• EI
  • Scopus
  • 食品科学与工程领域高质量科技期刊分级目录第一方阵T1
  • DOAJ
  • EBSCO
  • 北大核心期刊
  • 中国核心学术期刊RCCSE
  • JST China
  • FSTA
  • 中国精品科技期刊
  • 中国农业核心期刊
  • CA
  • WJCI
  • 中国科技核心期刊CSTPCD
  • 中国生物医学SinoMed
中国精品科技期刊2020
李珊珊,郝义,张婷婷,等. 基于主成分分析法分析不同采收期对李果实贮藏品质的影响[J]. 食品工业科技,2024,45(16):272−281. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023090093.
引用本文: 李珊珊,郝义,张婷婷,等. 基于主成分分析法分析不同采收期对李果实贮藏品质的影响[J]. 食品工业科技,2024,45(16):272−281. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023090093.
LI Shanshan, HAO Yi, ZHANG Tingting, et al. Effects of Different Harvesting Periods on Storage Quality of Plum Fruit were Analyzed Based on Principal Component Analysis[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45(16): 272−281. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023090093.
Citation: LI Shanshan, HAO Yi, ZHANG Tingting, et al. Effects of Different Harvesting Periods on Storage Quality of Plum Fruit were Analyzed Based on Principal Component Analysis[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45(16): 272−281. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023090093.

基于主成分分析法分析不同采收期对李果实贮藏品质的影响

Effects of Different Harvesting Periods on Storage Quality of Plum Fruit were Analyzed Based on Principal Component Analysis

  • 摘要: 为探究不同采收期对李果实贮藏品质的影响,该研究以‘蜜橘’李果实为试验材料,对采后李果实13个品质及生理指标进行分析,结合主成分分析(principal component analysis,PCA)法和数学模型对3个采收期(盛花后100 d、盛花后103 d、盛花后106 d)李果实(0±0.5)℃低温贮藏品质进行综合评价。结果表明,在盛花后103 d采收的保鲜效果最好,盛花后103 d采收的李果实至贮藏结束,硬度、TA分别下降了37.37%、27.06%,下降最慢,相对电导率、花青素、TSS、丙二醛、总酚、类黄酮变化相对平稳,延缓了呼吸强度的上升,同时能够保持较低的多酚氧化酶(polyphenol oxidase,PPO)活性以及较高的过氧化酶(peroxidase,POD)、过氧化氢酶(catalase,CAT)、超氧化物歧化酶(superoxide dismutase,SOD)活性。经过PCA分析发现PC1、PC2和PC3可以准确地反映出87.472%的信息,这说明不同的采收期会对所有的指标产生重要的影响。通过数学模型分析可知,在盛花后100 d、盛花后103 d和盛花后106 d采收的李果实贮藏至56 d时综合得分分别为1.06、0.99和2.69,综合得分越低表明品质越好,因此保鲜效果的排序为盛花后103 d>盛花后100 d>盛花后106 d。本研究为李果实采后保鲜和品质综合评价提供理论依据,同时也为实现李果实的适时采收提供技术参数。

     

    Abstract: To examine how different harvesting periods affect the storage quality of 'satsuma' plum fruits, this study analyzed 13 quality and physiological metrics post-harvest and utilized principal component analysis (PCA) and mathematical models to assess (0±0.5)℃ low temperature storage quality across three different harvesting periods(100 d after flowering, 103 d after flowering, 106 d after flowering). The results indicated that harvesting at 103 days after full bloom led to the best preservation effect. Additionally, the hardness and total acidity of plum fruit decreased by 37.37% and 27.06% respectively until the end of the storage period, which was the slowest. Furthermore, changes in relative conductivity, anthocyanins, total soluble solids, malondialdehyde, total phenols, and flavonoids were relatively smooth. The activity of polyphenol oxidase was low, while peroxidase, superoxide dismutase, and catalase activities were high, specifically catalase activities. After conducting PCA analysis, it was determined that PC1, PC2, and PC3 accurately capture 87.472% of the relevant information. These results suggested that varying harvesting periods will have significant impacts on all indicators. The mathematical model analysis revealed that the plum fruits harvested at 100, 103, and 106 days after bloom, and stored for 56 days, had comprehensive scores of 1.06, 0.99, and 2.69, respectively. Lower comprehensive scores indicated better quality, so the preservation effect followed the order of 103 days after bloom 100 days after bloom 106 days after bloom. The study offers a theoretical framework for evaluating postharvest preservation and quality of plum fruits, along with technical parameters to enable timely harvesting.

     

/

返回文章
返回