【摘要】：為了提高新梨7號(hào)果實(shí)的果品質(zhì)量和等級(jí)果比率,2015年至2016年在河北省漳河林場(chǎng)梨園研究了幾種不同栽培措施對(duì)新梨7號(hào)果品品質(zhì)的影響。研究了不同梨品種授粉,田間施肥和套袋處理對(duì)新梨7號(hào)梨品質(zhì)的影響,測(cè)定了果實(shí)的單果重、可溶性固形物含量、果點(diǎn)密度、可溶性糖、維生素C含量。得出結(jié)論如下:(1)新梨7號(hào)比較合適的授粉品種是鴨梨和黃冠。鴨梨授粉既可以顯著提高單果重,較雪青和紅香酥分別高3.34%和10.34%,又具有較高可溶性固形物含量,較比雪青和紅香酥分別高5.25%和5.88%。黃冠梨授粉具有較高的果實(shí)硬度,可溶性固形物,維生素C含量。果實(shí)硬度較雪青梨和紅香酥梨授粉果實(shí)分別高9.51%和10.11%,可溶性固形物含量較紅香酥授粉果實(shí)高21.44%;維生素C含量較雪青梨和紅香酥梨分別提高了9.54%和42.97%。(2)花后施尿素(NS)和史丹利復(fù)合肥(F)都顯著提高了果實(shí)的單果重。施史丹利復(fù)合肥中,果實(shí)最大的處理是F200g/株,高于CK12.14%;尿素處理中NS150g/株,高于CK4.31%。史丹利復(fù)合肥和尿素對(duì)于梨果形指數(shù),果點(diǎn)密度,可溶性固形物沒(méi)有顯著性影響。尿素四個(gè)處理都可以顯著提高果實(shí)可溶性糖含量,最高的處理是NS100g/株。史丹利復(fù)合肥F200g可以顯著提高果實(shí)可溶性糖含量。尿素處理中NS100g/株和NS150g/株的處理可以顯著提高果實(shí)可滴定酸含量。施史丹利復(fù)合肥的四個(gè)處理F50g/株、F100g/株、F150g/株和F200g/株的果實(shí)可滴定酸含量,顯著低于CK。復(fù)合肥和氮肥所有處理的維生素C含量顯著低于CK。隨施氮肥量的增加果實(shí)維生素C含量逐漸降低。(3)新梨7號(hào)套單層紙袋可以顯著提高果實(shí)的單果重,高于CK15.60%;顯著降低可溶性糖含量、維生素C含量,可溶性固形物的含量和果點(diǎn)密度,分別較CK降低低于CK為2.35%,22.29%,5.75%,15.84%。套兩層紙袋可以顯著提高單果重和硬度,分別高于CK為23.96%和14.42%。顯著降低可溶性糖含量、可溶性固形物含量、果點(diǎn)密度、維生素C含量,分別較CK降低了27.31%,6.94%,15.84%,6.95%。套三層紙袋可以顯著提高單果重,較CK提高了11.75%。顯著降低可溶性糖和可溶性固形物含量、果點(diǎn)密度、維生素C含量,分別低于CK為3.11%,18.13%,28.22%,12.88%。膜袋可以顯著降低單果重,可溶性糖,可溶性固形物,分別較CK降低6.25%,3.54%,13.24%。套透光袋可以顯著提高果實(shí)單果重和可溶性糖含量,分別高于CK13.39%,1.01%。顯著降低果實(shí)維生素C含量、可溶性固形物含量,果點(diǎn)密度,分別低于CK5.93%,8.04%,9.23%。綜上所述,新梨7號(hào)不適合套紙袋,套紙袋在一定程度上提高了果實(shí)外觀品質(zhì),但是會(huì)降低果實(shí)的內(nèi)在品質(zhì),使果品質(zhì)量下降。
[Abstract]:In order to improve the fruit quality and grade ratio of Xinli No. 7 fruit, the effects of different cultivation measures on the quality of Xinli No. 7 fruit were studied in Zhanghe Forest Farm, Hebei Province from 2015 to 2016. The effects of pollination, field fertilization and bagging on the quality of Xinli No. 7 pear were studied. The fruit weight, soluble solids content, fruit point density, soluble sugar and vitamin C content were measured. The conclusions are as follows: (1) the suitable pollination varieties of Xinli 7 are Yali pear and Huangguan. Pollination of Yali pear could increase the weight of single fruit by 3.34% and 10.34% higher than that of Xueqing and Red crispy respectively, and had higher soluble solids content, 5.25% and 5.88% higher than that of Xue Qing and Red crisp, respectively. The pollination of Huangguan pear has high fruit hardness, soluble solids and vitamin C content. The fruit hardness was 9.51% and 10.11% higher than that of Xueqing pear and Hongxiangshu pear, respectively, and the content of soluble solids was 21.44% higher than that of red crisp fruit. Compared with Xueqing pear and Hongxiang pear, the content of vitamin C increased by 9.54% and 42.97%, respectively. (2) after anthesis, urea (NS) and Stanley compound fertilizer (F) increased fruit weight significantly. In Stanley compound fertilizer, the largest fruit treatment is F200g/ strain, higher than CK12.14%; urea treatment NS150g/ plant, higher than CK4.31%. treatment. Stanley compound fertilizer and urea had no significant effects on fruit shape index, fruit point density and soluble solids. The content of soluble sugar in fruit was significantly increased by four treatments of urea, and the highest treatment was NS100g/ strain. Stanley compound fertilizer F 200 g can significantly increase the soluble sugar content of fruit. The treatment of NS100g/ strain and NS150g/ strain in urea treatment could significantly increase the titratable acid content of fruit. The titratable acid content of F50g/, F100g/, F150g/ and F200g/ in four treatments of Stanley compound fertilizer was significantly lower than that of CK.. The content of vitamin C in all treatments of compound fertilizer and nitrogen fertilizer was significantly lower than that of CK.. (3) the single layer paper bag of Xinli No. 7 could significantly increase the fruit weight per fruit, which was higher than that of CK15.60%;. The content of soluble sugar, vitamin C, soluble solids and fruit point density were significantly lower than that of CK, respectively, and lower than that of CK by 2.35 ~ 22.29 and 5.75 ~ 15.845.The content of soluble sugar, vitamin C, soluble solids and fruit point density were significantly lower than that of CK, respectively. The single fruit weight and hardness were significantly increased by two layer paper bags, which were higher than CK by 23.96% and 14.42%, respectively. The content of soluble sugar, soluble solids, fruit density and vitamin C were decreased by 27.31% and 6.94%, respectively. The weight of single fruit was significantly increased by three-layer paper bag, which was 11. 75% higher than that of CK. The contents of soluble sugar and soluble solids, fruit density and vitamin C were significantly lower than that of CK (3.11%, 18.13%) and 28.22% 12.88% (P < 0.05). The single fruit weight, soluble sugar and soluble solids were decreased by 6.25% and 3.54% and 13.24%, respectively, compared with CK. The fruit weight per fruit and soluble sugar content were significantly increased by light permeable bag, respectively, which were higher than that of CK13.39%,1.01%.. The content of vitamin C, soluble solids and fruit point density were significantly lower than that of CK5.93%,8.04%,9.23%.. To sum up, Xinli No. 7 is not suitable for paper bag. The paper bag can improve the appearance quality of fruit to some extent, but it will reduce the internal quality of fruit and make the quality of fruit decline.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北工程大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：S661.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王瑋;李紅旭;趙明新;曹素芳;孫文泰;;梨的7個(gè)授粉品種與早酥梨授粉效應(yīng)的比較[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)林研究;2013年03期

