Acta Horticulturae Sinica ›› 2026, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (8): 2213-2223.doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2025-0322
• Genetic & Breeding · Germplasm Resources · Molecular Biology • Next Articles
SU Yanli1,2, GAO Xiaoming1, WANG Long1, WANG Suke1, ZHANG Xiangzhan1, WANG Yanan1, XUE Huabai1,2,*(
)
Received:2026-03-14
Revised:2026-05-11
Online:2026-08-25
Published:2026-08-25
Contact:
XUE Huabai
SU Yanli, GAO Xiaoming, WANG Long, WANG Suke, ZHANG Xiangzhan, WANG Yanan, XUE Huabai. Comprehensive Evaluation of Fruit Texture in 488 Pear Germplasm Resources[J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(8): 2213-2223.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.ahs.ac.cn/EN/10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2025-0322
| 年Year | 数据项 Projects | 果皮硬度/N Peel firmness | 果皮脆性/mm Peel brittleness | 果皮韧性/mJ Peel toughness | 果肉硬度/N Pulp firmness | 果肉细度 Pulp fineness | 果肉脆性/% Pulp brittleness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 两年相关系数 Two-year correlation coefficient | 0.995** | 0.990** | 0.998** | 0.995** | 0.997** | 0.998** | |
| 2022 | 资源数 No. of resources | 488 | 488 | 488 | 488 | 488 | 488 |
| 中位数 Median | 35.45 | 1.83 | 34.32 | 16.16 | 24.72 | 46.28 | |
| 最小值 Min | 15.90 | 1.07 | 9.86 | 6.00 | 3.00 | 27.29 | |
| 最大值 Max | 91.47 | 4.69 | 153.17 | 69.43 | 43.19 | 84.04 | |
| 平均值 Mean | 36.71 | 1.89 | 36.83 | 17.49 | 24.00 | 47.66 | |
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 30.09 | 22.08 | 43.70 | 40.73 | 33.80 | 19.58 | |
| 2023 | 资源数 No. of resources | 451 | 451 | 451 | 451 | 451 | 451 |
| 中位数 Median | 35.89 | 1.71 | 32.36 | 15.81 | 24.75 | 45.78 | |
| 最小值 Min | 12.62 | 1.10 | 11.19 | 5.67 | 2.94 | 29.41 | |
| 最大值 Max | 90.56 | 7.25 | 174.94 | 61.28 | 46.69 | 78.53 | |
| 平均值 Mean | 36.83 | 1.81 | 35.87 | 17.41 | 23.87 | 46.87 | |
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 30.03 | 29.47 | 48.87 | 42.02 | 38.73 | 18.55 |
Table 1 The data of fruit texture of pear germplasm for two years
| 年Year | 数据项 Projects | 果皮硬度/N Peel firmness | 果皮脆性/mm Peel brittleness | 果皮韧性/mJ Peel toughness | 果肉硬度/N Pulp firmness | 果肉细度 Pulp fineness | 果肉脆性/% Pulp brittleness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 两年相关系数 Two-year correlation coefficient | 0.995** | 0.990** | 0.998** | 0.995** | 0.997** | 0.998** | |
| 2022 | 资源数 No. of resources | 488 | 488 | 488 | 488 | 488 | 488 |
| 中位数 Median | 35.45 | 1.83 | 34.32 | 16.16 | 24.72 | 46.28 | |
| 最小值 Min | 15.90 | 1.07 | 9.86 | 6.00 | 3.00 | 27.29 | |
| 最大值 Max | 91.47 | 4.69 | 153.17 | 69.43 | 43.19 | 84.04 | |
| 平均值 Mean | 36.71 | 1.89 | 36.83 | 17.49 | 24.00 | 47.66 | |
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 30.09 | 22.08 | 43.70 | 40.73 | 33.80 | 19.58 | |
