不同采后处理对‘水晶蜜柚’果实品质的影响

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0177

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究不同采后处理对水晶蜜柚品质的影响,对成熟采收的柚子进行撞击、套袋、保鲜和贮藏4个因素的试验,研究不同采后处理对‘水晶蜜柚’贮藏期间果实品质的动态变化,并对果实感官品质进行评分,探讨不同处理下柚子内在品质与感官品质的关系。结果表明,果实失重随试验时间延长而加剧,失重率1.7%~35.7%,相对于撞击处理和清水浸果处理,非撞击和咪鲜胺浸果处理可减少柚子损坏率,0.01 mm聚乙烯膜套袋处理和冷库低温贮藏可降低柚子失重。随贮藏时间推移,果实内在指标变化趋势总体一致,表现为可溶性固形物先略微增加再降低,可滴定酸先降低再增加再降低,Vc逐渐降低,木质素含量先降低再增加,且不同处理柚子可溶性固形物在19~40天达最大、木质素含量达最低。套袋和保鲜较未套袋和清水浸果处理分别增加柚子可溶性固形物133.8%和72.3%;撞击和冷库贮藏柚子可滴定酸含量较未撞击和常温贮藏处理分别增加82.4%和86.3%;套袋和冷库贮藏Vc含量分别增加17.6%和15.9%;撞击方式处理木质素含量增加85.0%,套袋、咪鲜胺保鲜和冷库贮藏处理分别降低柚子木质素34.3%、33.3%和51.7%。不同处理柚子果实感官评分随着试验时间延长呈先增加后降低的趋势,撞击加速柚子感官品质降低,较未撞击处理增加12.9%,套袋、咪鲜胺保鲜和冷库贮藏减缓柚子感官品质的降低,较未套袋、清水浸果保鲜和常温贮藏增加2.5%、7.7%和10.5%。柚子感官评价与果实内在品质存在高度一致性,随着贮藏时间的推延柚子感官评价和内在品质均呈现先增加后降低的趋势,采后1个月左右柚子品质最佳。综合而言,采取轻拿轻放、0.01 mm聚乙烯膜、咪鲜胺浸果和冷库贮藏组合处理(T1)可保持柚子的新鲜品质,并延长货架期。

关键词: 采后处理, ‘水晶蜜柚’, 品质, 撞击, 套袋, 保鲜, 贮藏

Abstract:

The paper aims to explore the effect of different post-harvest treatments on the quality of crystal honey pomelo. A test of four factors (impact, bagging, fresh and storage) was conducted on mature harvest pomelo, to study the dynamic change of fruit quality under different post-harvest treatments, and the grading and score through the sensory evaluation, and clarify the relationship between pomelo interior quality and sensory quality. The results showed that pomelo weight loss aggravated with the extension of test time, the weight loss ratio was 1.7%-35.7%. Compared with the impact and water immersion fruit treatment, the non-impact and the prochloraz immersion fruit treatment could reduce the damage of pomelo, 0.01 mm polyethylene film bagging treatment and cold storage could decrease the fruit weight loss. The change trend of fruit internal indexes was overall consistent with the extension of the storage time, soluble solids slightly increased first and then decreased; titratable acid had a trend of decrease - increase-decrease; Vc gradually reduced; the lignin content reduced first and then increased; and the fruit soluble solids under all treatments was the maximum and the lignin content was the minimum in 19-40 days. Bagging and keeping fresh increased pomelo fruit soluble solid by 133.8% and 72.3% compared with non-bagging and water immersion fruit treatment, respectively. Impact and cool storage treatment improved titratable acid by 82.4% and 86.3% compared with non-impact and ambient temperature storage. Bagging and cool storage treatment promoted Vc content by 17.6% and 15.9%. Impact treatment increased lignin content by 85.0%; bagging, prochloraz immersion and cool storage treatment decreased pomelo fruit lignin content by 34.3%, 33.3% and 51.7%, respectively. The pomelo fruit sensory score of different treatments first increased and then reduced with the test time. Impact aggravated the sensory quality of pomelo by 12.9% compared with non-impact; bagging, prochloraz and cool storage slowed the reducing of sensory quality, compared to non-bagging, water immersion and cool storage, the sensory score increased by 2.5%, 7.7% and 10.5%, respectively. Pomelo sensory evaluation result and the fruit interior quality were highly consistent, with the storage time prolonged, the pomelo sensory score and inner quality first increased then decreased, and the best quality could be found within one month of post-harvest. Overall, T1 treatment of gentle handling, 0.01 mm polyethylene film, the prochloraz immersion fruit and cold storage could maintain the fresh quality of the fruit and prolong the shelf life.

