Sensory evaluation and analysis for edible quality of fresh faba bean resources based on quantitative description method

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20240008

Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2024, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (11): 2482-2489.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.20240008

• Horticultural Science • Previous Articles Next Articles

Sensory evaluation and analysis for edible quality of fresh faba bean resources based on quantitative description method

WANG Linlin¹(), ZHONG Yangmin¹, LI Hanmei², MA Ruifang¹, LIU Na³, LIU Tingfu¹^,^*()

1. Lishui Institute of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Lishui 323000, Zhejiang, China
2. College of Forestry Science and Technology, Lishui Vocational & Technical College, Lishui 323000, Zhejiang, China
3. Institute of Vegetable Research, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou 310021, China

Received:2023-12-28 Online:2024-11-25 Published:2024-11-27

Abstract

Abstract:

In this study, 22 fresh faba bean germplasm resources were used to evaluate and analyze the edible quality traits of different varieties by quantitative description analysis. A vocabulary for quantitative description of the sensory characteristics of fresh faba beans was established. Multivariate statistical analysis methods such as principal component analysis, correlation analysis, and analysis of variance were used to explore the correlation and differences within these sensory traits. Key traits affecting sensory quality and the scoring criteria of the taste sensation were preliminarily determined. The results showed that there were significant (P<0.05) differences in sweetness, hardness, and waxiness among the 22 fresh faba bean germplasm resources. The overall evaluation of fresh faba beans was significantly (P<0.01) positively correlated with sweetness and umami, and the correlation coefficients were 0.92 and 0.91, respectively. Sweetness, umami, hardness, and waxiness were selected as the key traits for the sensory evaluation of fresh faba beans. The varieties with the best sensory quality (Y019, HN002) and the worst sensory quality (GB37, Qilichangxiang) were selected to grade the sensory quality of the taste. The scoring criteria for good taste were as follows: sweetness≥8.0, umami ≥6.5, soft texture(hardness ≤2.5, waxiness ≥7.5) or tender and crisp texture(4.5≤ hardness ≤7.0, waxiness ≤2.0). The poor palatability was scored as follows: sweetness ≤4.5, umami≤3.5, hard texture (hardness ≥7.0, waxiness ≤2.0), or loose texture (hardness ≤4.5, waxiness ≤2.0). The experimental results provided theoretical basis for the in-depth study of the sensory quality in fresh faba beans, and technical support for the selection and breeding of high-quality fresh faba beans.

Key words: fresh faba bean, sensory evaluation, eating quality, quantitative description analysis

CLC Number:

S565.1

WANG Linlin, ZHONG Yangmin, LI Hanmei, MA Ruifang, LIU Na, LIU Tingfu. Sensory evaluation and analysis for edible quality of fresh faba bean resources based on quantitative description method[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2024, 36(11): 2482-2489.