| 2023 | 资源数 No. of resources | 451 | 451 | 451 | 451 | 451 | 451 |
| 中位数 Median | 35.89 | 1.71 | 32.36 | 15.81 | 24.75 | 45.78 | |
| 最小值 Min | 12.62 | 1.10 | 11.19 | 5.67 | 2.94 | 29.41 | |
| 最大值 Max | 90.56 | 7.25 | 174.94 | 61.28 | 46.69 | 78.53 | |
| 平均值 Mean | 36.83 | 1.81 | 35.87 | 17.41 | 23.87 | 46.87 | |
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 30.03 | 29.47 | 48.87 | 42.02 | 38.73 | 18.55 |
| 性状 Trait | 分级 Scale | 分布频率/% Frequency | 数值范围 Number range | 评价 Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 果皮硬度/N | 1 | 3.28 | < 20 | 极低 Extremely low |
| Peel firmness | 2 | 26.64 | 20 ~ 29 | 低 Low |
| 3 | 35.25 | 30 ~ 39 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 23.57 | 40 ~ 49 | 高 High | |
| 5 | 11.27 | ≥ 50 | 极高 Extremely high | |
| 果皮韧性/mJ | 1 | 9.02 | < 20 | 极低 Extremely low |
| Peel toughness | 2 | 28.07 | 20 ~ 29 | 低 Low |
| 3 | 28.89 | 30 ~ 39 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 18.03 | 40 ~ 49 | 高 High | |
| 5 | 15.98 | ≥ 50 | 极高 Extremely high | |
| 果皮脆性/mm | 1 | 10.25 | < 1.5 | 极高 Extremely high |
| Peel brittleness | 2 | 35.86 | 1.5 ~ 1.7 | 高 High |
| 3 | 32.58 | 1.8 ~ 2.0 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 12.50 | 2.1 ~ 2.3 | 低 Low | |
| 5 | 8.81 | ≥ 2.4 | 极低 Extremely low | |
| 果肉硬度/N | 1 | 7.38 | < 10 | 极低 Extremely low |
| Pulp firmness | 2 | 35.66 | 10 ~ 14 | 低 Low |
| 3 | 29.51 | 15 ~ 19 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 17.42 | 20 ~ 24 | 高 High | |
| 5 | 10.04 | ≥ 25 | 极高 Extremely high | |
| 果肉细度 | 1 | 3.69 | < 9 | 极细 Extremely Fine |
| Pulp fineness | 2 | 17.01 | 9 ~ 16 | 细 Fine |
| 3 | 30.74 | 17 ~ 24 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 34.84 | 25 ~ 32 | 粗 Coarse | |
| 5 | 13.73 | ≥ 33 | 极粗 Extremely coarse | |
| 果肉脆性/% | 1 | 8.61 | < 36 | 极高 Extremely high |
| Pulp brittleness | 2 | 30.12 | 36 ~ 43 | 高 High |
| 3 | 32.79 | 44 ~ 51 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 15.37 | 52 ~ 59 | 低 Low | |
| 5 | 10.66 | ≥ 60 | 极低 Extremely low |
Table 2 Classification standards of pear peel and pulp texture traits
| 性状 Trait | 分级 Scale | 分布频率/% Frequency | 数值范围 Number range | 评价 Evaluation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 果皮硬度/N | 1 | 3.28 | < 20 | 极低 Extremely low |
| Peel firmness | 2 | 26.64 | 20 ~ 29 | 低 Low |
| 3 | 35.25 | 30 ~ 39 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 23.57 | 40 ~ 49 | 高 High | |
| 5 | 11.27 | ≥ 50 | 极高 Extremely high | |
| 果皮韧性/mJ | 1 | 9.02 | < 20 | 极低 Extremely low |
| Peel toughness | 2 | 28.07 | 20 ~ 29 | 低 Low |
| 3 | 28.89 | 30 ~ 39 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 18.03 | 40 ~ 49 | 高 High | |
| 5 | 15.98 | ≥ 50 | 极高 Extremely high | |
| 果皮脆性/mm | 1 | 10.25 | < 1.5 | 极高 Extremely high |
