不同光质萎凋处理云南大叶种白茶品质的差异

doi:10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2024.06.015

湖北农业科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 63 ›› Issue (6): 99-104.doi: 10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2024.06.015

不同光质萎凋处理云南大叶种白茶品质的差异

张艳梅¹, 仝佳音¹, 郝连奇², 杨方慧¹, 赵碧¹, 汤海昆¹, 马玉青¹, 夏丽飞¹, 孙云南¹, 浦绍柳¹

1.云南省农业科学院茶叶研究所/云南省茶学重点实验室,云南勐海 666201;
2.北京小罐茶业有限公司,北京 100020

收稿日期:2023-02-24 出版日期:2024-06-25 发布日期:2024-06-26
通讯作者: 浦绍柳（1974-）,男,云南宣威人,研究员,主要从事茶叶加工与功能性产品开发工作,（电话）13759253288（电子信箱）185535815@qq.com。
作者简介:张艳梅（1985-）,女,云南嵩明人,副研究员,主要从事茶叶加工与质量安全研究工作,（电话）13988182425（电子信箱）398986898@qq.com。
基金资助:
世界大叶茶技术创新中心建设及成果产业化项目（202102AE090038）; 绿色食品牌打造科技支撑行动（茶叶）专项经费实施方案项目; 普洱茶优良品种选育及应用项目（202002AE320001）; 云南省茶学重点实验室培育专项（2017DG011）; 云南省基础研究专项-青年项目（202301AU070129）; 云南省农业联合专项-面上项目（202301BD070001-212）; 云南省茶学重点实验室开放基金项目（2022YNCX004）; 云南省勐海县勐满镇西定乡科技特派队项目（202304BI090032-27）

Quality difference of large-leaf variety white tea by light quality withering treatments in Yunnan Province

ZHANG Yan-mei¹, TONG Jia-yin¹, HAO Lian-qi², YANG Fang-hui¹, ZHAO Bi¹, TANG Hai-kun¹, MA Yu-qing¹, XIA Li-fei¹, SUN Yun-nan¹, PU Shao-liu¹

1. Tea Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Yunnan Provincial Key Laboratory of Tea Science, Menghai 666201, Yunnan, China;
2. Beijing Xiaoguantea Co., Ltd., Beijing 100020, China

Received:2023-02-24 Published:2024-06-25 Online:2024-06-26

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 通过对云南大叶种鲜叶进行不同光质萎凋处理,以找出最优加工工艺,为进一步研究大叶种白茶提供理论依据。以云南大叶种长叶白毫为试验对象,采用蓝光和黄光2种光质萎凋,对茶样进行感官品质、生化成分以及香气成分的检测与分析。结果表明,经过2种光质处理后,感官审评总分均高于对照（室内自然凋萎）,综合分数从高到低分别为黄光、蓝光、对照,得分分别为92.5、91.8、89.2。经过2种光质处理的茶叶感官品质优于对照,其中黄光优于蓝光。经过2种光质处理的云南大叶种白茶品质得到明显提高,与对照相比,黄光萎凋显著提高了云南大叶种白茶氨基酸、咖啡碱、可溶性糖的含量（P<0.05）,蓝光次之,对照最低;与对照相比,2种光质处理均提高了水浸出物含量,蓝光提高幅度大于黄光;2种光质处理均降低了茶多酚含量,蓝光降低幅度大于黄光。试验茶样共鉴定出93种香气组分,其中对照58种,蓝光萎凋57种,黄光萎凋55种。黄光萎凋、蓝光萎凋和室内自然萎凋的茶样芳樟醇相对含量分别为65.43%、62.70%、61.36%。不同光质萎凋有助于云南大叶种白茶品质的提升,其中黄光优于蓝光。处理过的茶样香气、滋味等均比常规加工工艺有较大的改善,是加工云南大叶种优质白茶的方法。

关键词: 云南大叶种白茶, 光质, 萎凋

Abstract: In order to find out the best processing technology, the fresh leaves of Yunnan large-leaf variety were treated with different light quality, which provided a theoretical basis for further study of large-leaf variety white tea. The long-leaf pekoe of Yunnan large-leaf variety was used as the experimental object, two kinds of light quality were used for withering, the sensory quality, biochemical components and aroma components of the samples were detected and analyzed. The results showed that after two kinds of light quality treatment, the total score of sensory evaluation was higher than that of CK（conventional indoor natural sunlight withering）, and the comprehensive score from high to low was yellow light, blue light and CK, and the scores were 92.5, 91.8 and 89.2, respectively. The sensory quality of tea treated with two kinds of light was better than CK, and yellow light was better than blue light. The quality of white tea treated with two light qualities was significantly improved. Yellow light withering significantly increased the content of amino acids, caffeine and soluble sugars of large-leaf white tea in Yunnan （P<0.05）, followed by blue light and the lowest was the control （CK）. Compared with the control, two kinds of light quality treatment increased the content of water extract, and the increase of blue light was greater than that of yellow light;the polyphenol content of tea was reduced by two kinds of light quality treatment, and the reduction of blue light was greater than that of yellow light. A total of 93 aroma components were identified in the test tea samples, including 58 CK, 57 blue light withering and 55 yellow light withering. The content of tea-like linalool with yellow light withering, blue light withering and conventional indoor natural sunlight withering was 65.43%, 62.70% and 61.36%, respectively. The withering with different light quality was beneficial to the improvement of the quality of white tea, and yellow light was better than blue light. Because the aroma and taste of the processed tea were greatly improved, it was one of the methods to process high quality white tea.