Figures/Tables 7

References 24

[1]	叶茵. 中国蚕豆学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2003.
[2]	RAHATE K A, MADHUMITA M, PRABHAKAR P K. Nutritional composition, anti-nutritional factors, pretreatments-cum-processing impact and food formulation potential of faba bean (Vicia faba L.): a comprehensive review[J]. LWT, 2021, 138: 110796.
[3]	LI L, YANG T, LIU R, et al. Food legume production in China[J]. The Crop Journal, 2017, 5(2): 115-126.
[4]	HU H Y, LI H, HAO M M, et al. Nitrogen fixation and crop productivity enhancements co-driven by intercrop root exudates and key rhizosphere bacteria[J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2021, 58(10): 2243-2255.
[5]	周瑶, 姚梦楠, 缪亚梅, 等. 中国鲜食蚕豆产业发展研究[J]. 农学学报, 2022, 12(2): 80-84.
	ZHOU Y, YAO M N, MIAO Y M, et al. The developmental of fresh broad bean industry in China[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2022, 12(2): 80-84. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	张秋英, 李彦生, 王国栋, 等. 菜用大豆品质及其影响因素研究进展[J]. 大豆科学, 2010, 29(6): 1065-1070.
	ZHANG Q Y, LI Y S, WANG G D, et al. Quality and factors involved in vegetable soybean production[J]. Soybean Science, 2010, 29(6): 1065-1070. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	张秋英, 李彦生, 刘长锴, 等. 菜用大豆食用品质关键组分及其积累动态研究[J]. 作物学报, 2015, 41(11): 1692-1700.
	ZHANG Q Y, LI Y S, LIU C K, et al. Key components of eating quality and their dynamic accumulation in vegetable soybean varieties[Glycine max(L.) merr.[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2015, 41(11): 1692-1700. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	ZHU G T, WANG S C, HUANG Z J, et al. Rewiring of the fruit metabolome in tomato breeding[J]. Cell, 2018, 172(1/2): 249-261.e12.
[9]	李会合, 田秀英, 季天委. 蔬菜品质评价方法研究进展[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2009, 37(13): 5920-5922.
	LI H H, TIAN X Y, JI T W. Research progress on the evaluation methods of vegetable quality[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2009, 37(13): 5920-5922. (in Chinese)
[10]	李会合. 蔬菜品质的研究进展[J]. 北方园艺, 2006(4): 55-56.
	LI H H. A review of research of vegetable quality[J]. Northern Horticulture, 2006(4): 55-56. (in Chinese)
[11]	赵娜, 缪亚梅, 姚梦楠, 等. 蚕豆种质资源籽粒表型与营养品质性状的多样性分析[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2022, 38(3): 597-604.
	ZHAO N, MIAO Y M, YAO M N, et al. Diversity analysis on seed phenotypic and nutrient quality traits in faba bean germplasm resources[J]. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 38(3): 597-604. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	朱正梅, 宋度林, 卢华兵, 等. 10个鲜食蚕豆品种产量评价和食味品质分析[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(5): 968-971.
	ZHU Z M, SONG D L, LU H B, et al. Yield and eating quality analysis of 10 fresh broad bean varieties[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 63(5): 968-971. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	吴雨佳, 申士富, 钱静, 等. 青海蚕豆的品质评价及其不同来源的差异比较[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2018, 46(22): 234-236.
	WU Y J, SHEN S F, QIAN J, et al. Quality evaluation and difference comparison of broad beans from different sources in Qinghai Province[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 46(22): 234-236. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	刘玉玲, 张红岩, 滕长才, 等. 蚕豆SSR标记遗传多样性及与淀粉含量的关联分析[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(11): 2786-2805.
	LIU Y L, ZHANG H Y, TENG C C, et al. Genetic diversity and its association analysis of SSR markers with starch content in faba bean(Vicia faba L.)[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(11): 2786-2805. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	张红岩, 郭兴莲, 杨涛, 等. 利用SSR标记分析蚕豆品种(品系)与优异种质的遗传多样性[J]. 中国蔬菜, 2018(2): 34-41.
	ZHANG H Y, GUO X L, YANG T, et al. Genetic diversity of faba bean varieties(lines)and elite collections by SSR markers[J]. China Vegetables, 2018(2): 34-41. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	WANG H F, ZONG X X, GUAN J P, et al. Genetic diversity and relationship of global faba bean (Vicia faba L.) germplasm revealed by ISSR markers[J]. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2012, 124(5): 789-797.
[17]	黄中文. SPSS统计分析与应用[M]. 3版. 北京: 电子工业出版社, 2016.
[18]	李杨, 关海宁, 马雪, 等. QDA(定量描述分析)在方便面感官风味特性中的应用研究[J]. 中国调味品, 2018, 43(4): 90-92.
	LI Y, GUAN H N, MA X, et al. Study on the application of QDA(quantitative description analysis)in sensory flavor characteristics of instant noodles[J]. China Condiment, 2018, 43(4): 90-92. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	刘金洋, 周琰琰, 林云, 等. 南方90份秋播区蚕豆粒型性状的SSR关联分析[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2023, 24(6): 1602-1618.
	LIU J Y, ZHOU Y Y, LIN Y, et al. Associate studies of seed size-related traits with SSR markers of 90 faba beans in south autumn sowing areas[J]. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2023, 24(6): 1602-1618. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	任改弟, 张苗, 张文越, 等. 不同来源有机物料对菜用蚕豆生长和品质及根际土壤性状的影响[J]. 土壤, 2022, 54(4): 740-749.
	REN G D, ZHANG M, ZHANG W Y, et al. Effects of organic materials from different sources on growth and quality of vegetable broad beans and properties of rhizosphere soil[J]. Soils, 2022, 54(4): 740-749. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	刘庭付, 李汉美, 王琳琳, 等. 高产大粒菜用蚕豆新品种‘丽蚕3号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2022, 49(S2): 137-138.
	LIU T F, LI H M, WANG L L, et al. A new broad bean variety Lican No.3 with high yield and large grain for vegetable[J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2022, 49(S2): 137-138. (in Chinese)
[22]	程茜, 黄璐, 沈旭, 等. 基于电子舌和人工感官评价的菜用大豆食用品质特性分析[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2023, 51(7): 161-167.
	CHENG X, HUANG L, SHEN X, et al. Study on edible quality characteristics of vegetable soybeans based on electronic tongue and sensory evaluation[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 51(7): 161-167. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	由美千惠, 秦智伟, 辛明, 等. 黄瓜种质资源食味性感官品质评价[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2021, 34(12): 101-106.
	YOU M Q H, QIN Z W, XIN M, et al. Sensory evaluation of taste of cucumber germplasm resources[J]. China Cucurbits and Vegetables, 2021, 34(12): 101-106. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	朱艳, 胡腾飞, 黄甜, 等. 茯砖茶感官特征定量描述与风味轮构建[J]. 食品与生物技术学报, 2023, 42(9): 1-9.
	ZHU Y, HU T F, HUANG T, et al. Sensory characteristics of fu brick tea by quantitative descriptive analysis and construction of flavor wheel[J]. Journal of Food Science and Biotechnology, 2023, 42(9): 1-9. (in Chinese with English abstract)

