Drying Standard and Rapid Detection Technology of Green Raisin Based on Texture and Sensory Evaluation Method

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0196

Abstract

Abstract:

The high economic value of green raisins is an important support to maintain the dominant position of Xinjiang grape industry. The moisture content of raisins has a great influence on the color, nutritional quality, texture characteristics, and sensory taste experience of raisins, but there are few related studies. In this study, the correlation analysis was carried out on the quality, texture characteristics and sensory tasting results of raisins with different moisture contents, to apply the quantitative texture determination technology to the production of raisins. The results showed that the color of raisins with different moisture contents had certain differences, of which the difference in green color was the most significant. The texture characteristics of raisins showed a good linear upward or downward trend in the range of 11.9%-19.2% moisture content. The sensory taste results of raisins with different moisture contents were quite different in different populations. Raisins with high moisture content had higher sensory scores in different age groups. According to the sensory evaluation results and the comprehensive evaluation of storage characteristics of raisins, the moisture content of raisins in production should be controlled at 14%-17%. Fitting the moisture content and texture index of raisins, the relative error between the predicted value and the measured value was small, the relative error of elasticity was the minimum of 2.91%, and the relative error of adhesion was the maximum of 13.33%. The hardness prediction values of 14%-17% raisin moisture content were 1349.86, 1191.75, 1033.64, 875.53g respectively. Using hardness as an index, this paper explored the rapid calculation of moisture content, elasticity, chewiness and other indexes of raisins. The fitting degree was high. The fitting equation between hardness and moisture content was y=(-0.00006x+0.2191)×100, and R² value was 0.9171. To sum up, the color quality of raisins with different moisture contents was quite different. Different groups of people preferred to raisins with higher moisture content. It is feasible to quickly calculate the moisture content and other texture characteristics of raisins by using hardness value. The research results can provide data support and a theoretical basis for standardized production of green raisins.

Key words: green raisins, moisture content, textural characteristics, sensory evaluation, correlation analysis

CLC Number:

S663.1

Zhang Wen, Han Shou’an, Wang Min, , AIermaike· Caikasim, Zhong Haixia, Wang Huan, Pan Mingqi, Xie Hui. Drying Standard and Rapid Detection Technology of Green Raisin Based on Texture and Sensory Evaluation Method[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(28): 128-135.

