The Correlation Between Fruit Color Indexes and Fruit Internal Quality of Mollera rubra ‘Dongkui’

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0294

Abstract

Abstract:

The objective is to investigate the differences of fruit color indexes and internal quality of Mollera rubra ‘Dongkui’ at different maturity levels, and explore the correlation between fruit color indexes and internal quality, so as to provide reference for the appearance color evaluation and high quality harvest of M. rubra fruits. M. rubra ‘Dongkui’ cultivated in open field, greenhouse and high mountain net room were used as test materials. The fruit color indexes L^*, a^*, b^*, a^*/b^*, C, H, CIRG values of M. rubra ‘Dongkui’ at different maturity levels were measured and analyzed, so were the fruit weight, firmness, soluble solid content, titratable acid content, and solid-acid ratio. The results showed that with the increase of fruit maturity, the fruit color deepened from red to dark red, violet red and dark violet, the fruit color indexes L^*, a^*, b^*, C and H decreased, while the values of a^*/b^* and CIRG increased, the titratable acid content decreased, and the solid-acid ratio increased. Among them, the CIRG value showed significant differences among the four different fruit colors in the four bases, which could better reflect the color difference of M. rubra fruits. The fruits were red when the CIRG value ranged from 2.36 to 3.43, were dark red when the CIRG value ranged from 3.69 to 4.14, were violet red when the CIRG value ranged from 4.80 to 5.46, and were dark violet when the CIRG value ranged from 5.58 to 7.69, and the CIRG value was significantly and positively correlated with the solid-acid ratio of fruits in the four bases. It is suggested that CIRG value can be used as a quantitative evaluation index for fruit appearance color, maturity and internal quality of M. rubra fruits.

Key words: Mollera rubra ‘Dongkui’, maturity, fruit color index, soluble solids, solid-acid ratio

YAN Liju, JIANG Xin, CHEN Annan, ZHU Anna, WANG Jun. The Correlation Between Fruit Color Indexes and Fruit Internal Quality of Mollera rubra ‘Dongkui’[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(10): 136-143.

Figures/Tables 4

References 25

[1]	缪松林, 王定祥. 杨梅[M]. 杭州: 浙江科学技术出版社, 1987:9.
[2]	颜丽菊. 杨梅安全优质丰产高效生产技术[M]. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2014:2.
[3]	梁森苗, 朱婷婷, 张淑文, 等. 杨梅果实发育成熟度与颜色变化规律探究[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2019, 60(6):879-882.
[4]	袁春龙, 李华, 任亚梅. 杨梅成熟度指标的研究[J]. 西北农业学报, 2003, 12(1):76-80.
[5]	周蓉, 蒋芳玲, 梁梅, 等. 用色差仪法定量分析番茄果实番茄红素的含量[J]. 江西农业学报, 2012, 24(9):45-48,50.
[6]	路绪强, 袁明, 何楠, 等. 利用色差仪快速检测西瓜番茄红素含量[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2021, 34(4):41-45.
[7]	许玲, 章希娟, 魏秀清, 等. 利用色差仪估测‘脆蜜’毛叶枣成熟度的研究[J]. 福建果树, 2017(5):10-12.
[8]	周丹蓉, 叶新福, 方智振, 等. 李果实色泽与花色素苷、类黄酮和类胡萝卜素含量的关系研究[J]. 福建农业学报, 2015(1):33-37.
[9]	邵穔, 李永强, 张真真, 等. 基于色度分析的蓝莓果实采收标准研究[J]. 浙江师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2016(1):65-69.
[10]	王利群, 戴雄泽. 色差计在辣椒果实色泽变化检测中的应用[J]. 辣椒杂志, 2009(3):23-26.
[11]	张望舒, 陈昆松, 郑金土, 等. 不同成熟度杨梅果实采后呼吸速率、乙烯释放速率和品质的变化[J]. 植物生理与分子生物学学报, 2005, 31(4):417-424.
[12]	张淑文, 梁森苗, 郑锡良, 等. 杨梅果实生长指标的数学模型及各指标间的相关性分析[J]. 核农学报, 2020, 34(5):1020-1027. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.05.1020
[13]	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.
[14]	吴丹, 叶兴乾, 陈健初. 杨梅汁色差分析[J]. 酿酒, 2008, 35(1):94-96.
[15]	楼乐燕, 陈虹吉, 尹培, 等. 酚酸增强杨梅清汁贮藏期间色泽稳定性[J]. 食品科学, 2019, 40(9):220-227.
[16]	CARREÑO J, MARTÍNEZ A, ALMELA L, et al. Proposal of an index for the objective evaluation of the colour of red table grapes[J]. Food research international, 1995, 28(4):373-377. doi: 10.1016/0963-9969(95)00008-A URL
[17]	CHEN K S, XU C J, ZHANG B, et al. Red bayberry: Botany and horticulture[J]. Horticultural reviews, 2004(30):83-114.
[18]	ZHANG W S, LI X, ZHENG J T, et al. Bioactive components and antioxidant capacity of Chinese bayberry (Myrica rubra Sieb. and Zucc.) fruit in relation to fruit maturity and postharvest storage[J]. European food research and technology, 2008, 227(4):1091-1097. doi: 10.1007/s00217-008-0824-z URL
[19]	林旗华, 钟秋珍, 张泽煌. 浮宫1号杨梅及其早熟变异果实色泽发育研究[J]. 中国南方果树, 2016, 45(3):107-109.
[20]	CARREÑO J, MARTÍNEZ A, ALMELA L, et al. Measuring the color of table grapes[J]. Color research & application, 1996, 21(1):50-54.
[21]	蒋侬辉, 钟云, 曾继吾, 等. 杨梅成熟期间有机酸,糖的动态变化分析[J]. 食品科学, 2013, 34(18):235-235.
[22]	黄永红, 曾继吾, 夏瑞, 等. 杨梅果实品质动态变化及其综合评价[J]. 湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2009, 35(3):288-291.
[23]	邱立军, 张真真, 刘洁琪. 晚稻杨梅果实外观指标与可溶性固形物含量的关系[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2021, 62(4):768-770.
[24]	王霄霄. 不同品种杨梅果实品质和抗氧化活性的比较[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2007:25.
[25]	梁森苗, 张淑文, 郑锡良, 等. 杨梅生长指标与果实品质间的相关性分析[J]. 核农学报, 2019(4):751-758. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2019.04.0751

