Change Law of Water Loss in Fresh Tea Leaves Under Different Spreading Environments

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0146

Abstract

Abstract:

To clarify the dynamic changes of water loss during the spreading process of fresh tea leaves under different environmental conditions, a prediction model for the changes of the moisture content of fresh tea leaves was constructed to predict the degree of spreading. In this experiment, different temperature and humidity were set to investigate the change of moisture content of fresh tea leaves during a certain spreading time, and the prediction model was established by response surface analysis software. The results showed that the moisture content of fresh tea leaves decreased quickly and then slowly with the extension of spreading time in different environments, and the low temperature and high humidity environment could significantly delay the water loss rate of fresh leaves. The prediction model (R²=0.9977) of the relationship between fresh tea leaf moisture content and temperature, humidity and time was obtained by response surface analysis, which had high significance and fitting degree, and good prediction effect. Therefore, the model constructed in this experiment could be used to forecast the moisture changes of fresh tea leaves under different temperature and humidity conditions and have practical application value for the regulation of the spreading process.

Key words: fresh tea leaves, spreading temperature, spreading humidity, moisture content, change law, response surface prediction model

LIAO Jun, FANG Hongsheng, SU Youjian, WANG Yejun, ZHANG Yongli, SUN Yulong, FANG Yage. Change Law of Water Loss in Fresh Tea Leaves Under Different Spreading Environments[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(4): 160-164.

Figures/Tables 5

References 26

[1]	WU Z J, MA H Y, ZHUANG J. iTRAQ-based proteomics monitors the withering dynamics in postharvest leaves of tea plant (Camellia sinensis)[J]. Molecular genetics and genomics, 2018, 293(1):45-59. doi: 10.1007/s00438-017-1362-9 URL
[2]	宋楚君, 纵榜正, 周森杰, 等. 龙井茶加工中在制叶水分变化及其对茶叶滋味品质的影响[J]. 茶叶, 2020, 46(2):77-83.
[3]	MARITIM T K, KAMUNYA S M, MIREJI P, et al. Physiological and biochemical response of tea [Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze] to water-deficit stress[J]. Journal of horticultural science and biotechnology, 2015, 90(4):395-400. doi: 10.1080/14620316.2015.11513200 URL
[4]	NYARUKOWA C, KOECH R, LOOTS T, et al. SWAPDT: A method for short-time withering assessment of probability for drought tolerance in Camellia sinensis validated by targeted metabolomics[J]. Journal of plant physiology, 2016, 198:39-48. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2016.04.004 URL
[5]	WANG Y, ZHENG P C, LIU P P, et al. Novel insight into the role of withering process in characteristic flavor formation of teas using transcriptome analysis and metabolite profiling[J]. Food chemistry, 2019, 272(30):313-322. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.08.013 URL
[6]	YU X L, LI Y C, HE C, et al. Nonvolatile metabolism in postharvest tea (Camellia sinensis L.) leaves: Effects of different withering treatments on nonvolatile metabolites, gene expression levels, and enzyme activity[J]. Food chemistry, 2020, 327:126992. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.126992 URL
[7]	王镇恒, 詹罗九. 茶学知识读本[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2011:143-158.
[8]	刘民乾. 优质茶叶生产实用技术[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2011:156-176.
[9]	贾广松. 基于茶鲜叶表面可见特征与含水率变化模型研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江工业大学, 2016.
[10]	虞昕磊. 鲜叶摊放方式对绿茶色、香、味品质成分代谢的影响研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2020.
[11]	金心怡. 茶叶加工工程[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2014:36-51.
[12]	尹军峰, 许勇泉, 袁海波, 等. 名优绿茶鲜叶摊放过程中主要生化成分的动态变化[J]. 茶叶科学, 2009, 29(2):102-110.
[13]	金鑫, 陈俊, 许佳妮. ‘中黄1号’绿茶鲜叶摊放过程中主要生化成分变化与干茶品质形成分析[J]. 茶叶, 2020, 46(2):91-95.
[14]	YU X L, HU S, HE C, et al. Chlorophyll metabolism in postharvest tea (Camellia sinensis L.) leaves: Variations in color values, chlorophyll derivatives, and gene expression levels under different withering treatments[J]. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry, 2019, 67(38):10624-10636. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.9b03477 URL
[15]	XU P, SU H, ZHAO S, et al. Transcriptome and phytochemical analysis reveals the alteration of plant hormones, characteristic metabolites, and related gene expression in tea (Camellia sinensis L.) leaves during withering[J]. Plants, 2020, 9(2):204. doi: 10.3390/plants9020204 URL
[16]	DONG X C, NI Y, QU Z D, et al. Prediction model of punching springback of windshield beam based on response surface method[J]. Rare metal materials and engineering, 2021, 50(5):1611-1616.
[17]	叶玉龙. 萎凋/摊放对茶叶在制品主要理化特性的影响[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2018.
[18]	郑继辉. 鲜叶摊放过程失水规律的研究[J]. 福建茶叶, 1988(4):30-33.
[19]	王佳佳, 李国琰, 张雁, 等. 油茶粕中茶皂素连续多级逆流水提工艺的建立[J]. 食品科学技术学报, 2021, 39(1):153-161.
[20]	尹军峰. 名优绿茶鲜叶摊放过程主要化学成分变化规律及环境影响的研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2007.
[21]	张凯农, 肖纯, 毛世宏, 等. 萎凋叶的萎凋失水规律[J]. 茶业通报, 1992(1):31-34.
[22]	吴咏芳. 摊放时间对绿茶品质的影响[J]. 蚕桑茶叶通讯, 2020(3):13-16.
[23]	黄藩, 董春旺, 高明珠, 等. 工夫红茶萎凋中温度对鲜叶失水率影响的预测模型[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(34):193-198.
[24]	李芬, 陈春林, 田玉萍, 等. 云南不同品种大叶种茶树生化成分季节变化特征分析[J]. 食品与生物技术学报, 2022, 41(3):88-95.
[25]	廖珺. 摊放(萎凋)技术对茶鲜叶游离氨基酸影响的研究进展[J]. 氨基酸和生物资源, 2016, 38(4):15-19.
[26]	宋振硕, 陈键, 陈林, 等. 茶树离体春梢萎凋失水规律初步研究[J]. 茶叶科学技术, 2014(3):25-28.