Figures/Tables 12

References 28

[1]	谢辉, 张雯, 韩守安, 等. 新疆晾房环境对绿色葡萄干色泽的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(7):295-302.
[2]	谢辉, 张雯, 伍新宇, 等. 新疆葡萄干生产研究现状及展望[J]. 北方园艺, 2015(21):182-184.
[3]	樊丁宇, 谢辉, 闫鹏, 等. 葡萄干品质指标探讨及因子分析[J]. 西北农业学报, 2012, 21(3):137-141.
[4]	胡德. 浅谈南方高湿地区葡萄屋顶棚架绿色栽培技术[J]. 中国南方果树, 2019, 48(4):131-132.
[5]	李世诚. 南方葡萄栽培的进展与动向[J]. 中外葡萄与葡萄酒, 2009(1):67-69.
[6]	孙其宝. 葡萄避雨设施栽培及配套技术研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2006, 34(18):4560-4561.
[7]	杜建平, 孙圆圆, 王文建. 我国红枣干燥技术研究进展[J]. 干燥技术与设备, 2015(1):7-10.
[8]	谢辉, 艾尼瓦尔·肉孜, 王乔, 等. 新疆杏产业发展现状分析及前景展望[J]. 中国果树, 2019, 196(2):114-118.
[9]	刘敦华, 刘军, 李佩佩, 等. 枸杞深加工产品开发现状及研究进展[J]. 食品科学技术学报, 2020, 38(4):10-20.
[10]	韩宏伟, 邱杰, 李勇, 等. 不同品种西梅电热烘干工艺研究[J]. 经济林研究, 2014, 32(4):120-126.
[11]	Kilcast D, Fillion L. Understanding consumer requirements for fruit and vegetable texture[J]. Nutrition & Foodence, 2001, 31(5):221-225.
[12]	Rizzolo A, Vanoli M, Bianchi G, et al. Relationship Between Texture Sensory Profiles and Optical Properties Measured by Time-Re-solved Reflectance Spectroscopy During Post-Storage Shelf Life of ‘Braeburn’ Apples[J]. Journal of Horticultural Research, 2014, 22(1):113-121. doi: 10.2478/johr-2014-0014 URL
[13]	Valente Marc, Ribeyre Fabienne, Self Guy, et al. Instrumental and sensory characterization of mango fruit texture[J]. Journal of Food Quality, 2011, 34(6):413-424. doi: 10.1111/jfq.2011.34.issue-6 URL
[14]	张平, 李志文, 王莉, 等. 基于穿刺测试的沙窝萝卜质构特性分析[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2012(10):196-199.
[15]	贾艳茹, 魏建梅, 高海生. 质构仪在果实品质测定方面的研究与应用[J]. 食品科学, 2011(S1):184-186.
[16]	潘秀娟, 屠康. 质构仪质地多面分析(TPA)方法对苹果采后质地变化的检测[J]. 农业工程学报, 2005, 21(3):166-170.
[17]	曹雪慧, 张方方, 李雨露, 等. 冷冻处理对草莓质构、水分分布及果胶含量的影响[J]. 食品工业科技, 2016, 37(5):320-323,328.
[18]	姜松, 陈巧林. 水蜜桃在贮藏期间的质地变化规律的研究[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2006(5):4-5.
[19]	宋肖琴. 采后枇杷果实质地变化的质构研究[D]. 杭州:浙江大学, 2010.
[20]	徐志斌, 励建荣, 陈青. 杨梅果实采摘后品质变化规律的TPA表征[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2009, 30(2):114-117.
[21]	何全光, 黄梅华, 张娥珍, 等. 芒果TPA质构测定优化及不同成熟度芒果质构特性分析[J]. 食品工业科技, 2016, 37(18):122-126.
[22]	李永红, 常瑞丰, 张立莎, 等. 物性分析仪TPA测定鲜食桃质构条件的优化[J]. 河北农业科学, 2016, 20(3):95-100.
[23]	胡亚云, 傅虹飞, 寇莉萍. 模拟超市销售期间圣女果质构特性变化的研究[J]. 食品工业科技, 2012(4):383-386.
[24]	谢辉, 王仙, 张雯, 等. 新疆葡萄干多酚超声波辅助提取工艺响应面法优化研究[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2019, 56(4):696-706.
[25]	郑素慧, 车凤斌, 朱文慧, 等. 水分含量对无核白葡萄干贮期品质及生理变化的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2015, 52(10):1808-1813.
[26]	朱文慧, 车凤斌, 郑素慧, 等. 不同贮藏温度对无核白葡萄干贮期颜色变化的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2015, 52(12):2208-2214.
[27]	Rockland L B, Stewart G F. Water activity: influences on food quality[J]. Water Activity Influences on Food Quality, 1981.
[28]	匡凤军, 刘群, 曹倩蕾, 等. 槟榔硬度及其质构相关性研究[J]. 食品安全导刊, 2019(36):61-63.

项目	11.9%	12.8%	14.1%	17.1%	19.2%
总糖/%	73.29±2.1a	72.58±2.8a	71.26±3.3b	69.23±2.9c	67.28±3.84d
可滴定酸/%	2.08±0.09b	2.12±0.19b	2.19±0.13b	2.32±0.21a	2.41±0.28a
Vc/(mg/g)	7.51±0.39d	7.82±0.35c	7.91±0.43c	8.35±0.38b	9.01±0.52a
多酚/(μg/g)	6776.28±208.1a	6498.28±219.34b	6396.18±226.28b	6293.34±282.34c	6208.38±239.81c
黄酮/(μg/g)	3892.23±101.23a	3806.28±89.23a	3783.21±50.93 b	3672.92±89.29c	3497.74±92.49d
L值	18.77±3.34a	18.55±2.64a	18.18±3.06a	18.79±2.76a	18.64±2.74a
a值	1.94±1.53a	0.82±1.01b	-0.55±1.41c	-0.21±1.39c	-0.87±1.80c
b值	20.15±5.02c	21.01±2.91a	19.69±4.24c	21.44±3.78a	20.64±3.12b
水分活度	0.43±0.013c	0.43±0.021c	0.46±0.020b	0.48±0.017b	0.55±0.029a

