苦荞粗多糖涂膜处理对中国樱桃的保鲜效果

洪理杰; 范阳; 刘秉珍; 李莉蓉

doi:10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020060106

苦荞粗多糖涂膜处理对中国樱桃的保鲜效果

doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020060106

昆明理工大学农业与食品学院，云南昆明 650500

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金（31460424）；云南省大学生创新创业训练项目（201710674256）

详细信息

作者简介:
洪理杰（1996−），男，硕士研究生，研究方向：轻工技术与工程，E-mail：1030157703@qq.com

通讯作者:
李莉蓉（1980−），女，博士，副教授，研究方向：食品营养与安全，E-mail：lilirong-lily@126.com

中图分类号: TS255.3
计量
- 文章访问数: 142
- HTML全文浏览量: 67
- PDF下载量: 26
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2020-06-09
- 网络出版日期: 2021-06-05
- 刊出日期: 2021-07-07

Preservation Effect of Tartary Buckwheat Crude Polysaccharide Coating on Chinese Cherry

Faculty of Agriculture and Food, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming 650500, China

摘要

摘要: 为延长中国樱桃采后保质期，探究苦荞粗多糖涂膜处理对中国樱桃的保鲜效果，本研究对新鲜中国樱桃采后用不同浓度的苦荞粗多糖进行涂膜处理，塑料包装盒包装置于4 ℃下贮藏6 d，测定贮藏期间樱桃的理化、微生物和感官指标来分析苦荞粗多糖可食涂膜对中国樱桃的保鲜作用。结果表明：苦荞多糖可食涂膜保鲜有效降低中国樱桃除采后果实失重率（<3%），贮藏第6 d可溶性固形物、可滴定酸度、维生素C和总酚含量维持在新鲜采收时的87%、60%、40%、44%以上；延缓果实硬度和颜色的劣变，抑制贮藏期间细菌、霉菌和酵母的增殖，菌落总数<7 lg CFU/g，霉菌和酵母总数<6.2 lg CFU/g；0.4%和0.8%的苦荞粗多糖对中国樱桃的保鲜效果与相同浓度的壳聚糖相当，保鲜期延长至4 d，而1.2%的苦荞粗多糖显著增加樱桃保鲜期至5 d。苦荞粗多糖涂膜处理可作为有效的方式用于中国樱桃的采后保鲜。
- 粗多糖 /
- 中国樱桃 /
- 可食涂膜 /
- 保鲜效果 /
- 质构 /
- 感官评价
Abstract: In order to extend the shelf life of Chinese cherries after harvest and explored the preservation effect of tartary buckwheat crude polysaccharide coating on Chinese cherries, fresh Chinese cherries were coated with different concentrations of crude tartary buckwheat polysaccharides, and stored in plastic packaging boxes at 4 ℃ for 6 d in this study. The physical, chemical, microbiological and sensory indicators of cherries during storage were measured to analyze the fresh-keeping effect of crude polysaccharide edible coating on Chinese cherry. The results showed that tartary buckwheat crude polysaccharide edible film preservation effectively reduced the weight loss rate of Chinese cherries after harvesting (<3%), and the soluble solids, titratable acidity, vitamin C and total phenol contents were respectively maintained at 87%, 60%, 40% and 44% of the fresh harvest cherries on the 6th day of storage. Meanwhile, crude tartary buckwheat polysaccharides delayed the deterioration of fruit hardness and color, and inhibited proliferation of bacteria, mold, and yeast with the total number of colonies was <7 lg CFU/g, and the total number of molds and yeasts <6.2 lg CFU/g. The fresh-keeping effect of 0.4% and 0.8% tartary buckwheat crude polysaccharide on Chinese cherries was equivalent to the same concentration of chitosan, and the fresh-keeping period was extended to 4 days, while 1.2% tartary buckwheat crude polysaccharide significantly increased the fresh-keeping period of cherries to 5 d. Tartary buckwheat crude polysaccharide coating treatment can be used as an effective way to preserve the freshness of Chinese cherries after harvest.
- crude polysaccharide /
- chinese cherry /
- edible coating /
- preservation effect /
- texture /
- sensory evaluation

