中国不同地区‘富士’苹果品质评价

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.11.011

Abstract

Abstract:

【Objective】The aim of this study was to determine the key quality indexes of ‘Fuji’ apple and to establish the comprehensive evaluation model for ‘Fuji’ apple quality. 【Method】 One hundred and seventy six ‘Fuji’ apple samples were collected from orchards of 8 main ‘Fuji’ apple producing areas, including Hebei, Henan, Liaoning, Shandong, Shanxi, Shaanxi, Ningxia and Xinjiang. Fifteen indexes were tested for each sample, including single fruit weight, fruit firmness with skin, fruit firmness without skin, total soluble solid, soluble sugar, titratable acidity, vitamin C, sorbitol, glucose, fructose, sucrose, sweetness value, the ratio of total soluble solid to titratable acidity (RTT), the ratio of soluble sugar to titratable acidity (RST), and the ratio of sweetness value to titratable acidity. The key quality indexes of ‘Fuji’ apple were identified by principal component analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis (CA). The index weight of each quality was estimated by analytic hierarchy process. And the comprehensive evaluation model was established by grey interconnect degree analysis (GIDA). 【Result】 There was a quality difference between ‘Fuji’ apples from different areas. The quality of ‘Fiji’ apple from Xinjiang was superior to those from other areas in indexes of fruit firmness, vitamin C, total soluble solid, soluble sugar, sorbitol, fructose, sucrose, and sweetness value. The variable coefficients of ‘Fuji’ apple quality indexes of vitamin C, sorbitol, sucrose, and sweetness value were all over 30%, and that of quality index of soluble sugar was the smallest one with 9.8%. There was significant correlation coefficient (R) between some ‘Fuji’ apple quality indexes, such as the correlation coefficient between titratable acidity and RTT (-0.844) or RST (-0.854), the correlation coefficient between fructose and sweetness value (0.963), and the correlation coefficient between RTT and RST (0.941). Five quality indexes of ‘Fuji’ apple were screened to be key indexes by PCA and CA, including fruit weight (X₁), fruit firmness without skin (X₂), titratable acidity (X₃), RTT (X₄) and fructose (X₅). The comprehensive evaluation model for ‘Fuji’ apple quality was established by GIDA, which was Y=0.2601X₁+0.1378X₂+0.0819X₃+0.2601X₄+0.2601X₅. 【Conclusion】 Fruit weight, fruit firmness without skin, titratable acidity, RTT and fructose were the key quality indexes of ‘Fuji’ apple, and the established comprehensive evaluation model was useful and valuable for the quality evaluation of ‘Fuji’ apple produced in main producing area in China.

Key words: ‘Fuji’ apple, main producing area, quality evaluation, key index, comprehensive evaluation model

KUANG LiXue,NIE JiYun,LI YinPing,CHENG Yang,SHEN YouMing. Quality Evaluation of ‘Fuji’ Apples Cultivated in Different Regions of China[J].Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(11): 2253-2263.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

URL: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/EN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.11.011

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/EN/Y2020/V53/I11/2253

Figures/Tables 10

Table 1

Numbers and geographical origins of apple fruits"

