摘要
为给翠碧一号的配方打叶及叶组配方提供技术支持,以翠碧一号、云烟87和K326的上部叶(B2F)和中部叶(C3F)为试验材料,按等比例两两混合,设置9个叶组配方,以2个单料烟及其叶组配方为一组,通过感官质量评价判断翠碧一号与主栽品种(云烟87和K326)间的配伍性。结果表明,翠碧一号与K326单料烟的感官质量评价差异不显著,但均显著高于云烟87-B2F;在叶组配方中,B1和C4叶组配方的感官质量显著高于B2,与其他叶组配方差异不显著。B1、B2、B3、C1和C4的香气特性配伍性评价较好,显著高于其他叶组配方。B4和C4的烟气特性配伍性得分较高,显著高于其他叶组配方,配伍性较好。B2、C1、C2和C4的口感特性配伍性评价较好,且C1和C2的配伍性得分显著高于B1—B5和C3。B1的配伍性总分达到6.5分,显著高于其他叶组配方且配伍性较好,B5和C3的配伍性总分均低于5.0分,显著低于其他叶组配方且配伍性评价较差;其他叶组配方的配伍性总分介于5.0~6.0分之间,配伍性评价较好。由此可见,翠碧一号不同等级间及其与云烟87间的配伍性评价较好,其与K326相同等级间配伍性评价也较好,但不同等级间的配伍性评价较差。
In order to provide technical support for the optimized formula threshing and tobacco leaf blend formula of CB-1,using sensory quality evaluation method,we explored the compatibility of the characteristic flue-cured tobacco variety CB-1 with Yunyan87 and K326 in Fujiang Province,taking the cutters(C3F)and leaf(B2F)of CB-1,Yunyan87 and K326 as the experimental materials,and mixing different single material tobaccos in pairs in equal proportions to make up 9 leaf blend formulas.We smoked a group consisted of two single material tobaccos and their leaf blend formula to evaluate and judge the compatibility.The results showed that there had no significantly difference between smoking score of CB-1and K326 in single material tobacco,however,their smoking scores were significantly(P<0.05)higher than that of Yunyan87-B2F.The smoking scores of the leaf blend formula of B1 and C4 were significantly(P<0.05)higher than that of B2,but significantly difference was not found with the others.Compatibility evaluations indicated that the aroma characteristics of B1,B2,B3,C1and C4 were better,moreover,their compatibility scores were significantly(P<0.05)higher than that of the others.The compatibility scores of smoke characteristics of B4 and C4 were significantly(P<0.05)higher than that of the others,and their compatibility evaluation results were better.Compatibility evaluations of taste characteristic of B2,C1,C2 and C4 were better,furthermore,compatibility scores of taste characteristic of C1 and C2 were significantly(P<0.05)higher than those of B1-B5 and C3.The total compatibility score of B1 was 6.5 points and its compatibility evaluation was better.Meanwhile,the total compatibility score of B1 was significantly(P<0.05)higher than that of the others,but the total compatibility scores of B5 and C3 were less than 5.0 points,and its compatibility evaluation was poor.The total compatibility scores of remaining leaf blend formulas were from 5.0to 6.0 points,and their compatibility evaluations were better.In conclusion,the compatib
作者
汪季涛
舒俊生
李文卿
吴克松
杨继福
汪开保
郭东锋
杨波
汤雯雯
朱英华
WANG Jitao;SHU Junsheng;LI Wenqing;WU Kesong;YANG Jifu;WANG Kaibao;GUO Dongfeng;YANG Bo;TANG Wenwen;ZHU Yinghua(Technical Center,China Tobacco Anhui Industrial Co.,Ltd.,Hefei 230088;Tobacco Science Research Institute,Fujian Tobacco Monopoly Administration,Fuzhou 350003;School of Agronomy,Anhui Agricultural University,Hefei 230036)
出处
《安徽农业大学学报》
CAS
CSCD
2022年第2期352-358,共7页
Journal of Anhui Agricultural University
基金
典型区域片烟醇化过程中微生物对烟叶品质变化的影响机理研究(202034000034005)
中国烟草总公司科技重点项目(110201902002)
“安徽中烟福建上杭基地高质量烟叶生产管理模式创新与应用”项目(20190531006)共同资助。
关键词
翠碧一号
品种
等级
叶组配方
配伍性
tobacco CB-1
variety
grade
leaf blend formula
compatibility