| Peel brittleness | 2 | 35.86 | 1.5 ~ 1.7 | 高 High |
| 3 | 32.58 | 1.8 ~ 2.0 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 12.50 | 2.1 ~ 2.3 | 低 Low | |
| 5 | 8.81 | ≥ 2.4 | 极低 Extremely low | |
| 果肉硬度/N | 1 | 7.38 | < 10 | 极低 Extremely low |
| Pulp firmness | 2 | 35.66 | 10 ~ 14 | 低 Low |
| 3 | 29.51 | 15 ~ 19 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 17.42 | 20 ~ 24 | 高 High | |
| 5 | 10.04 | ≥ 25 | 极高 Extremely high | |
| 果肉细度 | 1 | 3.69 | < 9 | 极细 Extremely Fine |
| Pulp fineness | 2 | 17.01 | 9 ~ 16 | 细 Fine |
| 3 | 30.74 | 17 ~ 24 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 34.84 | 25 ~ 32 | 粗 Coarse | |
| 5 | 13.73 | ≥ 33 | 极粗 Extremely coarse | |
| 果肉脆性/% | 1 | 8.61 | < 36 | 极高 Extremely high |
| Pulp brittleness | 2 | 30.12 | 36 ~ 43 | 高 High |
| 3 | 32.79 | 44 ~ 51 | 中 Medium | |
| 4 | 15.37 | 52 ~ 59 | 低 Low | |
| 5 | 10.66 | ≥ 60 | 极低 Extremely low |
| 年 Year | 性状 Trait | 项目 Project | 白梨 P. bretschneideri | 砂梨P. pyrifolia | 秋子梨 P. ussuriensis | 西洋梨 P. communis | 新疆梨 P. sinkiangensis | 杂交品种 P. hybrid | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 资源数 No. of resources | 82 | 125 | 36 | 39 | 31 | 94 | |||||||||
| 果皮硬度/N Peel firmness | 平均值Mean | 34.64 | 39.15 | 38.79 | 39.86 | 37.07 | 32.16 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 28 | 21 | 33 | 29 | 34 | 27 | ||||||||||
| 果皮脆性/mm Peel brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 1.78 | 1.89 | 1.9 | 2.29 | 1.98 | 1.76 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 14 | 20 | 16 | 23 | 17 | 23 | ||||||||||
| 果皮韧性/mJ Peel toughness | 平均值 Mean | 32.76 | 38.48 | 38.32 | 47.91 | 38.18 | 30.56 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 34 | 30 | 45 | 41 | 35 | 43 | ||||||||||
| 果肉硬度/N Pulp firmness | 平均值 Mean | 16.06 | 16.91 | 22.29 | 21.98 | 18.9 | 14.09 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 36 | 28 | 39 | 34 | 35 | 33 | ||||||||||
| 果肉细度 Pulp fineness | 平均值 Mean | 25.48 | 26.24 | 18.13 | 19.83 | 18.16 | 25.72 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 25 | 27 | 52 | 40 | 51 | 29 | ||||||||||
| 果肉脆性/% Pulp brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 46.22 | 43.58 | 57.75 | 55.52 | 51.76 | 44.44 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 15 | 16 | 19 | 16 | 15 | 19 | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 资源数 No. of Resources | 80 | 97 | 25 | 42 | 23 | 91 | |||||||||
| 果皮硬度/N | 平均值 Mean | 35.57 | 38.11 | 39.19 | 40.19 | 35.75 | 32.32 | |||||||||
| Peel firmness | 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 29 | 23 | 35 | 27 | 35 | 27 | |||||||||
| 果皮脆性/mm Peel brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 1.69 | 1.78 | 1.82 | 2.38 | 1.72 | 1.66 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 16 | 19 | 36 | 51 | 13 | 18 | ||||||||||
