通过比较老枞和新枞凤凰单丛茶树茶叶挥发性香气物质和化学成分的异同,为凤凰单丛茶古茶树资源的评价和利用提供理论依据。以老枞蜜兰香、老枞八仙、新枞蜜兰香和新枞八仙4个样品茶叶为研究对象,采用感官审评、同时蒸馏萃取(simultaneous distillation extraction, SDE)制备、气相色谱质谱(gas chromatography-mass spectrometer, GC-MS)分析和茶叶品质生化成分分析方法,对4个样品茶叶外形、汤色、香气、滋味、叶底、香气物质成分和品质生化成分进行审评、测定和比较。结果显示,老枞八仙在感官评审中得分最高,新枞蜜兰香得分最低。GC-MS分析显示,4个样品共检测得到醇类、杂环类、烯烃类、酯类、烷烃类和酮类等化合物61种香气成分,其中老枞蜜兰香与新枞蜜兰香相同的香气物质有30种,老枞八仙与新枞八仙相同的香气物质有38种。4个茶叶样品相同的香气物质有21种,占全部香气物质种类的34.4%。茶叶品质生化成分测定结果显示,茶多酚和儿茶素含量最高的是新枞蜜兰香,氨基酸和水浸出物含量最高的是老枞八仙,咖啡碱含量最高的是老枞蜜兰香。综合实验结果,老枞茶树茶叶的感官品质和化学品质与新枞茶树茶叶有一定差异,这种差异与茶树的茶龄有关。
By comparing volatile aroma substances and chemical constituents of Old and New Tea Fenghuang single-cluster tea, a theoretical basis was provided for evaluating and utilizing Fenghuang single-cluster ancient tea resources. Four tea samples, including Old and New Tea of Milanxiang, and Old and New Tea of Baxian, were selected as research objects. These four samples were analyzed by sensory evaluation, SDE (simultaneous distillation extraction) preparation, GC-MS, and methods to analyse biochemical components related to tea quality. The shape, soup color, aroma, taste, bottom of the leaf, aroma components, and biochemical components of the four samples were evaluated, measured and compared. The results showed that Old Tea of Baxian scored the highest in sensory evaluation, while New Tea of Milanxiang was the lowest. GC-MS analysis showed that 61 kinds of aroma compounds, including alcohols, heterocyclic compounds, alkenes, esters, alkanes, and ketones were detected in four samples. Among them, Old and New Tea of Milanxiang shared 30 kinds of aroma substances, and Old and New Tea of Baxian shared 38 kinds of aroma substances. There were 21 kinds of aroma compounds were in common in all four tea samples, accounting for 34.4% of all aroma substances. The results of determining biochemical components in tea leaves showed that New Tea of Milanxiang had the highest contents of tea polyphenols and catechin, Old Tea of Baxian had the highest contents of amino acids and water extracts, and Old Tea of Milanxiang had the highest content of caffeine. Overall, the results showed that sensory and chemical qualities of old fir tea were different from that of new fir tea, and these differences were related to the age of tea.
[1] 代风玲,孙彬妹,谢沛娟,等.凤凰单丛茶香气研究进展[J].中国茶叶,2018,40(2):19-22.
[2] 萧力争,晏嫦妤,李家贤,等.凤凰单丛古茶树资源的遗传多样性AFLP分析[J].茶叶科学,2007,27(4):280-285.
[3] 肖凌,毛世红,童华荣.3种香型凤凰单丛茶挥发性成分分析[J].食品科学,2017,11:125-136.
[4] 周春娟,郭守军,庄东红,等.SDE-GC-MS与P&T-TD-GC-MS提取分析不同香型凤凰单丛茶香气比较[J].2015,36(18):137-142.
[5] 鲁成银,段家祥,龚淑英,等.茶叶感官审评通用方法:NY/T 787—2004[S].北京:中国农业出版社,2004.
[6] 中国标准出版社第一编辑室.茶叶标准汇编[M].北京:中国标准出版社,2003.
[7] 凌彩金,王秋霜,卓敏,等.茶叶审评技术研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2010(3):68-71.
[8] 周春娟,庄东红,郭守军,等.不同品种(系)凤凰单丛成品茶的香型分类与鉴定[J].2014,34(6):609-616.
[9] 竹尾忠一,游小青,王华夫,等.中国茶树的起源与分布[J].茶叶科学,1992,12(2):81-86.
[10] 史敬芳,陈栋,黄文洁,等.基于HS-SPME-GC-MS技术对凤凰单丛乌龙茶香气成分比较分析[J].食品科学,2016,37(24):111-117.
[11] 周春娟,郭守军,庄东红,等.不同香型凤凰单丛加工过程香气特征变化规律研究[J].现代食品科技,2016,32(6):246-255.
[12] 唐颢,唐劲驰,操君喜,等.凤凰单丛茶品质的海拔区间差异分析[J].中国农学通报,2015,31(34):143-151.
[13] 钟秋生,林郑和,陈常颂,等.烘培温度对九龙袍品种乌龙茶生化品质的影响[J].茶叶科学,2014,34(1):9-20.
[14] 严赞开,李跃林,庄东红,等.凤凰单枞香气成分的分析[J].食品研究与开发,2015,36(10):78-81.
[15] 肖作兵,陈合兴,牛云蔚,等.顶空蒸馏萃取法结合GC-MS/GC-O技术分析龙井茶的特征香气成分[J].浙江大学学报(理学版),2015,42(6):714-720.
[16] 项雷文,陈文韬.美拉德反应对乌龙茶品质形成的影响[J].化学工程与装备,2012(7):13-17.
[17] ZHU J C,CHEN F, WANG L Y,et al.Comparison of aroma-active volatiles in oolong tea infusions using GC-olfactometry, GC-FPD, and GC-MS[J]. Journal of Agricultural &Food Chemistry, 2015,63 (34):7 499-7 510.
[18] SHEIBANI E, DUNCAN S E, KUHN D D, et al.SDE and SPME analysis of flavor compounds in Jin Xuan oolong tea[J].Journal of Food Science, 2016,81(2):348-358.
[19] 唐颢,方华春,唐劲驰,等.凤凰单丛茶品质地域性差异的生化基础[J].食品科学,2015,36(20):168-173.
[20] 杨毅坚,尚卫琼,李友勇,等.云南景洪市普洱古茶树茶叶生化指标分析与特异资源筛选[J].西北农业学报,2017,26(3):448-454.
[21] 曾亮,田小军,罗理勇,等.不同贮藏时间普洱生茶水体物的特征性成分分析[J].食品科学,2017,38(2):198-205.
[22] 杨兴荣,矣兵,李友勇,等.野生古茶树资源主要生化成分多样性分析[J].中国农学通报,2016,32(22):133-139.
[23] 晏嫦妤,罗军武,赵超艺,等.凤凰单丛主要品质成分比较[J].湖南农业大学学报,2006,32(6):628-631.
[24] 曾亮,王杰,柳岩,等.小种红茶与工夫红茶品质特性的比较分析[J].食品科学,2016,37(20):51-56.