基地	品质指标	L^*	a^*	b^*	a^/b^	C	H	CIRG
基地A	单果重	-0.270	-0.253	-0.336	-0.006	-0.286	-0.265	0.203
	硬度	-0.364	-0.197	-0.104	0.231	-0.177	-0.102	0.242
	可溶性固形物	-0.612^*	-0.425	-0.548	0.283	-0.463	-0.533	0.469
	可滴定酸	0.622^*	0.783^**	0.639^*	-0.713^*	0.759^**	0.607^*	-0.767^**
	固酸比	-0.649^*	-0.797^**	-0.700^*	0.627^*	-0.787^**	-0.648^*	0.777^**
基地B	单果重	-0.411	-0.007	-0.213	-0.052	-0.06	-0.157	0.011
	硬度	0.389	0.504	0.476	-0.466	0.502	0.439	-0.459
	可溶性固形物	-0.617^*	-0.735^**	-0.747^**	0.680^*	-0.740^**	-0.752^**	0.708^**
	可滴定酸	0.813^**	0.803^**	0.827^**	-0.689^*	0.817^**	0.785^**	-0.792^**
	固酸比	-0.823^**	-0.916^**	-0.916^**	0.834^**	-0.921^**	-0.903^**	0.901^**
基地C	单果重	0.281	0.615^*	0.449	-0.587^*	0.568	0.503	-0.603^*
	硬度	-0.468	-0.363	-0.425	0.281	-0.379	-0.429	0.398
	可溶性固形物	-0.711^**	-0.880^**	-0.826^**	0.792^**	-0.869^**	-0.847^**	0.861^**
	可滴定酸	0.503	0.743^**	0.690^*	-0.749^**	0.734^**	0.717^**	-0.696^*
	固酸比	-0.568	-0.826^**	-0.753^**	0.794^**	-0.810^**	-0.782^**	0.775^**
基地D	单果重	0.482	0.600^*	0.541^*	-0.221	0.594^*	0.405	-0.549^*
	硬度	0.615^*	0.850^**	0.790^**	-0.541^*	0.843^**	0.729^**	-0.824^**
	可溶性固形物	-0.798^**	-0.881^**	-0.896^**	0.531^*	-0.887^**	-0.847^**	0.871^**
	可滴定酸	0.741^**	0.812^**	0.850^**	-0.578^*	0.822^**	0.850^**	-0.833^**
	固酸比	-0.683^**	-0.869^**	-0.878^**	0.637^**	-0.872^**	-0.901^**	0.882^**

基地	品质指标	L^*	a^*	b^*	a^/b^	C	H	CIRG
基地A	单果重	-0.270	-0.253	-0.336	-0.006	-0.286	-0.265	0.203
	硬度	-0.364	-0.197	-0.104	0.231	-0.177	-0.102	0.242
	可溶性固形物	-0.612^*	-0.425	-0.548	0.283	-0.463	-0.533	0.469
	可滴定酸	0.622^*	0.783^**	0.639^*	-0.713^*	0.759^**	0.607^*	-0.767^**
	固酸比	-0.649^*	-0.797^**	-0.700^*	0.627^*	-0.787^**	-0.648^*	0.777^**
基地B	单果重	-0.411	-0.007	-0.213	-0.052	-0.06	-0.157	0.011
	硬度	0.389	0.504	0.476	-0.466	0.502	0.439	-0.459
	可溶性固形物	-0.617^*	-0.735^**	-0.747^**	0.680^*	-0.740^**	-0.752^**	0.708^**
	可滴定酸	0.813^**	0.803^**	0.827^**	-0.689^*	0.817^**	0.785^**	-0.792^**
	固酸比	-0.823^**	-0.916^**	-0.916^**	0.834^**	-0.921^**	-0.903^**	0.901^**
基地C	单果重	0.281	0.615^*	0.449	-0.587^*	0.568	0.503	-0.603^*
	硬度	-0.468	-0.363	-0.425	0.281	-0.379	-0.429	0.398
	可溶性固形物	-0.711^**	-0.880^**	-0.826^**	0.792^**	-0.869^**	-0.847^**	0.861^**
	可滴定酸	0.503	0.743^**	0.690^*	-0.749^**	0.734^**	0.717^**	-0.696^*
	固酸比	-0.568	-0.826^**	-0.753^**	0.794^**	-0.810^**	-0.782^**	0.775^**
基地D	单果重	0.482	0.600^*	0.541^*	-0.221	0.594^*	0.405	-0.549^*
	硬度	0.615^*	0.850^**	0.790^**	-0.541^*	0.843^**	0.729^**	-0.824^**
	可溶性固形物	-0.798^**	-0.881^**	-0.896^**	0.531^*	-0.887^**	-0.847^**	0.871^**
	可滴定酸	0.741^**	0.812^**	0.850^**	-0.578^*	0.822^**	0.850^**	-0.833^**
	固酸比	-0.683^**	-0.869^**	-0.878^**	0.637^**	-0.872^**	-0.901^**	0.882^**