欢迎访问《中国农学通报》,

中国农学通报 ›› 2009, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (15): 0-1.

• 食品 营养 检测 安全 •    下一篇

小米食味(适口性)评价方法研究

李中青,李齐霞,霍成斌,孙万荣,王根全,王敏   

  • 收稿日期:2009-03-06 修回日期:2009-05-08 出版日期:2009-08-05 发布日期:2009-08-05

Study on Evaluation Methods of Millet taste (palatability)

lizhongqing , , , , ,   

  • Received:2009-03-06 Revised:2009-05-08 Online:2009-08-05 Published:2009-08-05

摘要: 常规化学分析测试方法和百分制感观评定方法是目前小米进行适口性评价的二种主要方法。本文以小米的色泽、芳香、味道、粘性、回生以及综合评价等六项感观性状为评定指标,设3、2、1、0、-1、-2、-3共七个评判值,以统一对照(晋谷21号)为参照,对参评品种的评判平均数进行T测验统计评价分析。评价分析结果:长农35号食味值为1.389,长农39号食味值为1.000,两个品种品尝食味值高,与晋谷21号达到95%水平上的显著差异,是适口性好的优质小米品种。该分析结果与前二种方法基本一致,分析方法方便科学,可以作为一种新的小米适口性评价方法。

关键词: 科技培训, 科技培训, 农民, 影响因素

Abstract: The conventional testing methods for chemical analysis and sensory evaluation of percentile system is currently millet palatability evaluation carried out two kinds of main methods. In this paper, millet color, aroma, taste, viscosity, retrogradation, and comprehensive evaluation of the six sensory traits for the evaluation of indicators, based 3,2,1,0, -1, -2, -3 judge the value of a total of seven to unified control (Jin Gu 21) for reference, on average judged participating varieties T Tests for statistical evaluation and analysis. Results: Chang Nong 35, eating a long agricultural value of 1.389, Chang Nong 39 agro-long taste even 1.000, two varieties of taste and eating high-value, and on the Jin Gu 21 level of 95% on the significant differences in palatability are good quality millet varieties. The results of the analysis with the former two kinds of methods are basically the same, to facilitate scientific analysis methods can be used as a new evaluation method of millet palatability.