluation index, and correlation coefficients（R）of linear relationships between bad fruit rate , pulp firmness and titratable acid were analyzed too.[Results] when the harvest, there were no significant difference on pulp firmness during different degree gummosis, high degree gummosis (Ⅴ-Ⅶ)reduced the TSS content and peel chromatic erration L*.During the whole storage, decay rate of high degree gummosis (Ⅴ-Ⅶ)>degree of Ⅰ>control significantly, and there were no significant difference on pulp firmness of different degree gummosis. There were certain difference of titratable acid but were not correlation coefficients（R）of linear relationships during different degree gummosis. There were significant negative correlation (P < 0.05)between decay rate and pulp firmness, R value of CK and Ⅴ degree was 0.92 and 0.848, respectively. There were negative correlation between decay rate and titratable acid, R value of CK and Ⅴ degree was 0.93 and 0.76.[Conclusion] Ⅴ was the key degree of gummosis, which was reduce the quality and storability of fruit. Decay rate combined with the pulp firmness and titratable acid can be used as objective evaluation index of storability.

中图分类号:

S662.1

周慧娟,叶正文. 树体流胶程度与‘沪油018’果实耐贮性的相关性[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016, 32(19): 182-188.

参考文献

1 LI Zhi, WANF Yu ting, GAO Lei, WANG Fan, YE Jun li, LI Guo huai. Biochemical changes and defence responses during the development of peachgummosisScaused by Lasiodiplodia theobromae[J].European journal of plant pathology, 2014, 138,(1):195-207.
2 杨文,赵丽娜,郝磊,李国怀.6个桃品种流胶病感病性的初步评价[J].华中农业大学学报,2015,34(3)：1-5.
3 赵密珍,郭洪,周建涛.不同桃树品种抗流胶病的调查[J].中国果树,1996(3)：45-46.
4 张勇,李晓军,曲健禄,李林光,杨建明.山东桃树流胶病病原菌研究[J].果树学报,2010,27(6)：965-968.
5 WANG Fan, ZHAO Lina, LI Guo huai, HUANG Jun bin, Hsiang Tom.Identification and Characterization of Botryosphaeria spp. CausingSGummosisSof Peach Trees in Hubei Province, Central China[J].Plant disease, 2011, 95(11) :1378-1384.
6 李国良,姚丽贤,何兆桓,周昌敏,杨苞梅,涂仕华.鹰嘴蜜桃养分累积分布特性与流胶病的关系[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2014,20(2)：421-428.
7 张慧琴,谢鸣,陈子敏,杨小先,肖金平,杨荣曦,周利秋.抗流胶病中熟桃新品种‘东溪小仙’[J].园艺学报,2014,41(10)：2149-2150.
8 俞明亮,马瑞娟,赵密珍,杜平.桃树体内生化代谢与其对流胶病抗性的关系[J].江苏农业学报,2001,17(4)：241-243.
9 马瑞娟,俞明亮,杜平,宋宏峰.桃流胶病研究进展[J].果树学报,2002,19(4)：262-264.
10 Z Li, W Zhu, Y.-C.Fan, YE, J.-L, LISG.-H. Effects of pre- and post-treatment with ethephon on gum formation of peach gummosisScaused by Lasiodiplodia theobromae[J].Plant pathology. 2015,63,(6) ：1306-1315.
11 SKRZYPEK E, MIYAMOTO K, SANIEWSKI M, UEDA J. Jasmonates are essential factors inducingSgummosisSin tulips: mode of action of jasmonates focusing on sugar metabolism[J].Journal of plant physiology. 2005, 162(5) : 495-505.
12 金薇薇,郝爱玲,陈功楷,吴振旺.贮藏期枯水病对瓯柑果实品质和外观的影响[J].浙江农业学报,2015,27(2)：229-233.
13 王圣通,鲍敏丽,吴丰年,李亚,许美容,刘朝吉,邓晓玲.黄龙病对焦柑果实品质影响的研究[J].中国南方果树,2015,44(4)：16-18.
14 苏明申,叶正文,周慧娟,杜纪红,李宏义,李雄伟,葛志刚,姚琛杰.‘锦绣’桃果实25℃贮藏的硬度与色泽变化及相关性分析[J].果树学报,2015,32(3)：487-493.
15 王璠.桃流胶病菌BOTRYOSPHAERIAS SPP.鉴定、分布、遗传多样性及PCR快速检测技术研究[D].华中农业大学,2012.
16 BECKMAN T G, PUSEY P L, BERTRAND P F. Impact of FungalSGummosisSon Peach Trees[J].HortScience. 2003 ,38(6) ：1141-1143.
17 周慧娟, 叶正文, 苏明申, 杜纪红. 采前不同浓度钙喷施对 ‘沪油018’ 贮藏品质的影响[J]. 经济林研究,2014, 32 (3) : 123-128.
18 YOSHIOKA H,HAYAMA H,TATSUKI M,NAKAMURA Y. Cell wall modification during development of mealy texture in the stony-hard peach“Odoroki”treated with propylene[J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2010, 55: 1-7.
19 周慧娟,乔勇进,王海宏,方强,张绍铃,陈召亮.低温对‘大团蜜露’水蜜桃保鲜效果的影响[J].制冷学报,2009,30(5)：41-44.
20 陈杭君,毛金林,宋丽丽,陈文烜,周拥军,郝海燕.温度对南方水蜜桃贮藏生理及货架期品质的影响[J].中国农业科学,2007,40(7)：1567-1572.
21 高慧,饶景萍.不同温度冷藏对于油桃生理生化变化的影响[J].果树学报,2004,21(2)：173-175.
22 高慧,饶景萍.冷害对贮藏油桃膜脂肪酸及相关酶活性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2007,27(4)：0710-0714.
23 赵永红,李宪利,姜泽盛,王长健,杨富林.设施油桃果实发育过程中有机酸代谢的研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2007,15(5)：87-89.