HTML全文

图 1 中国樱桃贮藏期间失重率的变化

Figure 1. Changes of weightlessness of Chinese cherries during storage

注：图中相同贮藏时间不同处理组标注的不同字母表示组间差异显著（P<0.05）；图2~图7同。

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 中国樱桃贮藏期间腐烂率的变化

Figure 2. Changes of rot rate of Chinese cherries during storage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 中国樱桃贮藏期间色度的变化

Figure 3. Changes of chroma of Chinese cherries during storage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 中国樱桃贮藏期间硬度的变化

Figure 4. Changes of hardness of Chinese cherries during storage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 中国樱桃贮藏期间菌落总数的变化

Figure 5. Changes of total viable counts of Chinese cherries during storage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 中国樱桃贮藏期间霉菌和酵母计数变化

Figure 6. Changes of molds and yeasts counts of Chinese cherries during storage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 中国樱桃贮藏期间感官评分

Figure 7. Changes of molds and yeasts counts of Chinese cherries during storage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 中国樱桃贮藏期间可溶性固形物、可滴定酸度、V_C及总酚含量

Table 1. Change of soluble solids, titratable acidity, V_C and total phenol content of Chinese cherries during storage

处理	可溶性固形物（%）
处理	0 d	1 d	2 d	3 d	4 d	5 d	6 d
Control	16.0±0.2^Aa	15.6±0.1^Ba	15.3±0.1^Ba	14.8±0.1^Ca	14.2±0.1^Da	14.0±0.2^DEa	13.7±0.2^Ea
0.8%Chitosan	16.2±0.2^Aa	15.9±0.1^Aab	15.9±0.4^Aab	15.6±0.2^Abc	15.2±0.2^Bc	15.0±0.1^BCc	14.2±0.2^Cb
0.4% TBP	16.1±0.3^Aa	16.0±0.2^Ab	15.9±0.3^Aab	15.4±0.1^Bb	14.9±0.2^Bb	14.7±0.1^Bb	14.2±0.1^Cb
0.8% TBP	16.2±0.2^Aa	16.2±0.2^Ab	16.1±0.3^Ab	15.9±0.1^Ac	15.2±0.1^Bc	15.1±0.1^Bc	14.6±0.1^Cc
1.2% TBP	16.2±0.4^Aa	16.2±0.2^Ab	16.1±0.2^Ab	15.9±0.3^ABc	15.4±0.2^BCc	15.2±0.1^Cc	14.8±0.1^Cc
处理	可滴定酸度（%）
处理	0 d	1 d	2 d	3 d	4 d	5 d	6 d
Control	0.68±0.05^Aa	0.61±0.01^Ba	0.54±0.01^Ca	0.47±0.01^CDa	0.42±0.01^DEa	0.40±0.01^Ea	0.38±0.02^Ea
