基于香韵活性值的不同产地中间香型烤烟风格特征差异分析
Study on the style characteristics differences of intermediate flavor flue-cured tobacco leaves of different producing areas based on activity values of aroma notes
-
摘要: 为阐明中间香型烤烟的风格特征差异，以3种产地（重庆、遵义和牡丹江） C3F中间香型烤烟烟叶为研究对象，采用GC-MS法测定烟叶主流烟气中96种重要香气成分释放量，计算其香气活性值，并根据香韵归属获得10种香韵的活性值，经对比分析揭示3种中间香型烤烟的香韵特点。结果表明：3种中间香型烤烟主流烟气粒相物中96种香气成分的总释放量分别为1 255.251 μg/g、856.274 μg/g和967.670 μg/g，其中乙酸释放量最高，十六酸和油酸次之；10种香韵中，酸香和脂蜡香的香气成分释放量最高。坚果香和甜香为3种中间香型烤烟的主体香韵，其次为清香和烤甜香香韵；3种产地C3F中间香型烤烟中，重庆的膏香最为突出，遵义的清香和果香最为突出，牡丹江的甜香和坚果香最为突出。Abstract: In order to reveal the style characteristics differences of intermediate flavor flue-cured tobacco leaves, the release of 96 aroma components in mainstream smoke of three intermediate flavor tobacco leaves (Chongqing C3F, Zunyi C3F and Mudanjiang C3F) was determined by GC-MS. Then the activity values of 96 aroma components were calculated, and the activity values of 10 aroma notes were also obtained. By comparing the activity values of 10 aroma notes, the aroma note style characteristics differences of three intermediate flavor flue-cured tobacco leaves were distinguished. The results were as follows:In the mainstream smoke of the three intermediate flavor flue-cured tobacco leaves, the total release was 1 255.251 μg/g, 856.274 μg/g and 967.670 μg/g respectively. Acetic acid had the highest release, followed by hexadecanoic acid and oleic acid; Among the 10 aroma notes, the acid note and the fat-waxy note had the highest release. The main note of the three intermediate flavor tobacco leaves was the nutty note and the sweet note, followed by the fresh note and roasted-sweet note; Among the three intermediate flavor flue-cured tobacco leaves, the balsamic note was most outstanding in Chongqing C3F, as the fresh and fruity note in Zunyi C3F and the sweet and nutty note in Mudanjiang C3F.
-
-
[1]
丁瑞康, 王承瀚, 朱尊权, 等.卷烟工艺学[M].北京:食品工业出版社, 1958.
-
[2]
魏鹏程, 张小利, 范学忠, 等.不同海拔条件对中间香型烤烟中性致香成分含量的影响[J].天津农业科学, 2017, 23(8):72-75.
-
[3]
乔学义, 王兵, 马宇平, 等.烤烟烟叶质量风格特色感官评价方法的建立与应用[J].烟草科技, 2014(9):5-9.
-
[4]
杨虹琦, 周冀衡, 杨述元, 等.不同产区烤烟中主要潜香型物质对评吸质量的影响研究[J].湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2005, 31(1):11-14.
-
[5]
杨超, 丁根胜, 万里兴, 等.基于烟叶化学成分的卷烟叶组感官质量和风格研究[J].烟草科技, 2018, 51(8):85-91.
-
[6]
杜咏梅, 张建平, 王树声, 等.主导烤烟香型风格及感官质量差异的主要化学指标分析[J].中国烟草科学, 2010, 31(5):7-12.
-
[7]
束茹欣, 蔡嘉月, 杨征宇, 等.应用近红外光谱投影模型法分析烟叶的产区与风格特征[J].光谱学与光谱分析, 2014, 34(10):2764-2768.
-
[8]
陈芝飞, 杨靖, 马宇平, 等.基于活性阈值的卷烟烟气中重要碱性香气成分剖析[J].烟草科技, 2017, 50(3):39-46.
-
[9]
蔡莉莉, 刘绍锋, 郝辉, 等.卷烟烟气重要中性香气成分的活性阈值[J].烟草科技, 2018, 51(9):33-39.
-
[10]
CHEN Z F, YANG J, SUN Z T, et al.Determination of odor activity values (oavs) of some important volatile organic acids in the mainstream cigarette smoke[J].Tobacco Science & Technology, 2016, 49(S1):27-32.
-
[11]
马宇平, 席高磊, 赵志伟, 等.香气活性值用于许昌、郴州和潍坊烤烟香气差异分析[J].烟草科技, 2020, 53(5):63-70.
-
[12]
中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会.卷烟用常规分析用吸烟机测定总粒相物和焦油:GB/T 19609-2004[S].北京:中国标准出版社, 2004.
-
[13]
贾春晓, 文金昉, 马宇平, 等.半制备型高效液相色谱结合气相色谱-质谱联用法分析卷烟烟气中性香味成分[J].分析试验室, 2016, 35(7):831-835.
-
[14]
LEFFINGWELL J C, YOUNG H C, BERNASEK E.Tobacco flavoring for smoking products[M].North Carolina:R.J.Reynolds Tobacco Company, 1972.
-
[15]
陈芝飞, 杨靖, 马宇平, 等.烟用香料作用阈值感官评价方法的建立及应用[J].烟草科技, 2016, 49(4):30-36.
-
[16]
罗登山, 王兵, 乔学义.《全国烤烟烟叶香型风格区划》解析[J].中国烟草学报, 2019, 25(4):1-9.
-
[1]
-
点击查看大图
计量
- PDF下载量: 29
- 文章访问数: 2744
- 引证文献数: 0
下载:
