|Table of Contents|

Evaluation of Split-fruit Resistant Jujube Variety Resources in South Xinjiang Region

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2025年10
Page:
10-18
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Evaluation of Split-fruit Resistant Jujube Variety Resources in South Xinjiang Region
Author(s):
YANG Cheng1; 2; WANG Zhenlei1; 2; ZHANG Chuanjiang1; 2; LIU Wei1; 2; LIN Minjuan1; 2
(1.Horticulture and Forestry College,Tarim University/National and Local Joint Engineering Laboratory of Efficient and Superior-Quality Cultivation and Deep Processing Technology for Southern Xinjiang Characteristic Fruit Trees,Alar,Xinjiang 843300；2.Xinjiang Production & Construction Corps Key Laboratory of Protection and Utilization of Biological Resources in Tarim Basin,Tarim University，Alar,Xinjiang 843300)
Keywords:
jujube; fruit cracking; hardness; texture
PACS:
S 665.1
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20244437
Abstract:
Taking 42 jujube varieties as the experimental materials,principal component analysis,cluster analysis and correlation analysis were adopted to conduct dynamic measurements on the natural cracking rate,cracking index,fruit texture,water immersion cracking rate and water absorption rate of jujubes at the white,semi-red and fully red stages,screen out extreme jujube varieties of different cracking types,in order to provide reference for the selection and breeding of anti-cracking jujube resources in Xinjiang.The results showed that the rate of fruit splitting under natural conditions was less than 50% for 39 date varieties,of which 20 did not experience splitting,and higher than 50% for three date varieties.The texture parameters were classified into four principal components and cluster analysed using principal component analysis.The group 1 with the highest hardness obtained had 13 varieties with 7.92% cracking.There were 14 varieties in group 2,with fruit cleavage intermediate between resistant and susceptible to cleavage.And the group 3 with the lowest hardness factor and elasticity factor had 15 varieties with the highest cracking rate of 13.97%.In further fruit dipping tests,‘Dalizhizao’ belonged to the moderately crack-resistant varieties,while the rest belonged to the crack-prone or very crack-prone varieties.Taken together,it was concluded that the taxa with higher hardness and elasticity of date fruits were more resistant to cracking.The fruit dipping test screened ‘Dalizhizao’ as a moderately crack-resistant variety.

References:

［1］曲泽洲,王永蕙.中国果树志-枣卷［M］.北京:中国林业出版社,1993.［2］刘孟军,王玖瑞,刘平,等.中国枣生产与科研成就及前沿进展［J］.园艺学报,2015,42(9):1683-1698.［3］王红明,李雪,汪海燕,等.甜樱桃裂果机理研究现状与展望［J］.落叶果树,2022,54(6):46-51.［4］刘丹,刘鹏,刘丙花,等.石榴果实裂果影响因子及研究进展［J］.北方园艺,2021(5):136-141.［5］秦丹凤,郝立健,张特斌,等.番茄裂果与果实主要性状相关性分析［J］.北方园艺,2025(1):29-35.［6］王旭旭,樊秀彩,李傲,等.葡萄品种资源裂果性状调查与分析［J］.园艺学报,2016,43(11):2099-2108.［7］王振磊,吴巍,王小燕,等.枣抗裂种质资源筛选与裂果机理初步研究［J］.塔里木大学学报,2016,28(3):88-95.［8］SEYMOURG B,MANNINGK,ERIKSSON E M,et al.Genetic identification and genomic organization of factors affecting fruit texture［J］.Journal of Experimental Botany,2002,53(377):2065-2071.［9］黄瑶.基于TPA法评价新疆枣果质地品质的研究［D］.乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学,2022.［10］杨植,董梦怡,王振磊,等.基于TPA法枣酸枣杂交F1果实质地与裂果对比分析［J］.新疆农业科学,2023,60(3):608-615.［11］唐贵敏,贾明,刘丙花,等.不同裂果易感性石榴品种果皮质构特性分析与显微结构观测［J］.热带作物学报,2021,42(3):777-781.［12］YAMAGUCHI M，SATO I，ISHIGURO M．Influences of epidermal cell sizes and flesh firmness on cracking susceptibility in sweet cherry (Prunus avium L．) cultivars and selections［J］.Engei Gakkai Zasshi,2002,71(6):738-746．［13］木合塔尔·扎热,故丽米热·卡克什,吴正保,等.浸水处理下骏枣裂果相关因子分析［J］.中南林业科技大学学报,2022,42(6):15-23.［14］王艳,马亚平,曹兵,等.‘灵武长枣’果实裂果特性初步研究［J］.中国农学通报,2018,34(1):75-80.［15］潘周昆,杨芯芳,张忠鑫,等.伏脆蜜果实吸水途径及吸水后结构力学的变化［J］.塔里木大学学报,2020,32(4):31-40.［16］张立恒,郑玮,赵柏霞,等.12个甜樱桃品种抗裂果生理指标的筛选及裂果机制分析［J］.中国果树,2023(12):42-46.［17］寸丽芳,房立媛,林敏娟,等.喷施外源钙对骏枣裂果和相关生理特性及显微结构的影响［J］.果树学报,2023,40(9):1894-1903.［18］张生智,孙俊宝,张未仲,等.甜樱桃不同品种内源激素含量与裂果相关性初步研究［J］.中国农学通报,2019,35(19):64-67.［19］阳姝婷.干旱胁迫对甜樱桃生理及果实品质的影响［D］.雅安:四川农业大学,2016.［20］辛艳伟,集贤,刘和.裂果性不同的枣品种果皮及果肉发育特点观察研究［J］.中国农学通报,2006,22(11):253-257.［21］LIUZ W，YANX W，WANGP W，et al．Changes in fruit texture and cell structure of different pumpkin varieties (lines) during storage［J］．Postharvest Biology and Technology，2024，208：112647．［22］陆玲鸿,马媛媛,古咸彬,等.不同猕猴桃品种在贮藏过程中果实质构的变化［J］.北方园艺,2023(7):95-101.［23］何全光,黄梅华,张娥珍,等.芒果TPA质构测定优化及不同成熟度芒果质构特性分析［J］.食品工业科技,2016,37(18):122-126,132.［24］姜勇,王允虎,薄艳红,等.不同品种无花果TPA质构特性分析［J］.山东农业科学,2018,50(10):52-56.［25］韩艳文,李文生,王宝刚,等.葡萄果实质地剖面分析的参数优化［J］.北方园艺,2018(19):129-135.［26］于继洲,马丽萍,张秀梅,等.枣树裂果机理研究［J］.山西农业科学,2002,30(1):76-79.［27］刘光生,刘源源,马树平,等.枣裂果主导因子及防裂技术措施研究［J］.山西农业科学,2012,40(2):150-152.176.［28］张伟龙,杨静慧,梁发辉,等.不同浸果时间对葡萄裂果的影响［J］.天津农学院学报,2020,27(1):10-14.［29］徐蕊,闫伟兄,马国飞,等.枸杞裂果相关性状因子研究［J］.北方园艺,2024(12):95-101.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2025-05-30