编号 No.	材料名称 Name	来源 Source	类型 Type	编号 No.	材料名称 Name	来源 Source	类型 Type
1	丽蚕1号 Lican No.1	浙江 Zhejiang	育成品种 Bred variety	12	小白皮 Xiaobaipi	云南 Yunnan	地方品种 Landrace
2	双绿5号 Shuanglyu No.5	浙江 Zhejiang	育成品种 Bred variety	13	小黑皮 Xiaoheipi	云南 Yunnan	地方品种 Landrace
3	慈蚕1号 Cican No.1	浙江 Zhejiang	育成品种 Bred variety	14	HN001	河南 Henan	地方品种 Landrace
4	通蚕鲜6号 Tongcanxian No.6	江苏 Jiangsu	育成品种 Bred variety	15	HN002	河南 Henan	地方品种 Landrace
5	海青1号 Haiqing No.1	江苏 Jiangsu	育成品种 Bred variety	16	Y001	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
6	香蕉豆 Xiangjiaodou	江苏 Jiangsu	育成品种 Bred variety	17	Y002	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
7	GB37	青海 Qinghai	育成品种 Bred variety	18	Y003	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
8	陵西白皮 Lingxibaipi	青海 Qinghai	育成品种 Bred variety	19	Y013	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
9	新陵西 Xinlingxi	青海 Qinghai	育成品种 Bred variety	20	Y019	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
10	陵西一寸 Lingxiyicun	日本 Japan	国外引种 Introduced variety	21	Y020	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
11	七粒长香 Qilichangxiang	意大利 Italy	国外引种 Introduced variety	22	Y024	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected

编号 No.	材料名称 Name	来源 Source	类型 Type	编号 No.	材料名称 Name	来源 Source	类型 Type
1	丽蚕1号 Lican No.1	浙江 Zhejiang	育成品种 Bred variety	12	小白皮 Xiaobaipi	云南 Yunnan	地方品种 Landrace
2	双绿5号 Shuanglyu No.5	浙江 Zhejiang	育成品种 Bred variety	13	小黑皮 Xiaoheipi	云南 Yunnan	地方品种 Landrace
3	慈蚕1号 Cican No.1	浙江 Zhejiang	育成品种 Bred variety	14	HN001	河南 Henan	地方品种 Landrace
4	通蚕鲜6号 Tongcanxian No.6	江苏 Jiangsu	育成品种 Bred variety	15	HN002	河南 Henan	地方品种 Landrace
5	海青1号 Haiqing No.1	江苏 Jiangsu	育成品种 Bred variety	16	Y001	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
6	香蕉豆 Xiangjiaodou	江苏 Jiangsu	育成品种 Bred variety	17	Y002	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
7	GB37	青海 Qinghai	育成品种 Bred variety	18	Y003	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
8	陵西白皮 Lingxibaipi	青海 Qinghai	育成品种 Bred variety	19	Y013	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
9	新陵西 Xinlingxi	青海 Qinghai	育成品种 Bred variety	20	Y019	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
10	陵西一寸 Lingxiyicun	日本 Japan	国外引种 Introduced variety	21	Y020	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected
11	七粒长香 Qilichangxiang	意大利 Italy	国外引种 Introduced variety	22	Y024	浙江 Zhejiang	自主选育 Self-selected