| 果皮韧性/mJ Peel toughness | 平均值 Mean | 32.56 | 35.66 | 35.55 | 51.21 | 32.7 | 29.43 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 39 | 29 | 44 | 63 | 35 | 38 | ||||||||||
| 果肉硬度/N Pulp firmness | 平均值Mean | 16.13 | 16.84 | 22.59 | 20.98 | 19.29 | 13.7 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 36 | 30 | 45 | 33 | 47 | 30 | ||||||||||
| 果肉细度 Pulp fineness | 平均值 Mean | 25.77 | 24.82 | 17.56 | 21.2 | 21.55 | 24.79 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 28 | 29 | 54 | 41 | 46 | 39 | ||||||||||
| 果肉脆性/% Pulp brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 45.23 | 44.41 | 55.85 | 52.03 | 53.19 | 42.84 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 12 | 15 | 25 | 16 | 16 | 15 | ||||||||||
Table 3 Fruit texture variation of different variety groups
| 年 Year | 性状 Trait | 项目 Project | 白梨 P. bretschneideri | 砂梨P. pyrifolia | 秋子梨 P. ussuriensis | 西洋梨 P. communis | 新疆梨 P. sinkiangensis | 杂交品种 P. hybrid | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 资源数 No. of resources | 82 | 125 | 36 | 39 | 31 | 94 | |||||||||
| 果皮硬度/N Peel firmness | 平均值Mean | 34.64 | 39.15 | 38.79 | 39.86 | 37.07 | 32.16 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 28 | 21 | 33 | 29 | 34 | 27 | ||||||||||
| 果皮脆性/mm Peel brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 1.78 | 1.89 | 1.9 | 2.29 | 1.98 | 1.76 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 14 | 20 | 16 | 23 | 17 | 23 | ||||||||||
| 果皮韧性/mJ Peel toughness | 平均值 Mean | 32.76 | 38.48 | 38.32 | 47.91 | 38.18 | 30.56 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 34 | 30 | 45 | 41 | 35 | 43 | ||||||||||
| 果肉硬度/N Pulp firmness | 平均值 Mean | 16.06 | 16.91 | 22.29 | 21.98 | 18.9 | 14.09 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 36 | 28 | 39 | 34 | 35 | 33 | ||||||||||
| 果肉细度 Pulp fineness | 平均值 Mean | 25.48 | 26.24 | 18.13 | 19.83 | 18.16 | 25.72 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 25 | 27 | 52 | 40 | 51 | 29 | ||||||||||
| 果肉脆性/% Pulp brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 46.22 | 43.58 | 57.75 | 55.52 | 51.76 | 44.44 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 15 | 16 | 19 | 16 | 15 | 19 | ||||||||||
| 2023 | 资源数 No. of Resources | 80 | 97 | 25 | 42 | 23 | 91 | |||||||||
| 果皮硬度/N | 平均值 Mean | 35.57 | 38.11 | 39.19 | 40.19 | 35.75 | 32.32 | |||||||||
| Peel firmness | 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 29 | 23 | 35 | 27 | 35 | 27 | |||||||||
| 果皮脆性/mm Peel brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 1.69 | 1.78 | 1.82 | 2.38 | 1.72 | 1.66 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 16 | 19 | 36 | 51 | 13 | 18 | ||||||||||