Key words: large-leaf white tea, light quality, wilting

中图分类号:

S571.1

张艳梅, 仝佳音, 郝连奇, 杨方慧, 赵碧, 汤海昆, 马玉青, 夏丽飞, 孙云南, 浦绍柳. 不同光质萎凋处理云南大叶种白茶品质的差异[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2024, 63(6): 99-104.

ZHANG Yan-mei, TONG Jia-yin, HAO Lian-qi, YANG Fang-hui, ZHAO Bi, TANG Hai-kun, MA Yu-qing, XIA Li-fei, SUN Yun-nan, PU Shao-liu. Quality difference of large-leaf variety white tea by light quality withering treatments in Yunnan Province[J]. HUBEI AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2024, 63(6): 99-104.

参考文献

[1] 梅宇, 梁晓. 2021年中国茶叶生产与内销形势分析[J]. 中国茶叶, 2022, 44(4): 17-22.
[2] 郭春雨, 廖贤军. 华江乡古树茶加工白茶关键技术[J]. 南方园艺, 2019, 30(4): 51-53.
[3] 刘谊健, 郭玉琼, 詹梓金. 白茶制作过程主要化学成分转化与品质形成探讨[J]. 福建茶叶, 2003(4): 13-14.
[4] 袁弟顺, 林丽明, 岳文杰, 等. 自然萎凋白茶的品质形成机理研究[A]. 中国茶叶学会. 2008茶学青年科学家论坛论文集[C]. 杭州: 中国茶叶学会, 2008. 138-146.
[5] 周才碧, 张敏星, 穆瑞禄, 等. 白茶萎凋技术的研究进展[J]. 农产品加工, 2014(1): 48-50.
[6] 李小娟, 郑国建, 陈积霞, 等. 不同光源照射与碰青处理对摊青叶香气的影响[J]. 中国茶叶加工, 2011(2): 13-18.
[7] 张贝贝. 不同光质萎凋对红茶品质的影响[D]. 武汉:华中农业大学, 2013.
[8] 黄藩, 唐晓波, 张成, 等. 不同光质萎凋对白牡丹茶品质的影响[J]. 热带作物学报, 2021, 42(6): 1735-1744.
[9] 罗玲娜, 林永胜. 不同LED光质萎凋对白茶品质的影响[J]. 福建农林大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 45(3): 262-268.
[10] 冯花, 王飞权, 张渤, 等. 不同工艺制作水仙白茶的生化成分及感官品质比较[J]. 现代食品科技, 2020, 36(12): 92-102. 21.
[11] 粟本文,黄怀生,钟兴刚,等. 汝城白毛茶白茶品质特征分析[J]. 茶叶通讯, 2018, 45(3): 21-26.
[12] 黄赟. 福建白茶化学成分与感官品质研究初报[D]. 福州:福建农林大学, 2013.
[13] 尹鹏, 王子浩, 刘盼盼, 等. 信阳红茶香气成分分析[J]. 食品工业, 2019, 40(3): 287-291.
[14] 徐元骏,何靓, 贾玲燕, 等. 不同地区及特殊品种红茶香气的差异性[J]. 浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2015, 41(3): 323-330.
[15] 冯花, 王飞权, 纪子翔, 等. 不同工艺对丹桂秋季白茶品质的影响[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2020, 41(13): 80-88.
[16] 王飞权, 冯花, 朱晓燕, 等. 摇青和揉捻工艺对白茶生化成分和感官品质的影响[J]. 热带作物学报, 2019, 40(11): 2236-2245.
[17] 马玉青, 方成刚, 夏丽飞, 等. 不同发酵程度对重萎凋“云抗10号”红茶香气成分的影响[J]. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(4): 760-768.
[18] 张贝贝,艾仄宜, 曲凤风, 等. 黄光萎凋对红茶品质的影响[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2016, 35(2): 108-114.
[19] 项丽慧. LED黄光对工夫红茶萎凋过程香气相关酶的影响[D]. 福州:福建农林大学, 2015.

不同光质萎凋处理云南大叶种白茶品质的差异

Quality difference of large-leaf variety white tea by light quality withering treatments in Yunnan Province

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	齐玉岗, 徐婷, 何竹梅, 纪昌中. 紫阳群体种鲜叶萎凋过程中主要生化成分的动态变化[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2024, 63(6): 193-197.
[2]	郭丽, 朱飞雪, 寇艳玲, 贾文庆. 不同光质对牡丹乌龙捧盛不定芽诱导的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2021, 60(7): 84-86.
[3]	胡清泉, 沙茜, 杨仁灿, 常雅洁, 韩敏, 赵智勇. 不同LED光质对狐尾藻生长及畜禽养殖污水净化效率的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2020, 59(8): 50-53.
[4]	刘美洲, 李忆珠, 张蕊, 葛佳荣, 任艺, 张雪, 刘晓嘉, 齐义杰. 不同光质对景天科植物火祭叶片呈色的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2020, 59(2): 106-109.
[5]	王阳昕, 章有知. 单侧红光对大豆幼苗生长的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2018, 57(8): 20-24.