性状 Traits	平均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation	最大值 Maximum	最小值 Minimum	极差 Range	变异系数 Coefficient of variation/%
甜味Sweetness	5.24	1.82	8.6	2.2	6.4	34.82
鲜味Umami	4.99	1.28	7.3	2.5	4.8	25.69
香味Aroma	4.35	1.03	6.5	2.8	3.7	23.76
硬度Hardness	4.06	1.86	7.6	2.2	5.4	45.68
糯性Waxiness	5.31	2.27	7.8	1.8	6.0	42.68
种皮厚度Episperm thickness	4.52	1.29	7.8	2.4	5.4	28.58
综合评价Overall satisfaction	5.37	1.40	8.0	3.2	4.8	26.00

性状 Traits	平均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation	最大值 Maximum	最小值 Minimum	极差 Range	变异系数 Coefficient of variation/%
甜味Sweetness	5.24	1.82	8.6	2.2	6.4	34.82
鲜味Umami	4.99	1.28	7.3	2.5	4.8	25.69
香味Aroma	4.35	1.03	6.5	2.8	3.7	23.76
硬度Hardness	4.06	1.86	7.6	2.2	5.4	45.68
糯性Waxiness	5.31	2.27	7.8	1.8	6.0	42.68
种皮厚度Episperm thickness	4.52	1.29	7.8	2.4	5.4	28.58
综合评价Overall satisfaction	5.37	1.40	8.0	3.2	4.8	26.00

编号 No.	甜味 Sweetness	鲜味 Umami	香味 Aroma	硬度 Hardness	糯性 Waxiness	种皮厚度 Episperm thickness	综合评价 Overall satisfaction
1	3.2±1.3	4.9±0.8	4.5±1.0	4.0±1.4	6.0±1.0	3.4±0.5	5.0±0.7
2	6.2±1.6	4.5±1.9	3.3±0.4	2.6±0.5	7.4±0.5	4.2±0.4	5.4±0.9
3	5.2±0.8	5.5±1.5	3.5±0.5	2.6±0.9	6.8±0.4	6.2±1.6	5.2±0.8
4	5.4±1.5	4.0±1.5	5.4±0.8	7.2±0.8	1.8±0.8	5.6±1.8	5.0±1.2
5	6.2±1.6	6.1±1.0	6.1±0.4	6.8±1.3	2.2±0.8	3.6±2.5	6.2±1.1
6	2.8±1.3	3.7±1.5	3.5±0.7	3.0±1.2	6.0±1.4	4.4±1.5	4.2±1.3
7	2.2±1.3	3.3±0.5	4.1±1.0	4.2±0.8	2.4±0.9	3.4±0.5	3.2±0.4
8	3.8±1.1	4.8±1.2	5.6±0.5	6.4±1.5	3.4±1.8	5.0±1.2	4.6±0.9
9	3.6±1.5	4.0±0.8	4.9±0.4	5.4±1.1	7.6±0.9	7.8±0.4	3.8±0.8
10	4.4±0.5	5.2±1.1	3.6±0.5	2.8±0.4	3.2±1.9	4.2±0.4	4.8±1.3
11	4.4±2.1	2.5±0.8	5.0±0.8	7.6±0.9	2.0±0.7	4.2±0.8	3.2±0.4
12	5.2±1.1	5.6±1.1	3.9±1.4	2.2±0.4	7.6±0.9	5.4±1.5	5.0±1.0
13	6.8±1.8	5.7±1.3	3.7±0.8	2.4±0.5	7.8±0.4	6.2±1.1	6.6±0.5
14	8.2±1.3	7.0±1.1	6.0±1.5	5.8±1.1	4.6±1.1	2.6±1.5	7.6±0.5
15	8.6±0.5	7.3±0.9	6.5±1.1	6.6±0.9	1.8±0.4	4.2±0.8	7.8±0.4
16	3.2±1.3	3.8±0.7	3.2±0.5	2.8±0.4	4.2±2.9	5.0±1.2	4.2±0.4
17	4.6±1.9	3.5±0.8	2.8±0.4	2.4±0.9	7.6±0.9	4.0±1.2	4.8±0.8
18	6.6±1.5	4.7±0.4	3.8±0.5	3.2±0.4	7.8±0.4	5.0±1.9	5.8±1.6
19	3.6±1.5	4.6±1.1	3.8±0.9	2.4±0.9	6.6±1.5	4.4±0.5	4.4±0.9
20	8.0±0.4	6.6±0.6	3.7±0.9	2.2±0.4	7.6±0.9	2.4±0.9	8.0±0.7
21	6.4±1.3	6.5±1.6	4.5±0.8	3.0±0.7	6.4±0.9	2.8±0.8	6.6±1.1
22	6.6±2.1	6.0±1.1	4.7±0.8	3.8±1.1	6.0±1.2	5.4±1.5	6.8±1.3

