杨梅气候品质评价方法及等级划分

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0633

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究旨在客观评价杨梅品质等级，为合理布局杨梅种植基地、改善杨梅品质提供气象技术支撑。基于2021—2023年怀化地区多个海拔的荸荠、东魁杨梅基地的可溶性固形物及总酸实测数据，首先将两种杨梅的可溶性固形物及总酸品质精细划分为4个等级，并建立综合实际品质评价方法和标准。结合气象资料，运用通径相关分析、逐步回归分析、聚类分析等统计方法，揭示了影响杨梅品质的关键气象因子：荸荠杨梅的可溶性固形物主要受成熟前5 d内日照时数<1 h阴天日数、成熟前9 d内日降雨量>5 mm降雨日数的影响；影响总酸的关键气候因子为成熟前44 d内和成熟前19 d内的平均最高温；影响东魁杨梅的可溶性固形物的关键气候因子为成熟前8 d内的日照时数，影响总酸的关键气候因子为成熟前30 d内平均气温和成熟前33 d内的平均最高气温。研究表明，杨梅成熟前9 d内（颜色由红转紫）的雨日越少、光照越多，可溶性固形物含量越高；杨梅坐果后的平均气温和最高气温越高，总酸含量越低。同时分别建立两种杨梅的品质气象模拟模型及气候品质评价模型，经回归验算及实际检验，气候品质等级和实际品质等级基本一致，表明该评价方法准确度较高，可用于杨梅品质等级的评价实践。

关键词: 杨梅, 实际品质, 气候品质, 等级划分, 气象指标, 评价方法

Abstract:

The aim is to provide meteorological basis for objective evaluation of the quality level of Myrica rubra, rational planting layout of Myrica rubra and improving the meteorological conditions for the formation of quality of Myrica rubra. Based on the measured data of soluble solids and total acid of Biqi and Dongkui Myrica rubra at multiple altitudes in Huaihua area from 2021 to 2023, the soluble solids and total acid quality of the two types of Myrica rubra were first divided into four grades, and a comprehensive actual quality evaluation method and standard were established. Combined with the corresponding meteorological data, the key meteorological factors affecting the quality of Myrica rubra were revealed by using the statistical methods of path correlation analysis, stepwise regression analysis and cluster analysis. Some conclusions were as follows: The key meteorological factors affecting the soluble solids of Biqi Myrica rubra were the number of days with less than 1 hour of sunshine during 5 days before maturity, and the number of rainfall days with more than 5 mm during 9 days before maturity; the key climatic factors affecting total acid were average maximum temperature during 44 days and during 19 days before maturity; the key climatic factors affecting the soluble solids of Dongkui Myrica rubra was sunshine hours during 8 days before maturity; and the key climatic factors affecting total acid were average temperature during 30 days before maturity and average maximum temperatures during 33 days before maturity. The less rainy days and more sunlight during 9 days before maturity (color changes from red to purple), the higher the content of soluble solids; the higher the average temperature and maximum temperature after the fruit setting stage of Myrica rubra, the lower the total acid content. The meteorological simulation models and climate quality evaluation models for two kinds of Myrica rubra were constructed respectively. After regression calculation and actual test, the climate quality grade and the actual quality grade were basically consistent, indicating that the evaluation method had high accuracy and could be used for the evaluation practice of Myrica rubra quality grade.

Key words: Myrica rubra, real quality, climate quality, gradation, meteorological indicators, evaluation methods

中图分类号:

易永, 李民华. 杨梅气候品质评价方法及等级划分[J]. 中国农学通报, 2026, 42(9): 130-137.

YI Yong, LI Minhua. Evaluation Method and Classification of Climate Quality of Myrica rubra[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(9): 130-137.