Key words: post-harvest treatment, crystal honey pomelo, quality, impact, bagging, fresh keeping, storage

中图分类号:

周龙, 汤利, 杨德荣, 曾志伟. 不同采后处理对‘水晶蜜柚’果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(6): 54-61.

Zhou Long, Tang Li, Yang Derong, Zeng Zhiwei. Effects of Different Post-harvest Treatments on Crystal Honey Pomelo Fruit Quality[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(6): 54-61.

图/表 9

参考文献 27

[1]	艾启平, 范敬群. 中国柑橘种植面积和产量均跃居世界第一[N]. 中国新闻网, 2008-10-26.
[2]	邓军蓉, 何坪华. 我国柑橘商品化处理现状及主影响因素[J]. 浙江柑橘, 2006,23(1):5-8.
[3]	祁春节. 中国柑手商产业经济分折与政策研究[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2003: 61-62.
[4]	张晶琳, 王永江, 刘海东, 等. 壳聚糖/CMC复合涂膜处理对柑橘果实采后品质的影响[J]. 现代食品科技, 2019,35(10):50-58.
[5]	解淑慧, 邵兴锋, 王鸿飞, 等. 纳米保鲜包装对柑橘果实贮藏品质的影响[J]. 食品工业科技, 2014(1):326-329.
[6]	王文军, 曾凯芳, 刘晓佳, 等. 不同保鲜剂对柑橘果实贮藏品质的影响[J]. 食品与机械, 2017,33(4):110-116.
[7]	Porat R, Daus A, Weiss B, et al. Reduction of post-harvest decay in organic citrus fruit by a short hot water brushing treatment[J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2000(18):151-157.
[8]	柳建良, 陆益明, 张晚风, 等. 不同贮藏温度对贡柑采后生理和贮藏品质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2008,36(5):2035-2036,2084.
[9]	潘腾飞, 朱学亮, 潘东明, 等. 低温贮藏对琯溪蜜柚汁胞粒化与木质素代谢的影响[J]. 热带作物学报, 2013,34(4):710-714.
[10]	王丽霞, 钟海雁, 赵红梅, 等. 天草果实壳聚糖涂膜保鲜贮藏效果的研究[J]. 食品科学, 2006,27(12):757-760.
[11]	肖建辉, 刘宜锋. 天然保鲜剂对朋娜脐橙果实贮藏保鲜效果的研究[J]. 食品工业科技, 2009(6):326-327.
[12]	王海宏, 周慧娟, 陈召亮, 等. 25%咪鲜胺水乳剂对宫川柑橘贮藏期品质及病害的影响[J]. 食品与机械, 2010,26(3):44-46,104.
[13]	周先艳, 朱春华, 周东果, 等. 水晶蜜柚和溪蜜柚贮藏期间果实不同部位品质变化[J]. 食品工业科技, 2018,39(19):291-296.
[14]	中国预防医学科学院营养与食品卫生研究所. GB/T 5009.86—2016,食品安全国家标准食品中抗坏血酸的测定[S]. 北京:中国标准出版社, 2016: 1-4.
[15]	卢军, 李婷, 黄琪悦, 等. 柑橘品质分级要素的分析与评价[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2012,51(20):4631-4633.
[16]	Obenland D, Collin S, Sievert J, et al. Commercial packing and storage of navel oranges alters aroma volatiles and reduces flavor quality[J]. Postharvest biology and technology, 2008,47(2):159-167.
[17]	De’aht G. Boosted trees for ecological modeling and prediction[J]. Ecology, 2007,88(1):243-251. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2007)88[243:btfema]2.0.co;2 URL pmid: 17489472
[18]	陈婷, 王日葵, 陆智明. 柑橘果实采后风味劣变机理的研究进展[J]. 农产品加工·学刊, 2010(2):56-60.
[19]	Gao Y, Kan C, Wan C, et al. Quality and biochemical changes of navel orange fruits during storages as affected by cinnamaldehyde-chitosan coating[J]. Scientia Horticulturae, 2018,239(9):80-86.
[20]	黄家红, 梁芸志, 李少华, 等. 低温气调协同臭氧间歇处理对柑橘贮藏品质的影响[J]. 保鲜与加工, 2018,18(3):28-32.
[21]	徐呈祥, 郑福庆, 马艳萍, 等. 二氧化氯处理对广东肇庆特产柑橘贡柑采后贮藏品质的影响[J]. 食品与发酵工业, 2019.
[22]	沈妍, 杨海花, 陈健初, 等. 涂蜡和套袋对柑橘采后酚类物质和抗氧化能力的影响[A]. 中国食品科学技术学会.中国食品科学技术学会第七届年会论文摘要集[C]. 中国食品科学技术学会. 2010: 135-136.
[23]	李春媛, 李志文, 朱志强, 等. 箱式气调保鲜技术在果蔬贮藏中的应用研究进展[J]. 天津农业科学, 2013,19(9):48-52.
[24]	余芳, 邵兴锋, 许凤, 等. 果实低温贮藏期间糖代谢变化研究进展[J]. 果树学报, 2014,31(1):125-131.
[25]	Shao X, Zhu Y, Cao S, et al. Soluble sugar content and metabolism as related to the heat-induced chilling tolerance of loquat fruit during cold storage[J]. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 2013,6(12):3490-3498. doi: 10.1007/s11947-012-1011-6 URL
[26]	王艳颖, 胡文忠, 李婷婷, 等. 间歇升温对香蕉李贮藏中营养成分的影响[J]. 食品工业科技, 2009(9):275-277.
[27]	Obenland D, Collin S, Mackey B, et al. Storage temperature and time influences sensory quality of mandarins by altering soluble solids, acidity and aroma volatile composition[J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2011(59):187-193. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2010.09.011 URL