| 果皮韧性/mJ Peel toughness | 平均值 Mean | 32.56 | 35.66 | 35.55 | 51.21 | 32.7 | 29.43 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 39 | 29 | 44 | 63 | 35 | 38 | ||||||||||
| 果肉硬度/N Pulp firmness | 平均值Mean | 16.13 | 16.84 | 22.59 | 20.98 | 19.29 | 13.7 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 36 | 30 | 45 | 33 | 47 | 30 | ||||||||||
| 果肉细度 Pulp fineness | 平均值 Mean | 25.77 | 24.82 | 17.56 | 21.2 | 21.55 | 24.79 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 28 | 29 | 54 | 41 | 46 | 39 | ||||||||||
| 果肉脆性/% Pulp brittleness | 平均值 Mean | 45.23 | 44.41 | 55.85 | 52.03 | 53.19 | 42.84 | |||||||||
| 变异系数/% Coefficient of variation | 12 | 15 | 25 | 16 | 16 | 15 | ||||||||||
| 丹霞红 Danxiahong | 玉露香 Yuluxiang | 鸭梨 Yali | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient |
| 新梨8号Xinli 8 | 0.95 | 金水酥Jinshuisu | 0.93 | 香茌Xiangchi | 0.97 |
| 香茌Xiangchi | 0.94 | 新星Xinxing | 0.93 | 晋州大鸭梨Jinzhou Dayali | 0.96 |
| 鸭梨Yali | 0.93 | 云和雪梨Yunhe Xueli | 0.92 | 红酥蜜Hongsumi | 0.96 |
| 苍溪雪梨Cangxi Xueli | 0.92 | 雪花梨Xuehuali | 0.92 | 苍溪雪梨Cangxi Xueli | 0.94 |
| 晋州大鸭梨 Jinzhou Dayali | 0.91 | 台湾蜜雪梨Taiwan Mixueli | 0.92 | 红酥宝Hongsubao | 0.94 |
| 白雪Baixue | 0.90 | 新梨6号Xinli 6 | 0.91 | 七月酥Qiyuesu | 0.93 |
| 巨鸭梨Juyali | 0.90 | 秋月Qiuyue | 0.89 | 白雪Baixue | 0.93 |
| 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.89 | 桂冠Guiguan | 0.89 | 八月酥Bayuesu | 0.93 |
| 红酥蜜Hongsumi | 0.89 | 丹霞红Danxiahong | 0.89 | 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.93 |
| 玉露香Yuluxiang | 0.88 | 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.89 | 丹霞红Danxiahong | 0.93 |
Table 4 Grey correlation analysis results of pulp texture(Part of the excellent grade)
| 丹霞红 Danxiahong | 玉露香 Yuluxiang | 鸭梨 Yali | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient |
| 新梨8号Xinli 8 | 0.95 | 金水酥Jinshuisu | 0.93 | 香茌Xiangchi | 0.97 |
| 香茌Xiangchi | 0.94 | 新星Xinxing | 0.93 | 晋州大鸭梨Jinzhou Dayali | 0.96 |
| 鸭梨Yali | 0.93 | 云和雪梨Yunhe Xueli | 0.92 | 红酥蜜Hongsumi | 0.96 |
| 苍溪雪梨Cangxi Xueli | 0.92 | 雪花梨Xuehuali | 0.92 | 苍溪雪梨Cangxi Xueli | 0.94 |
| 晋州大鸭梨 Jinzhou Dayali | 0.91 | 台湾蜜雪梨Taiwan Mixueli | 0.92 | 红酥宝Hongsubao | 0.94 |
| 白雪Baixue | 0.90 | 新梨6号Xinli 6 | 0.91 | 七月酥Qiyuesu | 0.93 |
| 巨鸭梨Juyali | 0.90 | 秋月Qiuyue | 0.89 | 白雪Baixue | 0.93 |
| 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.89 | 桂冠Guiguan | 0.89 | 八月酥Bayuesu | 0.93 |
| 红酥蜜Hongsumi | 0.89 | 丹霞红Danxiahong | 0.89 | 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.93 |
| 玉露香Yuluxiang | 0.88 | 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.89 | 丹霞红Danxiahong | 0.93 |
| 丹霞红 Danxiahong | 玉露香 Yuluxiang | 鸭梨 Yali | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient |
| 新梨8号Xinli 8 | 0.96 | 桂冠Guiguan | 0.94 | 红酥蜜Hongsumi | 0.97 |
| 苍溪雪梨Cangxi Xueli | 0.93 | 新星Xinxing | 0.93 | 香茌Xiangchi | 0.97 |
| 巨鸭梨 Juyali | 0.93 | 筑水Zhushui | 0.93 | 晋州大鸭梨Jinzhou Dayali | 0.96 |