编号 No.	省份（自治区） Province (Autonomous region)	主产市（县） Main city or county	样品数 Sample number
1	河北 Hebei	辛集市 Xinji city、邢台县 Xingtai county、肥乡县 Feixiang county、抚宁县 Funing county、昌黎县 Changli county、宽城县 Kuancheng county、滦南县 Luanan county、遵化县 Zunhua county	20
2	河南 Henan	灵宝市 Lingbao city、陕县 Shaan county、虞城县 Yucheng county、民权县 Minquan county、商丘市梁园区 Liangyuan district of Shangqiu city、丰县 Feng county	14
3	辽宁 Liaoning	瓦房店市 Wafangdian city、金州 Jinzhou city、绥中县 Suizhong county、兴城市Xingcheng city、建昌县 Jianchang county	8
4	宁夏 Ningxia	中宁县 Zhongning county、吴忠市 Wuzhong city、青铜峡市 Qingtongxia city、灵武市 Lingwu city、中卫县 Zhongwei county、银川市滨河新区 Binhe new district of Yinchuan city、西夏县 Xixia county、兴庆区 Xingqing district	24
5	山东 Shandong	蓬莱市 Penglai city、栖霞市 Qixia city、烟台市 Yantai city、招远市 Zhaoyuan city、沂源县 Yiyuan county、蒙阴县 Mengyin county、沂水县 Yishui county、泰安县 Taian county、胶南市 Jiaonan city、胶州市 Jiaozhou city、海阳市 Haiyang city、文登市 Wendeng city、威海市 Weihai city、牟平县 Muping county	44
6	山西 Shanxi	平陆县 Pinglu county、万荣县 Wanrong county、临猗县 Linyi county、芮城县Ruicheng county、晋中市 Jinzhong city、吉县 Ji county	15
7	陕西 Shaanxi	白水县 Baishui county、澄城县 Chengcheng county、合阳县 Heyang county、蒲城县 Pucheng county、富平县 Fuping county、旬邑县 Xunyi county、长武县 Changwu county、淳化县 Chunhua county、彬县 Bin county、礼泉县 Liquan county、永寿县 Yongshou county、乾县 Qian county、洛川县 Luochuan county	28
8	新疆 Xinjiang	霍城县 Huocheng county、察布查尔锡伯自治县 Qapqal xibe autonomous county、霍尔果斯市 Horgos city、伊宁县 Yining county、新源县 Xinyuan county、温宿县Wensu county、阿克苏市 Aksu city、阿拉尔市 Aral city	23
合计	8		176