时间	T₁	T₂	T₃	T₄	T₅	T₆
0 h	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA
2 h	75.25±0.38bC	76.00±0.33bA	74.43±0.23bD	75.42±0.23bB	73.02±0.29bF	74.04±0.25bE
4 h	73.21±0.27cC	74.28±0.17cA	72.26±0.34cD	73.53±0.31cB	70.01±0.18cF	71.45±0.31cE
6 h	71.67±0.19dC	73.14±0.28dA	70.69±0.21dD	72.29±0.35dB	68.22±0.25dF	69.87±0.39dE
8 h	70.71±0.22eC	72.42±0.24eA	69.72±0.18eD	71.33±0.22eB	67.04±0.32eF	68.83±0.27eE
10 h	70.12±0.26fC	71.91±0.21fA	69.11±0.14fD	70.75±0.41fB	66.22±0.29fF	68.02±0.26fE

时间	T₁	T₂	T₃	T₄	T₅	T₆
0 h	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA	77.91±0.20aA
2 h	75.25±0.38bC	76.00±0.33bA	74.43±0.23bD	75.42±0.23bB	73.02±0.29bF	74.04±0.25bE
4 h	73.21±0.27cC	74.28±0.17cA	72.26±0.34cD	73.53±0.31cB	70.01±0.18cF	71.45±0.31cE
6 h	71.67±0.19dC	73.14±0.28dA	70.69±0.21dD	72.29±0.35dB	68.22±0.25dF	69.87±0.39dE
8 h	70.71±0.22eC	72.42±0.24eA	69.72±0.18eD	71.33±0.22eB	67.04±0.32eF	68.83±0.27eE
10 h	70.12±0.26fC	71.91±0.21fA	69.11±0.14fD	70.75±0.41fB	66.22±0.29fF	68.02±0.26fE

方差来源	平方和	自由度	均方	F值	P值	显著性
模型	293.53	9	32.61	1085.56	<0.0001	^**
A	39.69	1	39.69	1320.97	<0.0001	^**
B	11.89	1	11.89	395.77	<0.0001	^**
C	86.80	1	86.80	2888.95	<0.0001	^**
AB	0.041	1	0.041	1.38	0.2524
AC	1.78	1	1.78	59.13	<0.0001	^**
BC	0.66	1	0.66	21.81	0.0001	^**
A²	3.10	1	3.10	103.06	<0.0001	^**
B²	1.13	1	1.13	37.71	<0.0001	^**
C²	5.78	1	5.78	192.31	<0.0001	^**
残差	0.69	23	0.030
失拟项	0.61	21	0.029	0.73	0.7253
纯误差	0.080	2	0.040
总和	294.22	32

方差来源	平方和	自由度	均方	F值	P值	显著性
模型	293.53	9	32.61	1085.56	<0.0001	^**
A	39.69	1	39.69	1320.97	<0.0001	^**
B	11.89	1	11.89	395.77	<0.0001	^**
C	86.80	1	86.80	2888.95	<0.0001	^**
AB	0.041	1	0.041	1.38	0.2524
AC	1.78	1	1.78	59.13	<0.0001	^**
BC	0.66	1	0.66	21.81	0.0001	^**
A²	3.10	1	3.10	103.06	<0.0001	^**
B²	1.13	1	1.13	37.71	<0.0001	^**
C²	5.78	1	5.78	192.31	<0.0001	^**
残差	0.69	23	0.030
失拟项	0.61	21	0.029	0.73	0.7253
纯误差	0.080	2	0.040
总和	294.22	32