• 中国科技期刊卓越行动计划项目资助期刊
  • 中国精品科技期刊
  • 首都科技期刊卓越行动计划
  • EI
  • Scopus
  • CAB Abstracts
  • Global Health
  • 北大核心期刊
  • DOAJ
  • EBSCO
  • 中国核心学术期刊RCCSE A+
  • 中国科技核心期刊CSTPCD
  • JST China
  • FSTA
  • 中国农林核心期刊
  • 中国开放获取期刊数据库COAJ
  • CA
  • WJCI
  • 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
中国精品科技期刊2020
蒲璐璐,罗金龙,方仕茂,等. 不同年份贵州白茶品质差异分析J. 食品工业科技,2026,47(18):1−12. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025080193.
引用本文: 蒲璐璐,罗金龙,方仕茂,等. 不同年份贵州白茶品质差异分析J. 食品工业科技,2026,47(18):1−12. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025080193.
PU Lulu, LUO Jinglong, FANG Shimao, et al. Analysis of Quality Differences in Guizhou White Tea Across Different YearsJ. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2026, 47(18): 1−12. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025080193.
Citation: PU Lulu, LUO Jinglong, FANG Shimao, et al. Analysis of Quality Differences in Guizhou White Tea Across Different YearsJ. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2026, 47(18): 1−12. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2025080193.

不同年份贵州白茶品质差异分析

Analysis of Quality Differences in Guizhou White Tea Across Different Years

  • 摘要: 为探究贮藏时间对贵州白茶风味特征的影响,该研究采用高效液相色谱法、电子鼻检测和气相质谱联用技术对不同贮藏年份贵州白茶进行主要滋味物质和挥发性成分分析。结果表明,白茶陈化过程中茶多酚、总黄酮、咖啡碱、游离氨基酸、可溶性糖、乳酸、L-苹果酸和儿茶素组分含量差异显著(P<0.05),水浸出物含量差异较小。电子鼻分析表明,不同年份贵州白茶的香气特征差异可能与硫化物、芳香成分和氮氧类挥发性物质有关。挥发性成分分析表明,在不同年份贵州白茶中共鉴定出123种挥发性物质,包括醇类17种、醛类13种、酮类18种、烷烃类23种、烯烃类12种、酯类22种、其他类18种。其中,2013年生产的白茶中检测出23种特有挥发性成分,而2015年、2016年、2020年和2022年生产的白茶中仅检测出1~3种特有挥发性成分。值得注意的是,2016年生产的白茶中挥发性物质总量最高,2013年生产的白茶中挥发性物质种类最为丰富。相对气味活性值(relative odor activity value,rOAV)分析表明,正壬醛(rOAV>20)对贮藏过程中白茶香气特征的形成具有重大贡献。该研究为贵州白茶的科学贮藏和品质提升提供了理论依据。

     

    Abstract: To investigate the effects of storage duration on the flavor characteristics of Guizhou white tea, this study employed high-performance liquid chromatography, electronic nose detection, and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) to analyze the major taste compounds and volatile components in Guizhou white tea from different storage years. The results revealed significant differences (P<0.05) in the contents of tea polyphenols, total flavonoids, caffeine, free amino acids, soluble sugars, lactic acid, L-malic acid, and catechin components during the aging process of white tea, whereas differences in water-extractable substances were relatively minor. Electronic nose analysis indicated that the aroma characteristics of Guizhou white tea from different vintages might be related to sulfides, aromatic components, and nitrogen‒oxygen volatile substances. Volatile compound analysis revealed 123 volatile substances across the different vintages of Guizhou white tea, including 17 alcohols, 13 aldehydes, 18 ketones, 23 alkanes, 12 alkenes, 22 esters, and 18 other compounds. Among these, 23 unique volatile compounds were detected in white tea from 2013, whereas only 1~3 unique volatile compounds were identified in tea from 2015, 2016, 2020, and 2022. Notably, white tea produced in 2016 presented the highest total volatile content, while that from 2013 contained the most diverse array of volatile compounds. Relative odor activity value (rOAV) analysis indicated that nonanal (rOAV>20) significantly contributed to the formation of the characteristic aroma of white tea during storage. This study provides a theoretical basis for the scientific storage and quality enhancement of Guizhou white tea.

     

/

返回文章
返回