玉溪市K326烤烟品种定色期烘烤工艺优化研究
|
摘要
【目的】为进一步优化密集烘烤工艺技术,改善烤后烟叶的总体质量和经济性状,提高其工业可用性。【方法】本试验选取K326烤烟品种,共设置了6种不同的定色期温湿度与时间组合烘烤工艺进行对比研究,通过测定烟叶产质量指标、物理特性、内在化学成分和评吸质量等指标来判定烤后烟叶质量。【结果】在定色期6种温湿度与时间参数组合处理下,不同部位初烤烟叶物理特性均一般,仅单叶重符合优质烟叶的要求;不同部位烟叶各处理之间化学成分协调性总体较好,各项指标大都符合优质烟叶的要求。定色期相对湿度较低和较高都不利于烤后烟叶品质,适当提高相对湿度可以提升烟叶质量,提高温度虽然会提升烟叶质量,同时也会导致烟叶内在化学成分的协调性变差。【结论】以定色期采取高温中湿烘烤方式并适当缩短定色时间的处理4,即定色期3个阶段的温湿度分别为48和37℃、55和38℃、60和39℃时,烤后烟叶感官评吸得分和均价最高,分别为81.5分和21.9元/kg,烟叶等级和物理特性最好,化学成分协调性也较好。
【Objective】The present paper was conducted to further optimize the curing technology of standardized intensive curing barn in Yuxi,improve the overall quality and economic traits of the flue-cured tobacco leaves and improve its industrial usability. 【Method】In this experiment,there were the upper,middle and lower leaves of the K326 flue-cured tobacco varieties used as test materials at dry-leaf stage to study the effect of the physical properties,chemical compositions,economic traits and sensory quality of tobacco leaves and determine the quality of cured tobacco.【Result】The results showed that under the combination of 6 kind of humiture and time parameters at the dry-leaf stage,the physical characteristics of the tobacco leaves in different parts were all in general,only the single leaf weight accords with the requirements of high quality tobacco,and the chemical composition of different parts of tobacco leaves in different parts is better,and the indexes are mostly in accordance with the requirements of high quality tobacco leaves. The proper increase of the relative humidity could improve the quality of the tobacco leaves. The improvement of the temperature could improve the quality of the tobacco leaves,but the chemical composition harmony was poor. 【Conclusion】The temperature and humidity of the 3 stages with treatment 4(taking high temperature and wet curing treatment and appropriate shorting the drying time in the dry-leaf stage) were 48 and 37 ℃,55 and 38 ℃,60 and 39 ℃,respectively. And the same time the average score of the sensory evaluation and the average price of the flue-cured tobacco leaves were 81. 5 and 21.9 Yuan/kg respectively. The tobacco grade and physical properties with treatment 4 were the best and the chemical composition was also better.
【Objective】The present paper was conducted to further optimize the curing technology of standardized intensive curing barn in Yuxi,improve the overall quality and economic traits of the flue-cured tobacco leaves and improve its industrial usability. 【Method】In this experiment,there were the upper,middle and lower leaves of the K326 flue-cured tobacco varieties used as test materials at dry-leaf stage to study the effect of the physical properties,chemical compositions,economic traits and sensory quality of tobacco leaves and determine the quality of cured tobacco.【Result】The results showed that under the combination of 6 kind of humiture and time parameters at the dry-leaf stage,the physical characteristics of the tobacco leaves in different parts were all in general,only the single leaf weight accords with the requirements of high quality tobacco,and the chemical composition of different parts of tobacco leaves in different parts is better,and the indexes are mostly in accordance with the requirements of high quality tobacco leaves. The proper increase of the relative humidity could improve the quality of the tobacco leaves. The improvement of the temperature could improve the quality of the tobacco leaves,but the chemical composition harmony was poor. 【Conclusion】The temperature and humidity of the 3 stages with treatment 4(taking high temperature and wet curing treatment and appropriate shorting the drying time in the dry-leaf stage) were 48 and 37 ℃,55 and 38 ℃,60 and 39 ℃,respectively. And the same time the average score of the sensory evaluation and the average price of the flue-cured tobacco leaves were 81. 5 and 21.9 Yuan/kg respectively. The tobacco grade and physical properties with treatment 4 were the best and the chemical composition was also better.