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Fig. 1

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

Table 9

References 35

[1]	聂继云 . 苹果的营养与功能. 保鲜与加工, 2013,13(6):56-59.
	NIE J Y . Nutritional components of apple and their physiological functions to human health. Storage and Process, 2013,13(6):56-59. (in Chinese)
[2]	李卓, 郭玉蓉, 孙立军, 刘婧琳, 李景景, 付成程 . 不同产地长富2号苹果品质差异及其与地理坐标的相关性. 陕西师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2012,40(4):98-103.
	LI Z, GUO Y R, SUN L J, LIU J L, LI J J, FU C C . Quality differences of ‘Nagafu 2’ apple from different habitats and its correlation with geographical coordinates. Journal of Shaanxi Normal University (Natural Science Edition), 2012,40(4):98-103. (in Chinese)
[3]	RÓTH E, BERNA A, BEULLENS K, YARRAMRAUB S, LAMMERTYN J, SCHENK A, NICOLAÏ B . Postharvest quality of integrated and organically produced apple fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2007,45(1):11-19. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2007.01.006
[4]	IWANAMI H, ISHIGURO M, KOTODA N, TAKAHASHI S, SOEJIMA J . Optimal sampling strategies for evaluating fruit softening after harvest in apple breeding. Euphytica, 2005,144(1/2):169-175. doi: 10.1007/s10681-005-5340-7
[5]	PETKOVSEK M M, STAMPAR F, VEBERIC R . Parameters of inner quality of the apple scab resistant and susceptible apple cultivars (Malus domestica Borkh.). Scientia Horticulturae, 2007, 114(1):37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2007.05.004
[6]	MIR J I, AHMED N, SINGH D B, PADDER B A, SHAFI W, ZAFFER S, HAMID A, BHAT H A . Diversity evaluation of fruit quality of apple (Malus×domestica Borkh.) germplasm through cluster and principal component analysis. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 2017,22(2):221-226. doi: 10.1007/s40502-017-0298-8
[7]	LV Y R, TAHIR I I, OLSSON M E . Factors affecting the content of the ursolic and oleanolic acid in apple peel: Influence of cultivars, sun exposure, storage conditions, bruising and penicillium expansum infection. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2016,96(6):2161-2169. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.2016.96.issue-6
[8]	HAMPSON C R, QUAMME H A, HALL J W, MACDONALD R A, KING M C, CLIFF M A . Sensory evaluation as a selection tool in apple breeding. Euphytica, 2000,111(2):79-90. doi: 10.1023/A:1003769304778
[9]	CURRIE A J, GANESHANANDAM S, NOITON D A, GARRICK D, SHELBOURNE C J A, ORAGUZIE N . Quantitative evaluation of apple (Malus×domestica Borkh.) fruit shape by principal component analysis of fourier descriptors. Euphytica, 2000,111(3):221-227. doi: 10.1023/A:1003862525814
[10]	公丽艳, 孟宪军, 刘乃侨, 毕金峰 . 基于主成分与聚类分析的苹果加工品质评价. 农业工程学报, 2014,30(13):276-285.
	GONG L Y, MENG X J, LIU N Q, BI J F . Evaluation of apple quality based on principal component and hierarchical cluster analysis. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014,30(13):276-285. (in Chinese)
[11]	LYU J, LIU X, BI J F, JIAO Y, WU X Y, RUAN W H . Characterization of Chinese white-flesh peach cultivars based on principle component and cluster analysis. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2017,54(12):3818-3826. doi: 10.1007/s13197-017-2788-0
[12]	邓健康, 刘璇, 吴昕烨, 毕金峰, 焦艺, 钟耀广 . 基于层次分析和灰色关联度法的苹果(等外果)汁品质评价. 中国食品学报, 2017,17(4):197-208.
	DENG J K, LIU X, WU X Y, BI J F, JIAO Y, ZHONG Y G . Quality evaluation of apple (substandard) juice from different cultivars based on analytic hierarchy process and grey interconnect degree analysis. Journal of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, 2017,17(4):197-208. (in Chinese)
[13]	弓成林, 郭爱民, 汪小伟, 李骏, 蔡智勇 . 灰色关联度和层次分析法在葡萄品质评价上的应用. 西南农业学报, 2002,15(1):79-82.
	GONG C L, GUO A M, WANG X W, LI J, CAI Z Y . Integrated evaluation of grape quality by the method of gray related degree analysis and analytic hierarchy process. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2002,15(1):79-82. (in Chinese)
[14]	陈永芳, 弓成林, 程昌凤 . 18个桔类品种果实品质的灰色关联分析. 四川农业大学大学学报, 2000,2(18):157-159.
	CHEN Y F, GONG C L, CHENG C F . Analysis evaluation of eighteen orange varieties orange fruit quality by grey related degree. Journal of Sichuan Agricultural University, 2000,2(18):157-159. (in Chinese)
[15]	张传珂 . 灰色系统理论在甜瓜品种综合评估中的应用 . 安徽农业科学, 2005, 33(7): 1214, 1311.
	ZHANG C KF . Application of the gray systematic theory in the comprehensive assessment of muskmelon variety. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2005, 33(7): 1214, 1311. (in Chinese)
[16]	王轩 . 不同产地红富士苹果品质评价及加工适宜性研究[D]. 中国农业科学院, 2013.
	WANG X . Research on quality evaluation and processing suitability of Fuji apple from different Chinese origins[D]. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences Dissertation, 2013. ( in Chinese)
[17]	聂继云, 毋永龙, 李海飞, 王昆, 李静, 李志霞, 徐国锋 . 苹果品种用于加工鲜榨汁的适宜性评价. 农业工程学报, 2013,29(17):271-278.
	NIE J Y, WU Y L, LI H F, WANG K, LI J, LI Z X, XU G F . Suitability evaluation of apple cultivars for fresh juice-processing. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2013,29(17):271-278. (in Chinese)
[18]	聂继云, 闫震, 李志霞 . 果品及其制品质量安全检测·营养品质和功能成分. 北京: 中国质检出版社, 2017.