| 香茌Xiangchi | 0.93 | 新鸭梨Xinyali | 0.92 | 桂冠Guiguan | 0.94 |
| 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.92 | 白皮金川雪梨Baipi Jinchuan Xueli | 0.92 | 天海鸭梨Tianhai Yali | 0.94 |
| 白雪Baixue | 0.92 | 新梨6号Xinli 6 | 0.91 | 蓟县大鸭梨Jixian Dayali | 0.93 |
| 早酥蜜Zaosumi | 0.90 | 苏翠1号Sucui 1 | 0.91 | 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.92 |
| 金水酥Jinshuisu | 0.90 | 香茌Xiangchi | 0.91 | 红香酥Hongxiangsu | 0.92 |
| 夏露Xialu | 0.89 | 鸭梨Yali | 0.90 | 巨鸭梨Juyali | 0.92 |
| 玉露香Yuluxiang | 0.88 | 黄冠Huangguan | 0.90 | 丹霞红Danxiahong | 0.90 |
Table 5 Grey correlation analysis results of fruit texture(Part of the excellent grade)
| 丹霞红 Danxiahong | 玉露香 Yuluxiang | 鸭梨 Yali | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient | 品种名 Cultivar name | 关联系数 Correlation coefficient |
| 新梨8号Xinli 8 | 0.96 | 桂冠Guiguan | 0.94 | 红酥蜜Hongsumi | 0.97 |
| 苍溪雪梨Cangxi Xueli | 0.93 | 新星Xinxing | 0.93 | 香茌Xiangchi | 0.97 |
| 巨鸭梨 Juyali | 0.93 | 筑水Zhushui | 0.93 | 晋州大鸭梨Jinzhou Dayali | 0.96 |
| 香茌Xiangchi | 0.93 | 新鸭梨Xinyali | 0.92 | 桂冠Guiguan | 0.94 |
| 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.92 | 白皮金川雪梨Baipi Jinchuan Xueli | 0.92 | 天海鸭梨Tianhai Yali | 0.94 |
| 白雪Baixue | 0.92 | 新梨6号Xinli 6 | 0.91 | 蓟县大鸭梨Jixian Dayali | 0.93 |
| 早酥蜜Zaosumi | 0.90 | 苏翠1号Sucui 1 | 0.91 | 崇化大Chonghuada | 0.92 |
| 金水酥Jinshuisu | 0.90 | 香茌Xiangchi | 0.91 | 红香酥Hongxiangsu | 0.92 |
| 夏露Xialu | 0.89 | 鸭梨Yali | 0.90 | 巨鸭梨Juyali | 0.92 |
| 玉露香Yuluxiang | 0.88 | 黄冠Huangguan | 0.90 | 丹霞红Danxiahong | 0.90 |
| [1] |
doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.01.008 URL |
| [2] |
doi: 10.1111/jts.2005.36.issue-4 URL |
| [3] |
doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2015.06.025 URL |
| [4] |
doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2022-0492 |
|
端瑞薇, 张向展, 李博, 王梦茹, 解亚荣, 李配, 王磊, 杨健, 薛华柏. 2023. 梨296份种质资源果点性状综合评价. 园艺学报, 50 (11):2305-2322.
doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2022-0492 |
|
| [5] |
doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201619012 |
|
高滋艺, 范献光, 杨惠娟, 蒋小兵, 杨亚州, 赵政阳, 党智宏. 2016. 苹果发育过程中细胞壁代谢及果肉质地的变化. 食品科学, 37 (19): 70-75.
doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201619012 |
|
| [6] |
doi: 10.1016/j.nfs.2018.04.002 URL |
| [7] |
doi: 10.1007/s13197-013-0990-2 URL |
| [8] |
|
|
李秀根, 张绍铃. 2020. 中国梨树志. 北京:中国农业出版社:12.
|
|
| [9] |
|
|
刘录祥, 孙其信, 王士芸. 1989. 灰色系统理论应用于作物新品种综合评估初探. 中国农业科学, 22 (3):22-27.
|
|
| [10] |
|
|
刘孟军. 1996. 枣树数量性状的概率分级研究. 园艺学报, 23 (2):105-109.
|
|
| [11] |
|
|
罗斌, 赵有斌, 尹学清, 赵东林, 杜志龙, 何江涛. 2019. 质构仪在果蔬品质评定中应用的研究进展. 食品研究与开发, 40 (5):209-213.
|
|
| [12] |
|
|
娄来峰, 吴杰, 张慧, 吕吉光, 杨雪梅. 2017. 香梨质地的多面分析及综合评价. 石河子大学学报(自然科学版), 35 (3):373-377.
|
|
| [13] |
|
|
马庆华, 王贵禧, 梁丽松. 2011. 质构仪穿刺试验检测冬枣质地品质方法的建立. 中国农业科学, 44 (6):1210-1217.