引文
[1]孙曙光,汪健.不同密集烘烤工艺对烤后烟叶质量的影响[J].江西农业学报2011,23(6):37-39.
[2]王玉兵,冯永刚,田必文,等.不同烘烤环境对散烟密集烤房初烤叶等级质量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2008,36(7):2789-2791.
[3]江厚龙,刘国顺,周辉,等.变黄时间和定色时间对烤烟烟叶化学成分的影响[J].烟草科技,2012(12):33-38.
[4]徐秀红,孙福山,王永,等.我国密集烤房研究应用现状及发展方向探讨[J].中国烟草科学,2008,295(4):544-56,61.
[5]江厚龙,刘国顺,周辉,等.变黄时间和定色时间对烤烟烟叶化学成分的影响[J].烟草科技,2012(12):33-38.
[6]赵应虎,王涛,何艳辉,等.烘烤过程中烤烟外观与内在质量变化研究进展[J].作物研究,2013,27(6):700-704.
[7]史宏志.烟草香味学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1998:154-158.
[8]吴中华,徐秀红,王松峰,等.不同调制方法对烤烟淀粉含量及香吃味的研究[J].云南烟草,2004(2):17-24.
[9]伍优,罗以贵,崔国民,等.重庆烟区K326上部烟叶烘烤工艺研究[J].中国农学通报,2013(9):213-220.
[10]刘春奎,王建民,李葆,等.云南烟区烤烟品种K326主要化学成分特点分析[J].郑州轻工业学院学报(自然科学版),2010(5):44-48.
[11]崔国民,黄维,赵高坤,等.不同烘烤工艺对烟叶评吸质量及致香物质的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2013(24):10125-10128.
[12]王娟,李文娟,周丽娟,等.云南主要烟区初烤烟叶物理特性的稳定性及质量水平分析[J].湖南农业科学,2013(17):28-31.
[13]聂东发,盛孝.提高烟叶香吃味的烘烤工艺研究[J].中国农学通报,2007,23(5):104-108.
[14]吴中华,窦国孝,赵瑜,等.不同调制方法对烤烟淀粉含量及香吃味的研究[J].云南烟草,2004(2):14-18.
[15]孙福山.烤烟调制过程中香气成分的研究及其应用技术探讨[J].中国烟草科学,1997(2):39-41.
[16]张保占,孟智勇,马浩波,等.密集烘烤定色阶段不同湿球温度对烤后烟叶品质的影响[J].河南农业科学,2012(1):56-61.
[17]杨尚明,孙钟亮,刘田军,等.烤烟中上部烟叶等级质量研究[J].现代农业科技,2011(9):55-56.
[18]李文娟,王娟,朱聿振,等.昆明不同烤烟品种初烤烟叶物理特性差异研究[J].河南农业科学,2014(4):43-47.
[19]杜文,谭新良,易建华,等.用烟叶化学成分进行烟叶质量评价[J].中国烟草学报,2007(3):25-31.
[20]彭清.我国烤烟烟叶化学成分特征分析及香型空间分布格局研究[D].重庆:西南大学,2013:22-23.
[21]张锦韬.红大烟叶化学成分与感官评吸质量特征及相互关系研究[D].长沙:湖南农业大学,2011:24-25.
[22]廖和明,孙福山,徐秀红,等.不同烘烤工艺对烤烟品种NC55中性香气物质各组分含量的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2013,34(5):89-94.
[23]富廷.优质烟七步烘烤法[J].农村新技术,1999(10):34.
[24]张荣范.烤烟烘烤技术改革初探[J].中国烟草,1987(2):36-39.
[25]樊军辉,陈江华,宋朝鹏,等.不同烤房烘烤过程中烟叶形态和物理特性的变化[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2010,38(6):109-114.
[26]刘国顺.内外烟叶质量差距分析和提高烟叶质量技术途径探讨[J].中国烟草学报,2003(增刊):54-58.