0.8%Chitosan	0.69±0.02^Aa	0.64±0.01^Bb	0.58±0.01^Cb	0.53±0.02^Db	0.47±0.01^Eb	0.45±0.01^EFb	0.42±0.01^Fb
0.4% TBP	0.69±0.02^Aa	0.64±0.01^Bb	0.58±0.02^Cb	0.53±0.01^Db	0.47±0.02^Eb	0.44±0.01^EFb	0.42±0.01^Fb
0.8% TBP	0.68±0.05^Aa	0.65±0.01^ABb	0.61±0.01^BCc	0.56±0.02^CDbc	0.53±0.02^Dc	0.49±0.01^DEc	0.45±0.01^Eb
1.2% TBP	0.69±0.03^Aa	0.65±0.02^ABb	0.62±0.02^BCc	0.59±0.02^CDc	0.55±0.01^DEc	0.54±0.02^Ed	0.53±0.01^Fc
处理	V_C含量（mg/100 g）
处理	0 d	1 d	2 d	3 d	4 d	5 d	6 d
Control	12.92±0.72^Aa	10.02±0.87^Ba	8.62±0.41^Ca	7.39±0.10^Ca	5.77±0.34^Da	5.18±0.31^Da	4.44±0.30^Da
0.8%Chitosan	12.92±0.95^Aa	12.18±0.68^Ab	10.11±0.23^Bbc	8.88±0.19^Cb	6.86±0.17^Db	6.20±0.12^DEb	5.25±0.15^Ebc
0.4% TBP	12.71±0.36^Aa	12.11±0.47^Ab	9.89±0.11^Bb	8.70±0.25^Cb	6.38±0.19^Db	5.97±0.15^DEb	5.11±0.16^Eb
0.8% TBP	12.68±0.95^Aa	12.38±0.59^Ab	11.21±0.87^ABcd	9.84±0.49^Bc	8.23±0.23^Cc	7.01±0.13^CDc	5.73±0.13^c
1.2% TBP	12.71±0.96^Aa	12.56±0.56^Ab	11.98±0.46^Ad	10.02±0.16^Bc	9.10±0.12^Bd	7.26±0.35^Cc	6.33±0.20^Cd
处理	总酚含量（μg/g）
处理	0 d	1 d	2 d	3 d	4 d	5 d	6 d
Control	540.74±21.97^Aa	406.18±7.91^Ba	343.63±13.50^Ca	301.53±14.73^Da	247.35±15.65^Ea	226.46±15.04^EFa	201.64±10.95^Fa
0.8%Chitosan	545.59±11.45^Aa	501.04±9.09^Ac	448.37±24.48^Bbc	383.80±19.09^Cbc	342.14±24.92^CDbc	312.32±19.72^DEb	268.80±10.11^Eb
0.4% TBP	549.89±9.07^Aa	465.70±9.62^Bb	401.52±20.87^Cb	363.01±13.57^Db	305.16±18.69^Eb	286.35±10.55^Eb	242.61±8.89^Fb
0.8% TBP	549.54±7.01^Aa	505.73±6.49^Bc	477.74±18.17^Bcd	400.02±10.52^Cc	373.34±18.73^CDc	357.51±7.38^Dc	313.72±12.14^Ec
1.2% TBP	550.54±11.14^Aa	531.81±10.78^ABd	505.75±14.56^Bd	438.17±7.39^Cd	390.24±10.08^Dc	373.07±10.34^DEc	346.95±12.35^Ed
注：同一行不同大写字母表示同组样品在不同贮藏时间差异显著（P<0.05），同一列不同小写字母表示相同贮藏时间各组间差异显著（P<0.05）。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(25)