|
|
| [14] |
doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2020-0599 |
|
聂洧洁, 王晨赫, 马婉茹, 苏江硕, 张飞, 房伟民, 陈素梅, 陈发棣, 管志勇. 2021. 切花小菊品种花枝性状综合评价. 园艺学报, 48 (6):1150-1162.
doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2020-0599 |
|
| [15] |
doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20181025-299 |
|
潘好斌, 刘东, 邵青旭, 高歌, 齐红岩. 2019. 不同品种薄皮甜瓜成熟期果实质地品质分析及综合评价. 食品科学, 40 (21):35-42.
doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20181025-299 |
|
| [16] |
|
|
潘秀娟, 屠康. 2005. 质构仪质地多面分析(TPA)方法对苹果采后质地变化的检测. 农业工程学报, 21 (3):166-170.
|
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
|
王斌, 林钦贤, 梁伟龙, 郭长达, 张华勇, 康志英. 2021. 灰色关联度分析法评价半枝莲药材质量. 中医药信息, 38 (5):6-10.
|
|
| [19] |
|
|
王力荣, 朱更瑞, 方伟超. 2005a. 桃(Prunus persica L.) 种质资源果实数量性状评价指标探讨. 园艺学报, 32 (1):1-5.
|
|
| [20] |
|
|
王力荣, 朱更瑞, 方伟超. 2005b. 桃种质资源若干植物学数量性状描述指标探讨. 中国农业科学, 38 (4):770-776.
|
|
| [21] |
doi: 10.1007/s12161-015-0153-3 URL |
| [22] |
|
|
许薇, 劳琪珍, 陈振林, 刘英健, 姜丽蕊, 宋慕波. 2023. 三华李果实的质地品质特性分析. 食品研究与开发, 44 (11):181-187.
|
|
| [23] |
|
|
杨为海, 张明楷, 邹明宏, 曾辉, 张汉周, 陆超忠. 2012. 澳洲坚果主要品质性状的灰色关联度分析和模糊综合评判. 热带作物学报, 33 (10):1743-1748.
|
|
| [24] |
|
|
杨植, 董梦怡, 王振磊, 闫芬芬, 吴翠云, 王玖瑞, 刘孟军, 林敏娟. 2023. 基于 TPA 法枣酸枣杂交F1果实质地与裂果对比分析. 新疆农业科学, 60 (3):608-615.
doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.03.011 |
|
| [25] |
|
|
叶志彪. 2011. 园艺产品品质分析. 北京:中国农业出版社:16.
|
|
| [26] |
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb20190800527 |
|
张凡, 薛鑫, 刘国涛, 周其军, 董军红, 杨春玲. 2020. 基于灰色关联度分析法和聚类分析法筛选小麦高产优质新品种(系)的研究. 中国农业通报, 36 (27):6-13.
|
|
| [27] |
|
|
张莹, 曹玉芬, 田路明, 董星光, 齐丹, 霍宏亮, 徐家玉, 刘超, 王立东. 2023. 梨种质资源果实若干数量性状评价指标研究. 果树学报, 40 (6):1053-1063.
|
|
| [28] |
doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201407052 |
|
朱丹实, 李慧, 曹雪慧, 刘贺, 励建荣, 孟宪军. 2014. 质构仪器分析在生鲜食品品质评价中的研究进展. 食品科学, 35 (7):264-269.
doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201407052 |
|
| [29] |
|
|
朱敏, 高爱平, 邓穗生, 陈业渊. 2010. 杧果种质资源果实主要数量性状评价指标探讨. 植物遗传资源学报, 11 (4):418-423.
doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2010.04.006 |
| [1] | TU Junfan, LI Xianming, ZHU Hongyan, ZHANG Li. A New High-Quality Pear Cultivar‘Minglu’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(S1): 19-20. |
| [2] | ZHANG Yanjie, OU Chunqing, WANG Fei, MA Li, QI Liyong, JIANG Shuling. A New High-Quality Pear Cultivar‘Huayun’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(S1): 21-22. |
| [3] | MA Na, LU Liqing, ZHANG Haiqi, LIU Chunyan, QI Yongjie, XU Yiliu, XIAO Ziwen, LI Minggang, ZHU Yingxu, GAO Zhenghui. A New Pear Cultivar‘Wanli 7’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(S1): 25-26. |
| [4] | WEI Chunyan, CAI Danying, WANG Yuezhi, SHI Zebin, ZHONG Linbing, DAI Meisong. A New Sand Pear Cultivar‘Zhongyu’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(S1): 27-28. |
| [5] | LI Lelong, WANG Ran, SONG Jiankun. A New Red Pear Cultivar‘Luyan’ [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(S1): 29-30. |
| [6] | SAILAIJIANG Maierhaba, CHENG Ping, MAIMUTIMIN Mieradili, LI Dan, ABDUSALAM Aysajan. Genetic Diversity Analysis and DNA Fingerprinting Development of Prunus ferganensis Landrace Germplasm Based on SSR [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(8): 2224-2240. |
| [7] | CHEN Fangce, WANG Ning, XIAO Yufei, ZHONG Chuangnan, HOU Ruili, OUYANG Yiqi, LI Haiyan, WAN Baoxiong, YI Xianrong, XU Zhimei, CHEN Jinqing, ZHANG Kunmei, LAI Shouren, LIU Chaoyang. Analysis of Sugar and Acid Component Contents in Fruit of 100 Southern Plum Germplasm Accessions [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(8): 2241-2255. |
| [8] | SU Wanlong, FU Jiatian, ZHAO Ailing, WANG Yongkang, REN Haiyan, XUE Xiaofang, SHI Meijuan, LIU Li, ZHANG Rui, LI Yi, LI Dengke. Characterization and Comprehensive Evaluation of Cell Wall Components of Jujube Fruit [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(8): 2415-2430. |
| [9] | LIU Xiaomin, XU Liangliang, LIU Yaling, WU Jun. Research Progress of Drought Stress Response in Pear [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(7): 1955-1976. |
| [10] | ZHUO Siting, LIANG Xin, SHEN Xingyi, HUANG Xue, LIU Junwei, ZHAO Shili, HE Huaping, LI Guohuai, ZHU Wei, ZHU Kaijie. Assessment of Gummosis Pathogens Resistance in Four Peach Rootstocks [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(7): 2004-2018. |
| [11] | SUN Nan, LIU Huaite, CAO Yang, DU Peihua, ZHANG Xueying, LIANG Bowen. Effects of Exogenous Melatonin and Dopamine on Nutrient Absorption and Drought Resistance Evaluation of Apple Plants Under Drought Stress [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(7): 2092-2106. |
| [12] | LIU Sitong, YAN Weiwei, SUN Xiaonan, ZHANG Xinnan, TIAN Luming, LI Yunpeng, JIA Xiaohui. Pathogen Identification,Fungicide Efficacy Assessment,and Germplasm Resistance Evaluation of Anthracnose in‘Docteur Jules Guyot’Pear [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(6): 1753-1764. |
| [13] | XU Huinan, GAO Mengjie, QI Kaijie, CUI Yanbo, WU Xiao, TAO Shutian, ZHANG Shaoling, YIN Hao. Phenotypic Diversity Evaluation of Shoots and Leaves in 264 Pear Germplasm Accessions [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(5): 1237-1252. |
| [14] | LI Jie, TIAN Qihang, LIU Guojian, TIAN Zhendong, WANG Yu, WANG Zhaoyuan, CHANG Ruifeng, LI Yonghong. Influence of Cold Stress and Cold Resistance Evaluation on the Seedling Stage of Peach Cultivars [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(5): 1409-1424. |
| [15] | CHEN Yanyan, YUE Chenxi, TU Hui, SHI Jikang, TAO Junjie, PAN Hui, LI Wenyi, LI Li, HUANG Chunhui. Evaluation of Resistance to Bacterial Canker Disease and Fungal Soft Rot and Fruit Quality of Jinfeng Kiwifruit Seed Offspring [J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2026, 53(3): 763-774. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||
Copyright © 2012 Acta Horticulturae Sinica 京ICP备10030308号-2 国际联网备案号 11010802023439
Tel: 010-82109523 E-Mail: yuanyixuebao@126.com
Support by: Beijing Magtech Co.Ltd