|Table of Contents|

Comparison of Fruit Quality of 18 Table Grape Varieties in Hotan Greenhouse

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2024年21
Page:
37-43
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Comparison of Fruit Quality of 18 Table Grape Varieties in Hotan Greenhouse
Author(s):
SONG Guangyong1; GUO Yawen1; LIU Chunyan1; YANG Kejing2; SU Xuede3; ZHOU Long1
(1.College of Horticulture，Xinjiang Agricultural University，Urumqi，Xinjiang 830052；2.Xinjiang Jinze Liquor Co.Ltd.，Hotan，Xinjiang 848007；3.Garden Research Institute，Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural and Reclamation Sciences，Shihezi，Xinjiang 832000)
Keywords:
grape variety; greenhouse; fruit quality; principal component analysis
PACS:
S 663.1
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20241752
Abstract:
Taking 18 five-year-old table grape varieties ‘Baoguang’‘Chenxiang’‘Chunguang’‘Conglinmeigui’‘Guanghui’‘Hongwuhe’‘Hutai No.8’‘Jumeigui’‘Romantic Beauty’‘Miguang’‘Puzhimeng’‘Ruiduhongyu’‘Victoria’‘Wuhecuibao’‘Midnight Beauty’‘Shine Muscat’‘Zitianwuhe’ and ‘Zixiameigui’ in greenhouse as the experimental materials,correlation analysis，principal component analysis and other methods were used.The differences in external and internal quality of different grape varieties were studied,in order to provide reference for the selection of grape varieties for facility cultivation in Hotan area.The results showed among the 18 table grape varieties，‘Zixiameigui’ had the largest fruit weight and the highest soluble solids content.‘Puzhimeng’ had the largest fruit shape index，‘Baoguang’ had the thickest peel，and only ‘Midnight Beauty’ had natural seedlessness.‘Hongwuhe’ had the lowest total acid content，and ‘Chunguang’ had the highest total anthocyanin content.Correlation analysis showed that fruit weight was positively correlated with fruit stalk length，seed number and soluble solids.Comprehensive evaluation was carried out by principal component analysis，and the scores of 18 grape varieties were ranked from high to low as ‘Puzhimeng’＞‘Zixiameigui’＞‘Zitianwuhe’＞‘Baoguang’＞‘Hongwuhe’＞‘Conglinmeigui’＞‘Jumeigui’＞‘Chunguang’＞‘Miguang’＞‘Romantic Beauty’＞‘Hutai No.8’＞‘Shine Muscat’＞‘Ruiduhongyu’＞‘Victoria’＞‘Wuhecuibao’＞‘Guanghui’＞‘Midnight Beauty’＞‘Chenxiang’.In summary，among the 18 table grape varieties，the most suitable variety for greenhouse cultivation in Hotan area was ‘Puzhimeng’，followed by ‘Zixiameigui’‘Zitianwuhe’‘Baoguang’ and ‘Hongwuhe’，et al.

References:

［1］国家统计局农村社会经济调查司.中国农村统计年鉴2023［M］.北京:中国统计出版社,2023.［2］张小琴,王富霞,边凤霞,等.新疆和田地区葡萄轻简化栽培关键技术［J］.中外葡萄与葡萄酒,2021(2):22-25.［3］王玉安,朱燕芳,郝燕.10个鲜食葡萄品种在甘肃兰州的品质表现及抗寒性［J］.经济林研究,2024,42(1):266-273.［4］江旭升,李庆宏,杨勇胜,等.贵阳地区8个葡萄品种果实品质的综合评价［J］.中外葡萄与葡萄酒,2023(3):66-72.［5］张生智,孙俊宝,张未仲,等.三种鲜食葡萄在山西省引种表现及与亲本比较［J］.北方园艺,2022(5):47-52.［6］吴久赟,刘翔宇,雷静,等.吐鲁番地区11个葡萄品种的设施栽培特性分析［J］.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2018,46(3):134-141.［7］刘春艳,谢岳,李栋梅,等.基于主成分分析的酿酒葡萄果实评价［J］.北方园艺,2017(11):13-17.［8］潘越,杨璐,杜林峰,等.简易覆盖对新疆阿克苏北冰红葡萄果实品质的影响［J］.中国果树,2022(11):6-11.［9］沈甜,牛锐敏,陈卫平,等.应用层次-关联度和聚类分析法评价十八个鲜食葡萄品质［J］.北方园艺,2017(23):64-72.［10］曹建康,姜微波,赵玉梅.果蔬采后生理生化实验指导［M］.北京:中国轻工业出版社,2007.［11］刘洪海,张晓丽,杜平,等.pH示差法测定烟73葡萄中花青素含量［J］.中国调味品,2009,34(4):110-111,117.［12］TOCI A T,CRUPI P,GAMBACORTA G,et al.Free and bound aroma compounds characterization by GC-MS of Negroamaro wine as affected by soil management［J］.Journal of Mass Spectrometry,2012,47(9):1104-1112.［13］蒋娅萍,方艳,王海霞,等.外源油菜素内酯对霞多丽和黑比诺葡萄品质的影响［J］.果树学报,2023,40(12):2574-2590.［14］李跃红,冉茂乾,徐孟怀,等.不同品种猕猴桃果实品质比较与综合评价［J］.食品与发酵工业,2020,46(23):162-168.［15］周会玲,李嘉瑞.葡萄浆果耐压力、耐拉力与果实结构的关系［J］.西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2007,35(2):106-109,114.［16］张亚飞,姚瑶,杜林笑,等.基于主成分分析的新疆多地酿酒葡萄“赤霞珠”品质分析及最适采收期［J］.食品工业科技,2020,41(2):227-232.［17］杨江山,李斗,王春恒,等.调环酸钙对霞多丽葡萄生理特性及果实品质的影响［J］.果树学报,2024,41(1):76-88.［18］曹炜玉,舒楠,温锦丽,等.不同品种酿酒葡萄果实发育期间营养物质动态变化及成熟期果实主成分分析［J］.北方园艺,2022(14):16-23.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2024-11-21