2 王海儒;李建貴;杜研;陳輝煌;努爾尼薩;侍瑞;牛真真;;人工授粉對(duì)紅富士蘋(píng)果坐果率及品質(zhì)的影響[J];新疆農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué);2013年08期

3 木合塔爾·扎熱;李疆;羅淑萍;齊曼·尤努斯;覃偉明;;全光和遮光下庫(kù)爾勒香梨果實(shí)品質(zhì)的比較分析[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)林研究;2012年04期

4 李忠;李春江;亞合甫·木沙;李林;;庫(kù)爾勒香梨果實(shí)套袋試驗(yàn)[J];新疆農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué);2012年10期

5 董彩霞;姜海波;趙靜文;徐陽(yáng)春;;我國(guó)主要梨園施肥現(xiàn)狀分析[J];土壤;2012年05期

6 李桂祥;馬瑞娟;俞明亮;張斌斌;;套袋對(duì)桃果實(shí)品質(zhì)影響的研究進(jìn)展[J];江蘇農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué);2011年06期

7 劉妮;陶書(shū)田;張紹鈴;曹玉芬;吳華清;王紀(jì)忠;伍濤;;授粉品種對(duì)‘庫(kù)爾勒香梨’果實(shí)萼片宿存及品質(zhì)的影響[J];南京農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

8 王巖;譚博;馬兵鋼;覃偉銘;張大海;李光輝;何平元;;生物有機(jī)肥對(duì)庫(kù)爾勒香梨果實(shí)品質(zhì)和凈光合速率的影響[J];新疆農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué);2010年06期

9 何偉志;周偉儒;;凹唇壁蜂、意大利蜜蜂與人工授粉對(duì)蘋(píng)果授粉效果研究[J];中國(guó)蜂業(yè);2009年11期

10 肖文芳;蔡?hào)|;李國(guó)懷;;中國(guó)有機(jī)果品發(fā)展概況及有機(jī)果品生產(chǎn)技術(shù)[J];中國(guó)農(nóng)學(xué)通報(bào);2009年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前8條

1 李春輝;施用氮磷鉀對(duì)藤稔葡萄產(chǎn)量和品質(zhì)的影響[D];吉林農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2013年

2 鄭元?jiǎng)?授粉和生長(zhǎng)調(diào)節(jié)劑對(duì)南部脆香甜柚裂果及果實(shí)品質(zhì)的影響研究[D];中國(guó)農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué)院;2013年

3 李濤濤;生草覆蓋條件下長(zhǎng)期不同施肥對(duì)蘋(píng)果園土壤肥力及果樹(shù)生長(zhǎng)發(fā)育的影響[D];西北農(nóng)林科技大學(xué);2013年

4 孫繼軍;阜新地區(qū)蘋(píng)果梨套袋對(duì)果實(shí)品質(zhì)影響研究[D];中國(guó)農(nóng)業(yè)科學(xué)院;2012年

5 徐愛(ài)紅;蘋(píng)果不同授粉組合果實(shí)品質(zhì)發(fā)育生理研究[D];山東農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2010年

6 馮先橘;大棚栽培條件下套袋對(duì)果實(shí)品質(zhì)的影響[D];華中農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2009年

7 趙娜;不同氮肥處理對(duì)獼猴桃果實(shí)品質(zhì)的影響[D];西北農(nóng)林科技大學(xué);2009年

8 劉侯俊;陜西省果園養(yǎng)分狀況和鉀肥肥效研究[D];西北農(nóng)林科技大學(xué);2002年

，

本文編號(hào)：2421307