Sensory evaluation and analysis for edible quality of fresh faba bean resources based on quantitative description method

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 24

Related Articles 9

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

性状 Trait	育成品种 Bred variety		国外引种 Introduced variety		地方品种 Landrace		自主选育 Self-selected
性状 Trait	平均值±标准差 Mean±SD	范围 Range	平均值±标准差 Mean±SD	范围 Range	平均值±标准差 Mean±SD	范围 Range	平均值±标准差 Mean±SD	范围 Range
甜味Sweetness	4.29±1.49 b	2.2~6.2	4.40±0.01 b	4.4~4.4	7.20±1.54 a	5.2~8.6	5.57±1.79 ab	3.2~8.0
鲜味Umami	4.53±0.89 b	3.3~6.1	3.85±1.91 b	2.5~5.2	6.40±0.88 a	5.6~7.3	5.10±1.27 ab	3.5~6.6
香味Aroma	4.53±1.01	3.3~6.1	4.29±0.95	3.6~5.0	5.02±1.43	3.7~6.5	3.76±0.68	2.8~4.7
硬度Hardness	4.69±1.82	2.6~7.2	5.20±3.39	2.8~7.6	4.25±2.28	2.2~6.6	2.83±0.56	2.2~3.8
糯性Waxiness	4.84±2.37 ab	1.8~7.6	2.60±0.85 b	2.0~3.2	5.45±2.84 ab	1.8~7.8	6.60±1.26 a	4.2~7.8
种皮厚度Episperm thickness	4.84±1.48	3.4~7.8	4.20±0.00	4.2~4.2	4.60±1.57	2.6~6.2	4.14±1.15	2.4~5.4
综合评价Overall satisfaction	4.73±0.90 b	3.2~6.2	4.00±1.13 b	3.2~4.8	6.75±1.28 a	5.0~7.8	5.80±1.41 ab	4.2~8.0

[1]	ZHANG Yue, CHEN Hui, ZHENG Yadan, YANG Peng, KE Zhigang, DAI Yangzhang, JIN Youding, DING Yuting, LIU Shulai. Quality changes of wine-lees mussel during wine-lees pickling process [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2024, 36(2): 416-423.
[2]	XIN Xiaoting, LIU Daqun, ZHANG Jianming, ZHANG Chengcheng, YANG Guangting. Effects of blanching and drying on nutritional components and processing suitability of dried Promma microphylla Turcz leaves [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(8): 1743-1751.
[3]	SUN Da, GONG Shu, CUI Hongchun, GUO Minming, ZHENG Xuxia. Suitability of fresh spring and autumn leaves from different tea cultivars for ultramicro green tea powder production [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(3): 437-446.
[4]	TANG Xiaoshu, HU Bo, CHEN Xuemei, ZHANG Baixi. Study on black chokeberry juicing processing and its quality evaluation [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(12): 2406-2414.
[5]	TANG Weimin, XING Jianrong, YANG Ying, XIANG Lu, WANG Sinong, LU Shengmin. Processing adaptability and storage characteristics of four whole fruit drinks of hybrid citrus [J]. , 2020, 32(3): 483-489.
[6]	YANG Juan, MI Qili, XIONG Wen, ZHU Ruizhi, LOU Mumeng, YAO Jianhua, LUO Yiyong. Application of foodborne lactic acid bacteria in improving tobacco quality [J]. , 2018, 30(5): 854-862.
[7]	JIA Yapeng, ZHANG Jun, LU Shengmin. Preliminary studies on canning processing adaptability of citrus varieties cultivated in Quzhou area [J]. , 2017, 29(2): 323-331.
[8]	WANG Sheng\\|tong， ZHENG Zheng， BAO Min\\|li， XU Mei\\|rong， DENG Xiao\\|ling*. Effects of Huanglongbing on fruit quality of Shatangju （Citrus reticulata Blanco） [J]. , 2016, 28(1): 145-.
[9]	WANG Zhen;SHAO Gao-neng;WEI Xiang-jin;HU Pei-song;TANG Shao-qing;*. Mapping QTLs for starch traits and its association analysis with starch synthesis-related genes in rice (Oryza sativa L.) [J]. , 2011, 23(3): 0-445.