	NIE J Y, YAN Z, LI Z X. . Quality and Safety Inspection of Fruit and Its Products·Nutritional Quality and Functional Components. Beijing: China Quality Inspection Press, 2017. ( in Chinese)
[19]	郑丽静, 聂继云, 闫震, 徐国锋, 王昆, 高源, 叶孟亮 . 苹果可溶性糖组分及其含量特性的研究. 园艺学报, 2015,42(5):950-960. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2015-0140
	ZHENG L J, NIE J Y, YAN Z, XU G F, WANG K, GAO Y, YE M L . Studies on the characteristics of the composition and content of soluble sugars in apple fruit. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2015,42(5):950-960. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2015-0140
[20]	刘遵春, 包东娥, 廖明安 . 层次分析法在金花梨果实品质评价上的应用. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2006,34(8):125-128.
	LIU Z C, BAO D E, LIAO M A . Application of analytic hierarchy process in evaluating Jinhua pear quality. Journal of Northwest A＆F University (Natural Science Edition), 2006,34(8):125-128. (in Chinese)
[21]	张海英, 韩涛, 刘洁, 刘晓伟, 王有年 . 应用灰色关联度分析法评价桃果实品质. 北方园艺, 2008(12):9-13.
	ZHANG H Y, HAN T, LIU J, LIU X W, WANG Y N . Evaluation of peach fruit quality by grey related degree.Northern Horticulture, 2008(12):9-13. (in Chinese)
[22]	贾定贤, 米文广, 杨儒琳, 陈素芬, 张凤兰 . 苹果品种果实糖、酸含量的分级标准与风味的关系. 园艺学报, 1991,18(1):9-14.
	JIA D X, MI W G, YANG R L, CHEN S F, ZHANG F L . Sugar and acid content of fruit and its classification standard associated with favor in different apple cultivars. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 1991,18(1):9-14. (in Chinese)
[23]	焦艺, 刘璇, 毕金峰, 陈芹芹, 吴昕烨, 阮卫红 . 基于灰色关联度和层次分析法的油桃果汁品质评价. 中国食品学报, 2014,14(12):154-162.
	JIAO Y, LIU X, BI J F, CHEN Q Q, WU X Y, RUAN W H . Quality evaluation of nectarine juice based on grey interconnect degree analysis and analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, 2014,14(12):154-162. (in Chinese)
[24]	聂继云, 李志霞, 李海飞, 李静, 王昆, 毋永龙, 徐国峰, 闫震, 吴锡, 覃兴 . 苹果理化品质评价指标研究. 中国农业科学, 2012,45(14):2895-2903. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.14.012
	NIE J Y, LI Z X, LI H F, LI J, WANG K, WU Y L, XU G F, YAN Z, WU X, QIN X . Evaluation indices for apple physicochemical quality. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012,45(14):2895-2903. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.14.012
[25]	段晓凤, 张磊, 金飞, 卫建国, 杜红娟 . 气象因子对苹果产量、品质的影响研究进展. 中国农学通报, 2014,30(7):33-37.
	DUAN X F, ZHANG L, JIN F, WEI J G, DU H J . Research progress of effects of meteorological factors on apple yield and quality. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2014,30(7):33-37. (in Chinese)
[26]	刘灿盛, 蒲永义 . 元帅系苹果品质与气象条件关系的研究. 园艺学报, 1987,14(2):73-80.
	LIU C S, PU Y Y . Studies on the relationship between apple fruit quality of ‘delicious’ strains and meteorological conditions. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 1987,14(2):73-80. (in Chinese)
[27]	王贵元 . 生态因子与果实品质的关系研究进展. 现代农业, 2009(9):103-104.
	WANG G Y . A review of relationship between environment and fruit quality.Modern Agriculture, 2009(9):103-104. (in Chinese)
[28]	徐吉花, 赵政阳, 王雷存, 高华, 刘振中, 樊红科 . 苹果果实品质评价因子的选择研究. 干旱地区农业研究, 2011,29(6):269-274.
	XU J H, ZHAO Z Y, WANG L C, GAO H, LIU Z Z, FAN H K . Selection of factors for apple fruit quality evaluation. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2011,29(6):269-274. (in Chinese)
[29]	赵玉, 刘东茹, 任亚梅, 胡馨木, 任小林 . 苹果品质评价体系的建立. 北方园艺, 2018 ( 19):32-41.
	ZHAO Y, LIU D R, REN Y M, HU X M, REN X L . Establishing an index system of physiochemical quality evaluation in apples.Northern Horticulture, 2018(19):32-41. (in Chinese)
[30]	魏钦平, 程述汉, 丁殿东 . 苹果品质评价因素的选择. 中国果树, 1997,4(4):14-15.
	WEI Q P, CHENG S H, DING D D . The choice of apple quality evaluation factors. China Fruits, 1997,4(4):14-15. (in Chinese)
[31]	郑丽静, 聂继云, 李明强, 康艳玲, 匡立学, 叶孟亮 . 苹果风味评价指标的筛选研究. 中国农业科学, 2015,48(14):2796-2805. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.14.011
	ZHENG L J, NIE J Y, LI M Q, KANG Y L, KUANG L X, YE M L . Study on screening of taste evaluation indexes for apple. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2015,48(14):2796-2805. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.14.011
[32]	王海波, 李林光, 陈学森, 李慧峰, 杨建明, 刘嘉芬, 王超 . 中早熟苹果品种果实的风味物质和风味品质. 中国农业科学, 2010,43(1):2300-2306.
	WANG H B, LI L G, CHEN X S, LI H F, YANG J M, LIU J F, WANG C . Flavor compounds and flavor quality of fruits of mid-season apple cultivars. Scientia Agriculturae Sinica, 2010,43(1):2300-2306. (in Chinese)
[33]	RÓTH E, BERNA A, BEULLENS K, YARRAMRAJU S, LAMMERTYN J, SCHENK A, NICOLAÏ B . Postharvest quality of integrated and organically produced apple fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2007,45(1):11-19. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2007.01.006
[34]	HARKER F R, MARSH K B, YOUNG H, MURRAY S H, GUNSON F A, WALKER S B . Sensory interpretation of instrumental measurements 2: Sweet and acid taste of apple fruit. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2002,24(3):241-250. doi: 10.1016/S0925-5214(01)00157-0
[35]	WU J H, GAO H Y, ZHAO L, LIAO X J, CHEN F, WANG Z F, HU X S . Chemical compositional characterization of some apple cultivars. Food Chemistry, 2007,103(1):88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.07.030

