35份软枣猕猴桃资源果实品质分析与综合评价.pdf

果树学报2023，40（8）：1523-1533Journal of Fruit ScienceDOI:10.13925/ki.gsxb.2022065935份软枣猕猴桃资源果实品质分析与综合评价何艳丽，秦红艳，温锦丽，范书田，杨义明，张宝香，曹炜玉，路文鹏，李昌禹*（中国农业科学院特产研究所，长春 130112）摘要：【目的】综合评价软枣猕猴桃资源果实品质，建立果实品质评价体系，为筛选优良软枣猕猴桃资源提供依据。【方法】以35份软枣猕猴桃资源果实为试验材料，分析测定果实21项品质指标，采用系统性描述、相关性分析、主成分分析和因子分析法，对果实外观品质和营养成分进行分析和综合评价。【结果】不同资源软枣猕猴桃果实的各项指标存在差异，SH5的横径、L*、可溶性固形物含量、固酸比、原果胶与果胶含量，SH1的单果质量、纵径、果形指数与还原糖含量，B080701的可滴定酸含量和可溶性糖含量，B070101的可滴定酸含量，B080401的维生素C含量显著高于其他材料；各品质指标存在一定的相关性；通过主成分分析对35份软枣猕猴桃资源的主要果实品质指标进行简化，从13项指标中提取了5个主成分，累计贡献率达到76.782%。【结论】通过变异系数分析、相关性分析与主成分分析筛选出可滴定酸含量、可溶性固形物含量、出汁率、单宁含量、a*、单果质量、可溶性糖含量和维生素C含量作为软枣猕猴桃果实品质评价的核心指标；通过因子分析法筛选出SH5、SH1、SH3、SH4、B080701为排名前5的优良软枣猕猴桃资源。关键词：软枣猕猴桃；果实品质；主成分分析；综合评价中图分类号：S663.4文献标志码：A文章编号：1009-9980(2023)08-1523-11收稿日期：2022-11-29接受日期：2023-04-12基金项目：吉林省发展和改革委员会（2022C037-2）；长春市科技发展计划项目（21ZGN09）；中国农业科学院创新工程（201409）；中国农业科学院特产研究所软枣猕猴桃、五味子国家林木种质库作者简介：何艳丽，女，硕士，研究方向为特色植物资源育种。Tel：15379723891，E-mail：*通信作者Author for correspondence.Tel：19969547299，E-mail：Quality analysis and comprehensive evaluation of 35 Actinidia argute ac-cessionsHE Yanli,QIN Hongyan,WEN Jinli,FAN Shutian,YANG Yiming,ZHANG Baoxiang,CAO Weiyu,LU Wenpeng,LI Changyu*(Institute of Special Animal and Plant Sciences of CAAS,Changchun 130112,Jilin,China)Abstract:【Objective】The fruit quality of Actinidia argute was evaluated comprehensively,and a fruitquality evaluation system was established for selecting excellent resources of A.argute.【Methods】Fruits of 35 A.argute were used as the test materials for determining the fruit appearance quality and 21other quality indexes.The appearance quality indexes included fruit shape,fruit color,shoulder shapeand fruit tip shape,and the 21 quality indexes included single fruit mass,transverse diameter,longitudi-nal diameter,fruit shape index,fruit color values(L*,a*,b*and c*),soluble solids content(SSC),titrat-able acids(TA),solid to acid ratio,soluble sugars,vitamin C,soluble proteins,juice yield,pH,reducingsugars,tannins,soluble pectin,protopectin and pectin.Systematic description,correlation analysis,prin-cipal component analysis and factor analysis were used to analyze and evaluate the fruit appearancequality and nutrient composition.【Results】The single fruit quality of SH1,SH5 and A130701 was sig-nificantly higher than that of most of the materials by significance difference analysis.The transverse di-ameters of SH5,A100101,SH1,and T060203 were the highest and in the range of 2.90 to 3.12 cm andhad no significant difference.The longitudinal diameter of SH1,A130701,SH5 and A140301 was sig-nificantly higher than that of the other accessions.The fruit shape index of A130701,SH1 and SH2 wasthe highest,and there was no significant difference.The L*of SH5 and SH2 was significantly higher果树学报第40卷than that of the other materials,indicating that the fruits of SH5 and SH2 were whiter and brighter.Thea*values of A191002 and B080401 were higher,while their b*and c*values were lower,indicating thatthe fruit color of these two accessions was more greenish and the color saturation was lower.The inter-nal fruit quality of different A.argute is also different.SH5,SH3 and SH1 had the highest soluble solidsin the range of 16.50%-17.73%.Titratable acid content of B070101 and B080701 was the highest buthad no significant difference compared with the other accessions,whose TA was 1.59%-1.51%.Thesolid to acid ratio of SH5 was the highest,reaching 54.77,which was significantly higher than the oth-er materials.The soluble sugar content of B080701 was significantly higher than that of the other mate-rials,reaching 13.97%.The vitamin C content of A100703 and B080401 was the highest reaching102.61 mg100 g-1and 101.92 mg100 g-1,respectively,but had no significant difference with the othermaterials.The soluble protein content of A020203 was 0.43 mgg-1,significantly higher than that of theother materials.The juice recovery of A040103 was the highest,up to 74.30%,which was significantlyhigher than that of the other materials.The pH of fruit ranged from 3.54 to 4.24.The highest pH wasfound in A170303 and T060203,and the lowest in SH1 and SH2.Reducing sugar content varied in arange of 0.41%-7.52%.That in SH1 was significantly higher than in the other materials.The tannin con-tent in B070101 was the highest,reaching 0.80 gL-1,which was significantly higher than in the othermaterials.The soluble pectin and pectin contents in A140101 were the highest(0.92%-1.82%)and sig-nificantly higher than in the other materials.The protopectin content in SH5 was significantly higher thanin the other materials.The correlation analysis showed that the appearance index of single fruit weight,transverse diameter and longitudinal diameter had an extremely significant correlation with fruit shape in-dex.Color indexes L*,a*,b*and c*were significantly correlated with each other.L*was significantly cor-related with flavor indexes including SSC,TA and solid to acid ratio,and a*was significantly positivelycorrelated with vitamin C.SSC was negatively correlated with TA and