|Table of Contents|

Differences of Quality and Phenols Content of ‘Muscat Hamburg’ Grape in Different Regions

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2021年02
Page:
23-30
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Differences of Quality and Phenols Content of ‘Muscat Hamburg’ Grape in Different Regions
Author(s):
SU Ya1; XU Wen1; PEI Yi1; CHEN Qiusheng2; NIE Jiangli1; WANG Baiming1
(1.College of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture，Tianjin Agricultural University，Tianjin 300384;2.Tianjin Institute of Agricultural Quality Standards and Testing Technology,Tianjin 300381)
Keywords:
‘Muscat Hamburg’ grape; place of origin; fruit quality; phenolic
PACS:
-
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20202196
Abstract:
The ‘Muscat Hamburg’ grape was the main grape variety in Bohai bay area and used as the research material of this experiment，and the difference in fruit quality and phenolic substances of ‘Muscat Hamburg’ grape in Tianjin,Hebei and Shandong areas were determined,using conventional physical and chemical index determination methods and colorimetric methods,so as to provide theoretical basis for the efficient planting of ‘Muscat Hamburg’ grape.The results showed that the contents of soluble solids (18.80%) and total sugar (16.92 g ?（100g）-1) were higher in Tianjin，the contents of titratable acid (0.43 g ?（100g）-1) and vitamin C (2.69 mg?（100g）-1) were higher in Hebei than in other two places，and the sugar-acid ratio was 36.15.The overall quality of ‘Muscat Hamburg’ grape in Shandong was poor.The content of phenolic substances in different parts of rose scented grapes was grape seed>grape peel>grape pulp.The content of total proanthocyanidins and total polyphenols in grape seeds in Tianjin was higher than that in Hebei and Shandong.The content of total flavonoids in grape seeds in Shandong was higher than that in the other two places.In conclusion,compared with Hebei and Shandong，the quality of ‘Muscat Hamburg’ grape in Tianjin was better，the phenolic substances were relatively abundant，and the fruit quality in shandong was poor.

References:

[1]孙美，李栋梅，董业雯，等.养分供应量对玫瑰香葡萄矿质元素和水分吸收的影响[J].西北植物学报，2017,37(3):526-533.[2]李一凡，王凤玲，唐艳冲.响应面法优化超声波辅助提取玫瑰香葡萄中芪化物的工艺条件[J].食品工业科技，2016,37(20):258-262.[3]BELLIK Y,LADBOUKRA,ALZAHRANI H A,et al.Molecular mechanism underlying anti-inflammatory and anti-allergic activities of phytochemicals[J].Molecules,2012,18(1):322-353.[4]NANDAKUMAR V,SINGH T,KATIYAR S K.Multitargeted prevention and therapy of cancer by proanthocyanidins[J].Cancer Letters,2008，269(2):378-387.[5]刘旭，杨丽，张芳芳，等.酿酒葡萄成熟期间果实质地特性和花色苷含量变化[J].食品科学，2008,36(2)：105-109.[6]杨馥霞，张坤，杨瑞，等.酿酒葡萄主要品质形成机理研究进展[J].中外葡萄与葡萄酒，2016(3)：41-45.[7]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.[8]李酉开.土壤农业化学常规分析方法[M].北京:科学出版社,1983.[9]赵世杰，史国安，董新纯.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业科学技术出版社，2002.[10]王芳，俞然，张斌，等.天津地区适宜酿酒葡萄品种的选择[J].天津农业科学，2017,23(2):87-91.[11]克热曼?赛米，岳朝阳，巴哈尔古丽，等.不同立地条件下‘木纳格’葡萄果实品质和矿质元素含量[J].北方园艺，2016(18):9-13.[12]王瑛，郭奎龙.不同施肥模式对葡萄营养元素累积及土壤肥力的影响[J].江苏农业科学，2017(19):208-212.[13]高显飞.不同施肥处理对设施葡萄品质及产量的影响[D].兰州：甘肃农业大学,2017.[14]VYSTAVNA Y，RUSHENKO L，DIADIN D.Trace metals in wine and vineyard environment in southern Ukraine[J].Food Chemistry,2014,146(3):339-344．[15]HOPFER H,NELSON J,COLLINS T S.The combined impact of vineyard origin and processing winery on the elemental profile of red wines[J].Food Chemistry,2015,172(4)：486-496．[16]梁倩，王玉英，刘树庆.河北省葡萄产区土壤中微量元素分布特征及其对果实品质的影响[J].江苏农业科学，2018,46(9):127-131.[17]肖慧琳，张珍珍，朱保庆，等.川西北干旱河谷地区赤霞珠葡萄果实花色苷的积累[J].中外葡萄与葡萄酒，2012(3):16-21.[18]刘旭，杨丽，张芳芳，等.酿酒葡萄成熟期间果实质地特性和花色苷含量变化[J].食品科学，2015,36(2)：105-109.[19]王红梅，彭璐，王悦，等.五个品种葡萄理化特性及酚类物质组成的比较[J].食品与发酵工业，2019,45(7):74-81.[20]唐美玲，宋来庆，张超杰，等.烟台地区不同蛇龙珠营养系果实品质分析[J].中外葡萄与葡萄酒，2011(7)：9-13.[21]张娟，王晓宇，田呈瑞，等.基于酚类物质的酿酒红葡萄品种特性分析[J].中国农业科学，2015(7)：1370-1382.[22]齐岩，程安玮，解红霞，等.不同产区葡萄中多酚及原花青素含量差异的研究[J].山东农业科学，2015,47(8):30-33．[23]魏征.圆叶葡萄多酚积累特性分析[D].北京：中国农业大学,2017.[24]车金鑫，师俊玲，罗光武.广西罗城毛葡萄多酚、黄酮和白藜芦醇的组成特性及其抗氧化活性研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2019,47(11):87-95.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2021-05-10