[1]	曾端香, 余曦玥, 于敬文, 贾建平, 彭德良, 黄文坤. 松材线虫病的检测及综合防治技术[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(4): 86-91.
[2]	强生军, 刘玉荣, 李刚. 溶剂标、基质标对农药残留检测结果的影响及校正[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(4): 99-106.
[3]	陈丹丹, 万建春, 连琦, 王建雄, 王栋, 洪挺, 杨毅生. 中药材农药残留研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(31): 125-135.
[4]	陈培华, 鲍涵, 陈培寿, 沈万宽. 果蔗健康种苗田间效果评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(16): 1-5.
[5]	昝光敏, 张玲, 张延瑞, 盛英华, 周凯, 王贤智. 大豆籽粒脂肪酸组分气相色谱检测方法的建立[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(9): 118-124.
[6]	文英, 刘永生. 基于ipaH基因的志贺菌LAMP检测方法的建立及应用[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(5): 104-110.
[7]	李楠楠, 李顺成, 韩玉林, 邹少奎, 杜晓宇, 杨光宇, 王丽娜, 张倩, 吕永军. Fhb1基因改良‘周麦’品种赤霉病抗性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(4): 98-104.
[8]	王东鹏, 叶诚, 廖小丽. 微流控芯片在农产品安全检测中的应用[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(36): 148-154.
[9]	崔贵梅, 李小波, 马樾, 郝曜山, 张欢欢, 孙毅. 玉米预防转基因漂移试纸条快速检测方法[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(36): 19-23.
[10]	温华强, 舒灿伟, 曾莉莎, 周而勋. 荷花腐败病菌的荧光定量PCR检测[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(34): 127-132.
[11]	熊巍, 陶晓秋, 张海燕. 环境和食品中阿维菌素类药物残留量检测方法研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(30): 111-120.
[12]	李艳, 张煜轩, 楚品品, 蒋智勇, 席振军, 蔡汝健, 勾红潮, 张昆丽, 宋帅, 卞志标, 李春玲. 非洲猪瘟病毒LNA引物PCR检测方法的建立及优化[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(29): 107-113.
[13]	常东浩, 葛菁萍. 生态环境中抗生素检测与降解方法的研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(27): 59-64.
[14]	郭思依, 孙明娜, 董旭, 褚玥, 童舟, 王梅, 高同春, 段劲生. 免疫分析技术在农药残留快速检测中的应用及研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(23): 106-112.
[15]	龙丽坤, 赵宁, 夏蔚, 李葱葱, 董立明, 闫伟, 李飞武. 转基因玉米CM8101特异性定性PCR检测方法[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(23): 23-28.

树体流胶程度与‘沪油018’果实耐贮性的相关性

Correlation Between Tree Body Gummosis and Storability of‘Huyou 018’Nectarine

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

关于本刊

作者中心

审者中心

在线期刊

联系我们