项目	11.9%	12.8%	14.1%	17.1%	19.2%
总糖/%	73.29±2.1a	72.58±2.8a	71.26±3.3b	69.23±2.9c	67.28±3.84d
可滴定酸/%	2.08±0.09b	2.12±0.19b	2.19±0.13b	2.32±0.21a	2.41±0.28a
Vc/(mg/g)	7.51±0.39d	7.82±0.35c	7.91±0.43c	8.35±0.38b	9.01±0.52a
多酚/(μg/g)	6776.28±208.1a	6498.28±219.34b	6396.18±226.28b	6293.34±282.34c	6208.38±239.81c
黄酮/(μg/g)	3892.23±101.23a	3806.28±89.23a	3783.21±50.93 b	3672.92±89.29c	3497.74±92.49d
L值	18.77±3.34a	18.55±2.64a	18.18±3.06a	18.79±2.76a	18.64±2.74a
a值	1.94±1.53a	0.82±1.01b	-0.55±1.41c	-0.21±1.39c	-0.87±1.80c
b值	20.15±5.02c	21.01±2.91a	19.69±4.24c	21.44±3.78a	20.64±3.12b
水分活度	0.43±0.013c	0.43±0.021c	0.46±0.020b	0.48±0.017b	0.55±0.029a

质构特性	11.9%	12.8%	14.1%	17.1%	19.2%
硬度/g	1841.49±469.13a	1530.30±328.56b	1162.41±317.23c	749.89±456.33d	658.74±277.39d
弹性/%	0.53±0.07c	0.58±0.071c	0.613±0.07b	0.608±0.10b	0.624±0.12a
粘聚性/(g·s)	0.32±0.04c	0.36±0.08c	0.42±0.09b	0.46±0.10a	0.48±0.12a
胶着度	592.94±154.54a	549.01±174.14a	485.60±154.92b	328.71±163.14c	301.19±126.47c
咀嚼度	316.64±100.25a	321.63±120.92a	299.10±100.41b	203.86±108.63c	197.58±109.22c
回复性/%	0.06±0.01c	0.072±0.01b	0.082±0.01b	0.095±0.02a	0.095±0.02a
粘附性/g	-1.15±1.44a	-1.18±1.16a	-1.38±1.89a	-3.07±2.17b	-2.94±5.83b

质构特性	11.9%	12.8%	14.1%	17.1%	19.2%
硬度/g	1841.49±469.13a	1530.30±328.56b	1162.41±317.23c	749.89±456.33d	658.74±277.39d
弹性/%	0.53±0.07c	0.58±0.071c	0.613±0.07b	0.608±0.10b	0.624±0.12a
粘聚性/(g·s)	0.32±0.04c	0.36±0.08c	0.42±0.09b	0.46±0.10a	0.48±0.12a
胶着度	592.94±154.54a	549.01±174.14a	485.60±154.92b	328.71±163.14c	301.19±126.47c
咀嚼度	316.64±100.25a	321.63±120.92a	299.10±100.41b	203.86±108.63c	197.58±109.22c
回复性/%	0.06±0.01c	0.072±0.01b	0.082±0.01b	0.095±0.02a	0.095±0.02a
粘附性/g	-1.15±1.44a	-1.18±1.16a	-1.38±1.89a	-3.07±2.17b	-2.94±5.83b

质构特性	相关性方程	R²	11.9%	12.8%	14.1%	17.1%	19.2%	相对误差/%
硬度	y=-15811x+3563.4	0.9171	1681.89	1539.59	1334.05	859.72	527.69	11.72
弹性	y=0.9858x+0.4429	0.6357	0.56	0.57	0.58	0.61	0.63	2.91
粘聚性	y=2.0886x+0.0943	0.9001	0.34	0.36	0.39	0.45	0.50	4.01
胶着度	y=-4215.8x+1084.7	0.9702	583.02	545.08	490.27	363.80	275.27	4.53
咀嚼度	y=-1949.2x+560.53	0.9275	328.35	310.80	285.46	226.99	186.05	5.76
回复性	y=0.4616x+0.0115	0.8690	0.07	0.07	0.08	0.09	0.10	5.90
粘附性	y=-30.014x+2.5641	0.8863	-1.01	-1.28	-1.67	-2.57	-3.20	13.33