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

产地 Origin	单果重 SW (g)	去皮硬度 FF (kg?cm^-2)	带皮硬度 FFS (kg?cm^-2)	维生素C Vc (mg/100 g)	可溶性固形物 TSS (%)	可溶性糖 SS (%)	可滴定酸 TA (%)	山梨醇 Sor (%)	葡萄糖 Glu (%)	果糖 Fru (%)	蔗糖 Sucr (%)	甜度 Sv	固酸比 RTT	糖酸比 RST	甜酸比 Sv/Av
河北 Hebei	245.64a	6.55bc	8.72bc	2.72d	13.66cd	12.13b	0.29ab	0.35b	2.39abc	4.97c	2.97b	13.47cd	49.01ab	43.61ab	48.85bc
河南 Henan	243.55a	6.41c	8.62bc	3.47cd	13.79bcd	11.89b	0.27b	0.40b	2.63a	6.07ab	3.13b	15.75ab	55.48a	47.79a	63.44a
辽宁 Liaoning	234.80a	6.51bc	8.72bc	3.36cd	13.34d	11.42b	0.32a	0.35b	2.08c	4.61c	2.75b	12.41d	45.01b	38.20b	41.75c
宁夏 Ningxia	244.13a	7.10ab	8.75bc	4.96b	14.67ab	12.01b	0.32a	0.57a	1.61d	5.41bc	3.48b	14.30bcd	46.61b	38.14b	45.37c
山东 Shandong	254.93a	6.81abc	9.01ab	3.88bc	13.73bcd	11.71b	0.28ab	0.37b	2.55ab	5.26bc	2.90b	14.04bcd	50.50ab	43.10ab	52.09abc
山西 Shanxi	245.29a	6.86abc	8.32c	3.81cd	14.40bc	12.05b	0.28ab	0.39b	2.13bc	5.09c	3.05b	13.60bcd	51.89ab	43.46ab	49.41bc
陕西 Shaanxi	240.42a	7.29a	9.27ab	4.48bc	14.40bc	12.05b	0.32a	0.39b	2.47abc	5.91ab	3.21b	15.42abc	47.86ab	40.17b	52.13abc
新疆 Xinjiang	227.90a	7.37a	9.63a	6.37a	15.52a	12.90a	0.30ab	0.69a	2.27abc	6.43a	4.31a	17.44a	52.23ab	43.47ab	58.56ab

指标 Index	均值 Average	变幅 Range	标准差 Standard deviation	变异系数 CV (%)
单果重 SW (g)	243.9	133.2—388.1	39.0	16.0
去皮硬度 FF (kg?cm^-2)	6.93	4.69—10.58	0.85	12.3
带皮硬度 FFS (kg?cm^-2)	8.96	6.13—13.05	0.95	10.6
维生素C Vc (mg/100 g)	4.25	0.82—10.88	1.83	43.1
可溶性固形物 TSS (%)	14.23	8.90—18.4	1.45	10.2
可溶性糖 SS (%)	12.04	8.65—15.41	1.18	9.8
可滴定酸 TA (%)	0.30	0.15—0.56	0.06	20.0
山梨醇 Sor (%)	0.44	0.05—1.39	0.23	52.3
葡萄糖 Glu (%)	2.30	0.62—4.39	0.67	29.1
果糖 Fru (%)	5.52	1.04—8.62	1.21	21.9
蔗糖 Sucr (%)	3.24	0.28—6.57	1.06	32.7
固酸比 RTT	49.87	28.04—90.67	10.79	21.6
糖酸比 RST	42.24	23.93—75.27	9.42	22.3
甜度 Sv	14.70	2.55—22.91	3.14	21.4
甜酸比 Sv/Av	51.86	8.80—115.70	16.27	31.4