图/表 16

参考文献 24

[1]	陈方永. 我国杨梅研究现状与发展趋势[J]. 中国南方果树, 2012, 41(5):31-36.
[2]	李兴军, 吕均良, 李三玉. 中国杨梅研究进展[J]. 四川农业大学学报, 1999, 17(2):224-229.
[3]	陈志银, 李三玉, 叶明儿, 等. 气候生态因子与杨梅品质关系的研究[J]. 浙江农业大学学报, 1992(2):100-106.
[4]	陈正道, 娄艳华, 汤婧. 穹顶棚架栽培对杨梅果实品质的影响[J]. 农学学报, 2021, 11(9):68-71. doi: 10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2020-0117
[5]	王引, 陈方永, 倪海枝, 等. 杨梅大棚栽培关键技术及其对果实品质的影响[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2020(2):168-170.
[6]	任海英, 甘振, 戚行江, 等. 补光对设施栽培杨梅营养生长和果实品质的影响[J]. 果树学报, 2022, 39(6):1072-1080.
[7]	任海英, 梁森苗, 郑锡良, 等. 避雨伞对杨梅生长及果实品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018, 34(29):37-41. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb17090158
[8]	孟敏霞. 避雨栽培对杨梅商品果率及果实品质的影响[J]. 浙江柑橘, 2021, 38(2):38-41.
[9]	康志雄, 骆文坚, 吕爱华, 等. 杨梅栽培气候区划与应用研究[J]. 果树学报, 2002(2):118-122.
[10]	缪松林, 黄寿波, 梁森苗, 等. 中国杨梅生态区划研究[J]. 浙江农业大学学报, 1995(4):366-372.
[11]	陈爱莉, 龚伟, 孔芬, 等. 气候变化对杨梅种植适宜区的影响[J]. 扬州大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2021, 42(4):96-102.
[12]	金志凤, 姚益平, 樊高峰. 基于GIS的浙江省杨梅栽培气候生态区划[J]. 浙江气象, 2004(3):21-23,42.
[13]	边超钧, 王连喜, 王亚军, 等. 江苏省杨梅精细化农业气候区划[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2013, 41(11):190-193.
[14]	霍治国, 江梦圆, 匡昭敏, 等. 国外农产品气候品质评价研究进展[J]. 中国农业资源与区划, 2022, 43(9):34-49.
[15]	徐擎擎, 李衍彪, 曹伟, 等. 农产品气候品质认证技术研究进展[J]. 热带农业科学, 2022, 42(4):132-135.
[16]	DB 5202/T 011—2019.地理标志产品岱瓮杨梅[S]. 六盘水市市场监督管理局, 2019.
[17]	T/ZNZ 129—2022.地理标志产品仙居杨梅[S]. 浙江省农产品质量安全学会, 2022.
[18]	LY/T 1747—2018.杨梅质量[S]. 国家林业和草原局, 2018.
[19]	钱皆兵, 陈子敏, 陈俊伟, 等. 乌紫杨梅果实发育和主要品质成分积累特性研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2006(3):151-154.
[20]	李伟, 郜海燕, 陈杭君, 等. 基于主成分分析的不同品种杨梅果实综合品质评价[J]. 中国食品学报, 2017, 17(6):161-171.
[21]	陈惠, 林晶, 杨凯, 等. 青枣气候品质等级评价模型构建及应用[J]. 应用气象学报, 2021, 32(4):443-455.
[22]	金志凤, 王治海, 姚益平, 等. 浙江省茶叶气候品质等级评价[J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(5):1456-1463.
[23]	杨照渠, 陈旦蕊, 苏士法. 东魁杨梅果实生长发育规律初探[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2003(1):9-11.
[24]	柴春燕, 徐绍清, 房聪玲, 等. 杨梅四大良种生长发育特性比较研究初报[J]. 中国园艺文摘, 2010, 26(2):18-21.

取样点	纬度/°N	经度/°E	海拔/m
靖州县后山溪	26.5829	109.6977	326
靖州县铺口	26.5387	109.5688	327
靖州县坳上	26.6578	109.5952	420
洪江市罗岩	27.1207	109.5445	232
洪江市杉木桥	27.1123	109.6942	212
鹤城区杨村	27.5376	110.0090	234
鹤城区黄岩	27.4343	110.0596	848
鹤城区清水井	27.6126	110.0195	256
中方县花桥	27.6728	110.1727	327
中方县龙场	27.6507	110.2451	550
中方县泸阳	27.6127	110.1835	766

取样点	纬度/°N	经度/°E	海拔/m
靖州县后山溪	26.5829	109.6977	326
靖州县铺口	26.5387	109.5688	327
靖州县坳上	26.6578	109.5952	420
洪江市罗岩	27.1207	109.5445	232
洪江市杉木桥	27.1123	109.6942	212
鹤城区杨村	27.5376	110.0090	234
鹤城区黄岩	27.4343	110.0596	848
鹤城区清水井	27.6126	110.0195	256
中方县花桥	27.6728	110.1727	327
中方县龙场	27.6507	110.2451	550
中方县泸阳	27.6127	110.1835	766

		特级	一级	二级	其他
品质等级指数赋值		3	2	1	0
荸荠杨梅	SSC/%	SSC≥12.6	11.3≤SSC<12.6	10.5≤SSC<11.3	SSC<10.5
荸荠杨梅	TA/%	TA≤1.0	1.0<TA≤1.2	1.2<TA≤1.5	TA>1.5
东魁杨梅	SSC/%	SSC≥13.0	12.5≤SSC<13.0	12.0≤SSC<12.5	SSC<12.0
东魁杨梅	TA/%	TA≤1.0	1.0<TA≤1.3	1.3<TA≤1.5	TA>1.5

		特级	一级	二级	其他
品质等级指数赋值		3	2	1	0
荸荠杨梅	SSC/%	SSC≥12.6	11.3≤SSC<12.6	10.5≤SSC<11.3	SSC<10.5
荸荠杨梅	TA/%	TA≤1.0	1.0<TA≤1.2	1.2<TA≤1.5	TA>1.5
东魁杨梅	SSC/%	SSC≥13.0	12.5≤SSC<13.0	12.0≤SSC<12.5	SSC<12.0
东魁杨梅	TA/%	TA≤1.0	1.0<TA≤1.3	1.3<TA≤1.5	TA>1.5

等级	特级	一级	二级	其他
综合实际品质指数(DIC)	DIC>2.5	1.5<DIC≤2.5	0.5<DIC≤1.5	DIC≤0.5
综合气候品质指数(I_ocq)	I_ocq>2.5	1.5<I_ocq≤2.5	0.5<I_ocq≤1.5	I_ocq≤0.5