[27]刘垦.定色前期不同恒定干湿球温度对烤后烟叶质量的影响[D].贵州:贵州大学,2007:52.
[2]王玉兵,冯永刚,田必文,等.不同烘烤环境对散烟密集烤房初烤叶等级质量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2008,36(7):2789-2791.
[3]江厚龙,刘国顺,周辉,等.变黄时间和定色时间对烤烟烟叶化学成分的影响[J].烟草科技,2012(12):33-38.
[4]徐秀红,孙福山,王永,等.我国密集烤房研究应用现状及发展方向探讨[J].中国烟草科学,2008,295(4):544-56,61.
[5]江厚龙,刘国顺,周辉,等.变黄时间和定色时间对烤烟烟叶化学成分的影响[J].烟草科技,2012(12):33-38.
[6]赵应虎,王涛,何艳辉,等.烘烤过程中烤烟外观与内在质量变化研究进展[J].作物研究,2013,27(6):700-704.
[7]史宏志.烟草香味学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1998:154-158.
[8]吴中华,徐秀红,王松峰,等.不同调制方法对烤烟淀粉含量及香吃味的研究[J].云南烟草,2004(2):17-24.
[9]伍优,罗以贵,崔国民,等.重庆烟区K326上部烟叶烘烤工艺研究[J].中国农学通报,2013(9):213-220.
[10]刘春奎,王建民,李葆,等.云南烟区烤烟品种K326主要化学成分特点分析[J].郑州轻工业学院学报(自然科学版),2010(5):44-48.
[11]崔国民,黄维,赵高坤,等.不同烘烤工艺对烟叶评吸质量及致香物质的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2013(24):10125-10128.
[12]王娟,李文娟,周丽娟,等.云南主要烟区初烤烟叶物理特性的稳定性及质量水平分析[J].湖南农业科学,2013(17):28-31.
[13]聂东发,盛孝.提高烟叶香吃味的烘烤工艺研究[J].中国农学通报,2007,23(5):104-108.
[14]吴中华,窦国孝,赵瑜,等.不同调制方法对烤烟淀粉含量及香吃味的研究[J].云南烟草,2004(2):14-18.
[15]孙福山.烤烟调制过程中香气成分的研究及其应用技术探讨[J].中国烟草科学,1997(2):39-41.
[16]张保占,孟智勇,马浩波,等.密集烘烤定色阶段不同湿球温度对烤后烟叶品质的影响[J].河南农业科学,2012(1):56-61.
[17]杨尚明,孙钟亮,刘田军,等.烤烟中上部烟叶等级质量研究[J].现代农业科技,2011(9):55-56.
[18]李文娟,王娟,朱聿振,等.昆明不同烤烟品种初烤烟叶物理特性差异研究[J].河南农业科学,2014(4):43-47.
[19]杜文,谭新良,易建华,等.用烟叶化学成分进行烟叶质量评价[J].中国烟草学报,2007(3):25-31.
[20]彭清.我国烤烟烟叶化学成分特征分析及香型空间分布格局研究[D].重庆:西南大学,2013:22-23.
[21]张锦韬.红大烟叶化学成分与感官评吸质量特征及相互关系研究[D].长沙:湖南农业大学,2011:24-25.
[22]廖和明,孙福山,徐秀红,等.不同烘烤工艺对烤烟品种NC55中性香气物质各组分含量的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2013,34(5):89-94.
[23]富廷.优质烟七步烘烤法[J].农村新技术,1999(10):34.
[24]张荣范.烤烟烘烤技术改革初探[J].中国烟草,1987(2):36-39.
[25]樊军辉,陈江华,宋朝鹏,等.不同烤房烘烤过程中烟叶形态和物理特性的变化[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2010,38(6):109-114.
[26]刘国顺.内外烟叶质量差距分析和提高烟叶质量技术途径探讨[J].中国烟草学报,2003(增刊):54-58.
[27]刘垦.定色前期不同恒定干湿球温度对烤后烟叶质量的影响[D].贵州:贵州大学,2007:52.