相关性 Correlation	去皮硬度 FF	带皮硬度 FFS	维生素C Vc	可溶性固形物 TSS	可溶性糖 SS	可滴定酸 TA	山梨醇 Sor	葡萄糖 Glu	果糖 Fru	蔗糖 Sucr	固酸比 RTT	糖酸比 RST	甜度 Sv	甜酸比 Sv/Av
单果重SW	-0.282**	-0.284**	-0.173*	-0.156*	-0.146	-0.150*	0.058	0.029	-0.080	0.008	0.055	0.070	-0.045	0.055
去皮硬度FF		0.688**	0.390**	0.485**	0.390**	0.439**	0.143	-0.062	0.079	0.058	-0.226**	-0.264**	0.068	-0.263**
带皮硬度FFS			0.437**	0.450**	0.419**	0.278**	0.185*	0.155*	0.162*	0.106	-0.064	-0.081	0.174*	-0.056
维生素C Vc				0.600**	0.447**	0.257**	0.502**	0.002	0.301**	0.397**	0.008	-0.074	0.352**	0.053
可溶性固形物TSS					0.735**	0.324**	0.499**	-0.020	0.239**	0.342**	0.140	0.000	0.289**	-0.030
可溶性糖SS						0.263**	0.455**	0.095	0.242**	0.272**	0.080	0.184*	0.283**	0.014
可滴定酸TA							0.171*	-0.219**	-0.035	0.174*	-0.844**	-0.854**	0.007	-0.684**
山梨醇Sor								0.152*	0.457**	0.553**	0.029	0.003	0.547**	0.239**
葡萄糖Glu									0.626**	0.057	0.217**	0.264**	0.597**	0.594**
果糖Fru										0.531**	0.153*	0.147	0.963**	0.676**
蔗糖Sucr											-0.009	-0.047	0.722**	0.351**
固酸比RTT												0.941**	0.134	0.742**
糖酸比RST													0.123	0.741**
甜度Sv														0.672**

指标 Index	PC1	PC2	PC3	PC4	PC5
单果重 SW	-0.122	-0.257	-0.256	0.499	0.718
去皮硬度 FF	0.266	0.649	0.357	-0.326	0.126
带皮硬度 FFS	0.410	0.479	0.394	-0.417	0.178
维生素C Vc	0.589	0.429	0.188	0.185	-0.138
可溶性固形物 TSS	0.602	0.470	0.403	0.258	0.060
可溶性糖 SS	0.583	0.366	0.406	0.185	0.181
可滴定酸 TA	-0.045	0.915	-0.290	-0.012	0.057
山梨醇 Sor	0.683	0.217	-0.144	0.410	0.047
葡萄糖 Glu	0.513	-0.348	-0.247	-0.517	0.380
果糖 Fru	0.824	-0.136	-0.401	-0.235	-0.011
蔗糖 Sucr	0.658	0.141	-0.379	0.335	-0.290
固酸比 RTT	0.346	-0.746	0.520	0.118	-0.057
糖酸比 RST	0.318	-0.780	0.500	0.078	0.008
甜度值 Sv	0.876	-0.090	-0.440	-0.112	-0.047
甜酸比 Sv/Av	0.645	-0.734	-0.059	-0.098	-0.069
特征值 Characteristic value	4.547	4.011	1.898	1.309	0.862
方差贡献率 Variance contribution rate (%)	30.315	26.742	12.653	8.729	5.750
累积方差贡献率Cumulative variance contribution rate (%)	30.315	57.057	69.710	78.439	84.189

标度 Scale	定义Definition	说明Explain
1	同等重要Equally important	两元素具有同样重要性Both elements are equally important
3	稍微重要Weakly important	一个元素比另一个元素稍微重要One element is slightly more important than the other
5	明显重要Obviously important	一个元素比另一个元素明显重要One element is significantly more important than the other
7	重要的多More important	一个元素占主导地位One element dominates
9	绝对重要Absolutely important	一个元素的主导地位占绝对重要地位One element is absolutely dominant
2,4,6,8	介于上述相邻判断之间Somewhere in between	介于上述重要性之间Somewhere in between

