PDF(1358 KB)
Quality Evaluation and Aroma Analysis of Flue-cured Tobacco Hybrid ‘YY021’
SUNJiping, LILihua, WANGHui, LIXuejun, SUNHuan, SONGZhengxiong
Journal of Agriculture ›› 2026, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (2) : 69-73.
PDF(1358 KB)
PDF(1358 KB)
Quality Evaluation and Aroma Analysis of Flue-cured Tobacco Hybrid ‘YY021’
In order to explore the quality characteristics of flue-cured tobacco hybrid ‘YY021’, a multi-point field comparative test was conducted with ‘Heluo No.1’ as the control variety. The appearance quality and sensory quality of raw tobacco were evaluated, and the contents of chemical components and aroma components were determined to comprehensively evaluate the quality and aroma components of tobacco leaves. The results showed that the quality of ‘YY021’ middle tobacco was slightly better than that of upper tobacco. The scores of chemical composition, sensory quality evaluation and comprehensive evaluation of ‘YY021’ were significantly higher than those of ‘Heluo No.1’, and the performance of each pilot was consistent. The contents of five kinds of neutral aroma components in the upper leaves of ‘YY021’ were higher than those in the middle leaves. The content of sugar and browning products of middle leaves of ‘Heluo No.1’ were significantly higher than those of ‘YY021’. The contents of total neutral aroma components, chlorophyll degradation products (neophytadiene) and cembranoids (solanone) in middle leaves of ‘YY021’ were significantly higher than those of ‘Heluo No.1’, which were 278.93, 243.80 and 38.21 μg/g, respectively. The quality of ‘YY021’ was better than that of ‘Heluo No.1’. Neophytadiene, ketone, benzyl alcohol, β-damone and giant bean trienone were important aroma components that affect their quality.
flue-cured tobacco / ‘YY021’ / quality, aroma components / sensory quality / chemical composition / appearance quality
| [1] |
吴彦辉, 白静科, 李建华, 等. 河南浓香型烟叶致香物质及风格成因研究进展[J]. 现代农业科技, 2019(24):207-211.
|
| [2] |
贺帆, 王涛, 余金恒, 等. 不同典型浓香型产区烟叶化学成分差异分析[J]. 福建农业学报, 2012, 27(11):1189-1193.
|
| [3] |
刘晶晶, 崔光周, 段旺军, 等. 生态因素影响烟草香味特征的研究进展[J]. 河南农业科学, 2023, 52(2):1-11.
|
| [4] |
杨志晓, 王轶, 刘红峰, 等. 我国主栽烤烟品种亲缘关系及育种[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2013, 19(2):34-41.
|
| [5] |
邵丽, 晋艳, 杨宇虹, 等. 生态条件对不同烤烟品种烟叶产质量的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2002, 35(10):40-45.
|
| [6] |
晁江涛, 吴新儒, 宋青松, 等. 烤烟新品种中烟特香301的选育及特征特性[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2022, 43(3):7-13.
|
| [7] |
曹建敏, 别瑞, 王玉华, 等. 烤烟新品种中烟特香301特征香气物质研究[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2022, 43(2):64-70.
|
| [8] |
耿锐梅, 曹长代, 李峰, 等. 烤烟新品种中川208香气成分及香韵特征解析[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2023, 44(6):69-74.
|
| [9] |
晁江涛, 曹建敏, 吴新儒, 等. 烤烟特征香韵品系8号清甜香韵的形成机制研究[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2022, 43(6):82-87.
|
| [10] |
周冀衡, 王勇, 邵岩, 等. 产烟国部分烟区烤烟质体色素及主要挥发性香气物质含量的比较[J]. 湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2005, 31(2):128-132.
|
| [11] |
陈帅, 任民, 杨爱国. 烟草品质性状相关基因挖掘与功能解析研究进展[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2023, 44(3):99-106.
|
| [12] |
闫克玉, 王建民, 屈剑波, 等. 河南烤烟评吸质量与主要理化指标的相关分析[J]. 烟草科技, 2001, 34(10):5-9.
|
| [13] |
中国农业科学院烟草研究所. 中国烟草栽培学[M]. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2005:87-89.
|
| [14] |
郭可谦. 烤烟香型风格特性及其影响因素和鉴定方法研究进展[J]. 中南农业科技, 2024, 45(2):251-256.
烤烟的香味与香型由多种影响因素共同作用形成,不同种类的烟叶香气香型都有其各自的风格特点,且不同产地、不同香型的烤烟在质量特性上都有明显的差异性。概述了不同烤烟香味香型的风格特性及其影响因素,分析了烤烟在化学成分、香味成分及感官评吸上的质量差异,归纳了国内外在其他食品上香气香型的鉴定研究方法,为烤烟香气香型鉴定研究提供了参考。
|
| [15] |
王永, 孙延国, 王德权, 等. 山东省不同类型烟叶质量特征差异及原因分析[J]. 现代农业科技, 2024(10):141-150.
|
| [16] |
王鹏泽, 来苗, 陶陶, 等. 不同香型烤烟主要香味物质成分与香韵指标的关系研究[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2015, 17(3):126-135.
|
| [17] |
孙计平, 吴照辉, 李雪君, 等. 烤烟品种中烟100与NC89及其F1主要特性研究[J]. 河南农业科学, 2014, 43(9):46-51.
为了研究烤烟中烟100与NC89的特性差异及其遗传特点,用2个亲本配制正反交组合并进行小区对比试验,分析比较2个品种及其F1的农艺性状、经济性状、田间自然发病情况、化学成分、香气成分、感官质量差异。结果表明,中烟100大田表现优于NC89,NC89内在品质优于中烟100;二者的F1在农艺性状、经济性状、抗病性等方面都表现出明显的中亲或超亲优势;正反交组合表现有差异,(NC89×中烟100)F1产量、产值等经济性状极显著高于两亲本,且在感官质量上超亲优势明显;(中烟100×NC89)F1抗病性明显好于两亲本,钾含量超亲优势明显;NC89香气成分总量明显高于中烟100,二者的F1香气成分总量高于中烟100、低于NC89。
|
| [18] |
高建宏. 不同香型烟叶中关键致香物质的GC-MS/O分析与鉴别[D]. 上海: 复旦大学, 2012.
|
| [19] |
叶荣飞, 赵瑞峰. 烟草香气物质来源[J]. 广东农业科学, 2011, 38(5):51-53.
|
| [20] |
王能如, 李章海, 王东胜, 等. 我国烤烟主体香味成分研究初报[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2009, 30(3):1-6.
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