处理	撞击	套袋	保鲜	贮藏
T1	1	1	1	1
T2	2	1	1	1
T3	1	1	1	2
T4	1	1	2	1
T5	2	1	2	2
T6	1	2	1	1
T7	2	2	2	2
T8	2	2	2	1
T9	2	2	1	2
T10	1	2	2	2

处理	撞击	套袋	保鲜	贮藏
T1	1	1	1	1
T2	2	1	1	1
T3	1	1	1	2
T4	1	1	2	1
T5	2	1	2	2
T6	1	2	1	1
T7	2	2	2	2
T8	2	2	2	1
T9	2	2	1	2
T10	1	2	2	2

类别	评价标准	感官得分
Ⅰ	酸甜适合,不苦不麻无异味,柑橘清香,化渣鲜嫩,汁胞饱满,风味较佳	80~100
Ⅱ	酸甜适合,不苦不麻无异味,香气减淡,化渣鲜嫩,汁胞饱满,风味适宜	60~80
Ⅲ	酸甜偏淡,不苦不麻无异味,香气减淡,化渣,汁胞稍硬,风味一般	40~60
Ⅳ	微酸微苦,无香气,轻微异味,汁胞偏硬,稍木质化,无新鲜感,化渣性差,风味差	20~40
Ⅴ	酸甜无味,苦麻有异味,木质化严重,汁胞粘结,寡水味,无风味	0~20

类别	评价标准	感官得分
Ⅰ	酸甜适合,不苦不麻无异味,柑橘清香,化渣鲜嫩,汁胞饱满,风味较佳	80~100
Ⅱ	酸甜适合,不苦不麻无异味,香气减淡,化渣鲜嫩,汁胞饱满,风味适宜	60~80
Ⅲ	酸甜偏淡,不苦不麻无异味,香气减淡,化渣,汁胞稍硬,风味一般	40~60
Ⅳ	微酸微苦,无香气,轻微异味,汁胞偏硬,稍木质化,无新鲜感,化渣性差,风味差	20~40
Ⅴ	酸甜无味,苦麻有异味,木质化严重,汁胞粘结,寡水味,无风味	0~20

处理	单果失重/g	失重率/%	单果日失重/g	损坏率/%	含水量/%
T1	27.5h	1.7g	0.3e	2.8f	91.4a
T2	47.5g	2.7f	0.4e	8.7e	90b
T3	151.8e	9.6e	1.4d	3.8f	91.7a
T4	42.5g	2.5f	0.4e	12.5cd	90.7ab
T5	120.0ef	7.8e	1.1d	18.3ab	91.4a
T6	370c	19.5c	3.4b	9.0e	89.7b
T7	695a	32.5b	6.4a	21.7a	89.6b
T8	310d	18.2cd	2.9c	11.5de	88.3c
T9	595b	35.7a	5.5a	13.3cd	88.7bc
T10	332.5cd	19.5c	3.1bc	13.8c	89.4bc
撞击	ns	ns	ns	*	ns
套袋	**	**	**	ns	**
保鲜	ns	ns	ns	**	ns
贮藏	**	**	**	*	**