[1]	吴保欢. 基于形态性状的中国李属樱亚属系统分类研究[D]. 广州: 华南农业大学, 2016.
[2]	艾呈祥, 辛力, 余贤美, 等. 樱桃主栽品种的遗传多样性分析[J]. 园艺学报,2007,34(4):871−876. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0513-353x.2007.04.011
[3]	董渭雪, 陈德经, 贾思婕, 等. 玛瑙樱桃与早美樱桃营养成分比较研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2020,41(4):277−288.
[4]	贾朝爽, 单长松, 周涛, 等. 主要樱桃品种果实营养性状分析[J]. 食品科学,2019,40(4):244−250. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20171220-240
[5]	贾海慧, 张小燕, 陈学森, 等. 甜樱桃和中国樱桃果实性状的比较[J]. 山东农业大学学报: 自然科学版,2007(2):193−202.
[6]	Cazón P, Velazquez G, Ramírez J A, et al. Polysaccharide-based films and coatings for food packaging: A review[J]. Food Hydrocolloids,2017,68:136−148. doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2016.09.009
[7]	Salgado P R, Ortiz C M, Musso Y S, et al. Edible films and coatings containing bioactives[J]. Current Opinion in Food Science,2015,5:86−92. doi: 10.1016/j.cofs.2015.09.004
[8]	刘开华, 张宇航, 邢淑婕. 含茶多酚的大豆分离蛋白涂膜对甜樱桃保鲜效果的影响[J]. 茶叶科学,2013,33(1):67−73.
[9]	舒康云, 陶永元, 徐成东, 等. 一种可食性涂膜保鲜液对樱桃的保鲜效果影响[J]. 北方园艺,2013(23):137−140.
[10]	陶永元, 舒康云, 张春梅, 等. 茶多酚与壳聚糖复配溶液对樱桃的保鲜效果研究[J]. 食品研究与开发,2014,35(8):115−119. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-6521.2014.08.33
[11]	王华林, 王寒. 改性魔芋精粉对樱桃保鲜性能的研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2010,31(2):311−313.
[12]	Wang F, Zhang H, Jin W, et al. Effects of tartary buckwheat polysaccharide combined with nisin edible coating on the storage quality of tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) fillets[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,2018,98:2880−2888.
[13]	Xin Y, Chen F, Lai S, et al. Influence of chitosan-based coatings on the physicochemical properties and pectin nanostructure of Chinese cherry[J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology,2017,133:64−71. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2017.06.010
[14]	韩晓云, 刘鹏, 王震, 等. 核桃青皮提取液对樱桃的保鲜作用[J]. 北方园艺,2020(6):109−114.
[15]	Aglar E, Ozturk B, Guler S K, et al. Effect of modified atmosphere packaging and ‘Parka’ treatments on fruit quality characteristics of sweet cherry fruits (Prunus avium L. ‘0900 Ziraat’) during cold storage and shelf life[J]. Scientia Horticulturae,2017,222:162−168. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2017.05.024
[16]	Yaman Ö, Bayoindirli L. Effects of an edible coating and cold storage on shelf-life and quality of cherries[J]. LWT-Food Science and Technology,2002,35(2):146−150.
[17]	Bozkurt F, Tornuk F, Toker O S, et al. Effect of vaporized ethyl pyruvate as a novel preservation agent for control of postharvest quality and fungal damage of strawberry and cherry fruits[J]. LWT-Food Science and Technology,2016,65:1044−1049.
[18]	Remón S, Venturini E M, Lopez-Buesa P, et al. Burlat cherry quality after long range transport: Optimisation of packaging conditions[J]. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies,2003,4:425−434. doi: 10.1016/S1466-8564(03)00058-4
[19]	Bautista-Baños S, Hernández-Lauzardo A, Velázquez-del Valle M G, et al. Chitosan as a potential natural compound to control pre and postharvest diseases of horticultural commodities[J]. Crop Protection, 2006, 25(2): 108-118.
[20]	李洋洋, 宋文龙, 郜海燕, 等. 聚乳酸活性抗菌薄膜的性能及其对樱桃保鲜效果的影响[J]. 食品科学,2020,41(17):216−222. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20190808-094
[21]	王建青, 刘光发, 金政伟, 等. 八角茴香提取物对甜樱桃保鲜效果的研究[J]. 食品科技,2010,35(5):186−190.
[22]	Gonçalvesa B, Moraisa M C, Sequeirac A. Quality preservation of sweet cherry cv. 'staccato' by using glycine-betaine or Ascophyllum nodosum[J]. Food Chemistry,2020,322:126713. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.126713
[23]	Champa W A H, Gill M I S, Mahajan B V C, et al. Preharvest salicylic acid treatments to improve quality and postharvest life of table grapes (Vitis vinifera L.) cv. flame seedless[J]. Journal of Food Science and Technology,2015,52(6):3607−3616.
[24]	Kortei N K, Odamtten G T, Obodai M, et al. Determination of color parameters of gamma irradiated fresh and dried mushrooms during storage[J]. Croatian Journal of Food Technology, Biotechnology and Nutrition,2015(10):66−71.
[25]	Alique R, Zamorano J P, Martínez M A, et al. Effect of heat and cold treatments on respiratory metabolism and shelf-life of sweet cherry, type picota cv “Ambrunés”[J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology,2005,35:153−165. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2004.07.003