Quality Evaluation of ‘Fuji’ Apples Cultivated in Different Regions of China

RichHTML

PDF

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 10

References 35

Related Articles 9

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

指标 Index	可滴定酸 TA	去皮硬度 FF	单果重 SW	固酸比 RTT	果糖 Fru	权重值 Weight
可滴定酸 TA	1	2	3	1	1	0.2601
去皮硬度 FF	0.5	1	2	0.5	0.5	0.1378
单果重 SW	0.333	0.5	1	0.333	0.333	0.0819
固酸比 RTT	1	2	3	1	1	0.2601
果糖 Fru	1	2	3	1	1	0.2601

产地 Origin	可滴定酸 TA (%)	去皮硬度 FF (kg?cm^-2)	单果重 SW (g)	固酸比 RTT	果糖 Fru (%)
X₀	0.50	7.37	270.00	55.00	6.43
河北 Hebei	0.29	6.55	245.64	49.01	4.97
河南 Henan	0.27	6.41	243.55	55.48	6.07
辽宁 Liaoning	0.32	6.51	234.80	45.01	4.61
宁夏 Ningxia	0.32	7.10	244.13	46.61	5.41
山东 Shandong	0.28	6.81	254.93	50.50	5.26
山西 Shanxi	0.28	6.86	245.29	51.89	5.09
陕西 Shaanxi	0.32	7.29	240.42	47.86	5.91
新疆 Xinjiang	0.30	7.37	227.90	52.23	6.43

产地 Origin	加权关联度 Weighted correlation degree	排名 Rank
新疆 Xinjiang	0.7550	1
河南 Henan	0.6919	2
陕西 Shaanxi	0.6471	3
山西 Shanxi	0.5990	4
山东 Shandong	0.5958	5
宁夏 Ningxia	0.5884	6
河北 Hebei	0.5511	7
辽宁 Liaoning	0.5070	8

[1]	ZHU DaWei,ZHANG LinPing,CHEN MingXue,FANG ChangYun,YU YongHong,ZHENG XiaoLong,SHAO YaFang. Characteristics of High-Quality Rice Varieties and Taste Sensory Evaluation Values in China [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2022, 55(7): 1271-1283.
[2]	ZENG XiangYuan,ZHAO WuQi,LU Dan,WU Ni,MENG YongHong,GAO GuiTian,LEI YuShan. Effects of Ultrasound on the Sugar Permeability Effect, Drying Energy Consumption and Quality of Kiwifruit Slices [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(4): 725-737.
[3]	JIA MengKe,WU Zhong,ZHAO WuQi,LU Dan,ZHANG QingAn,ZHANG BaoShan,SONG ShuJie. Response Surface Design and Multi-Objective Optimization of Apple Slices Dried by Air-Impingement [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(15): 2695-2705.
[4]	ZHANG Jia, NIE JiYun, ZHANG Hui, LI Jing, LI Ye. Evaluation Indexes for Blueberry Quality [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(12): 2128-2139.
[5]	WU XuanYi, CAO HongXia, WANG HuBing, HAO ShuXue. Effect of Planting Row Spacing and Irrigation Amount on Comprehensive Quality of Short-Season Cultivation Tomato in Solar Greenhouse in Northwest China [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(5): 940-951.
[6]	ManMan ZHANG, ZengHui WANG, YunFei MAO, ShanShan CHAI, XiaoHong ZHAO, YiChang FAN, Wei NI, ZhiQuan MAO, XueSen CHEN, Xiang SHEN. Effects of Different Pollination Combinations on the Fruit Quality of ‘Fuji’ and ‘Starkrimson’ Apple [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 51(18): 3551-3560.
[7]	Lü Jian, LIU Xuan, BI Jin-feng, ZHOU Lin-yan, WU Xin-ye. Research on the Quality Evaluation for Peach and Nectarine Chips by Explosion Puffing Drying [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(4): 802-812.
[8]	LI Hong-zheng, CAO Hong-xia, GUO Li-jie, WU Xuan-yi. Effect of Furrow Irrigation Pattern and Irrigation Amount on Comprehensive Quality and Yield of Greenhouse Tomato [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(21): 4179-4191.
[9]	NING Geng-zhe,WEI Yi-min,ZHANG Bo,SHI Jun-ling,HU Xin-zhong,ZHANG Bing-hu . Analysis on Quality Properties of Product Evaluation Extruded from Whole Oat Flour [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2010, 43(5): 1017-1022 .