不同板栗品种坚果果皮结构差异及其与腐烂指数的相关性分析

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20230588

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 探明不同板栗品种坚果果皮结构特征及与其腐烂指数的相关关系，筛选影响板栗腐烂的重要果皮结构指标，为板栗耐腐种质资源评价、筛选和科学贮藏提供参考依据。方法: 以种植于河北省迁西县的6个板栗品种（‘荔波早栗’‘八月红’‘明拣’‘泰栗1号’‘燕山早丰’和‘大板红’）坚果为试验材料，进行180天低温（0~2 ℃）贮藏试验，每隔30天调查坚果腐烂情况。在贮藏前取完好果，贮藏中取腐烂果的果皮进行固定，采用石蜡切片法观察不同板栗品种坚果的果皮结构及差异、贮藏期间腐烂果果皮的结构变化，并对完好果、腐烂果的果皮结构指标与腐烂指数进行相关性分析。结果: 1）不同板栗品种在贮藏期间的腐烂程度存在显著差异。‘明拣’‘泰栗1号’‘燕山早丰’和‘大板红’较耐贮藏，腐烂指数平均为9.35%，而‘八月红’和‘荔波早栗’较易腐烂，腐烂指数分别达到23.53%和21.63%； 2）不同板栗品种坚果的果皮结构存在显著差异。‘明拣’‘泰栗1号’‘燕山早丰’和‘大板红’的角质层厚，表皮细胞小且形状规则，中果皮层和内果皮层致密性高；‘八月红’和‘荔波早栗’的角质层薄，表皮细胞较大，‘八月红’的表皮细胞层存在明显间隙，‘荔波早栗’的表皮细胞层虽较为紧密，但中果皮层和内果皮层致密性差。与完好果相比，腐烂果的角质层厚度显著下降，表皮细胞层、中果皮层和内果皮层间隙率增加，果皮结构致密性显著下降。就品种而言，‘荔波早栗’和‘八月红’腐烂果的角质层几乎消失，表皮层破坏严重，中果皮层内薄壁细胞的胞壁分解，出现大量空腔，而‘明拣’‘泰栗1号’‘燕山早丰’和‘大板红’腐烂果的角质层仍保持一定厚度，表皮细胞结构仍较为完整，但中、内果皮层出现较多空腔；3）相关性分析表明，腐烂指数与完好果和腐烂果的角质层厚度均呈显著负相关（P<0.05），与表皮细胞层间隙率和中内果皮层间隙率呈显著正相关（P<0.05），与表皮细胞长宽比呈负相关，与其他指标无明显相关性；4）基于角质层厚度、表皮细胞长宽比、表皮细胞层和中、内果皮层的细胞间隙大小4个指标，利用隶属函数法综合评价发现，6个板栗品种的耐腐性由强至弱排序为‘明拣’>‘泰栗1号’>‘燕山早丰’>‘大板红’>‘荔波早栗’>‘八月红’。结论: 板栗果皮的角质层厚度、表皮细胞长宽比、表皮细胞层和中、内果皮层的细胞间隙大小与腐烂发生密切相关，以上4个指标可作为判定板栗坚果耐腐性的重要参考。

关键词: 板栗, 腐烂指数, 坚果果皮, 解剖结构, 角质层

Abstract:

Objective: This study aimed to elucidate the structural characteristics of the nut pericarp in different chestnut varieties and their relationship with the decay index, identifying key pericarp structural indicators that influence chestnut decay. This research provides a reference for the evaluation, selection, and scientific storage of chestnut germplasm resources resistant to decay. Method: Nuts from six chestnut cultivars planted in Qianxi County, Hebei Province (‘Libozaoli’, ‘Bayuehong’, ‘Mingjian’, ‘Taili 1’, ‘Yanshanzaofeng’, and ‘Dabanhong’) were used as experimental materials. A low-temperature storage experiment (0~2 ℃) was conducted over 180 days, with nut rot conditions surveyed every 30 days. Pericarp samples from both intact nuts before storage and rotted nuts during storage were fixed for structural observation using the paraffin section method. This facilitated analysis of pericarp structural and differences among different chestnut cultivars, changes in the structure of rotted nut pericarps, and the correlation with the decay index. Result: 1) Significant differences in the decay levels were observed among chestnut cultivars during storage. ‘Mingjian’, ‘Taili 1’, ‘Yanshanzaofeng’, and ‘Dabanhong’ showed higher storage resistance with an average rot index of 9.35%, whereas ‘Bayuehong’ and ‘Libozaoli’ were more prone to rot, with rot indexes reaching 23.53% and 21.63%, respectively. 2) Significant differences in pericarp structure were noted among the varieties. ‘Mingjian’, ‘Taili 1’, ‘Yanshanzaofeng’, and ‘Dabanhong’ had thick cuticle layers, small and regular epidermal cells, and highly dense mesocarp and endocarp layers. ‘Bayuehong’ and ‘Libozaoli’ had thin cuticle layers, larger epidermal cells, with ‘Bayuehong’ showing clear gaps in the epidermal cell layer, whereas ‘Libozaoli’, despite a tighter epidermal cell layer, had less dense mesocarp and endocarp layers. Compared to intact fruits, decayed fruits showed a significant reduction in cuticle thickness, increased gaps in the epidermal, mesocarp, and endocarp layers, and a significant decrease in pericarp density. Specifically, the cuticle layer of decayed fruits from ‘Libozaoli’ and ‘Bayuehong’ nearly vanished, with severe damage to the epidermal layer, and decomposition of the cell walls in the thin-walled cells of the mesocarp, leading to numerous cavities, whereas ‘Mingjian’, ‘Taili 1’, ‘Yanshanzaofeng’, and ‘Dabanhong’ maintained a certain thickness in the cuticle layer, and their epidermal cell structure remained relatively intact, but more cavities appeared in the middle and inner pericarp layers. 3) The analysis of the correlation between the pericarp structural indicators of intact and decayed fruits and the decay index showed that the decay index was significantly negatively correlated with the thickness of the cuticle layer, and significantly positively correlated with the gap rate of the epidermal cell layer and the gap rate of the mesocarp and endocarp layers. It was also negatively correlated with the length-to-width ratio of epidermal cells, but showed no significant correlation with other indicators. 4) Based on the four indicators of cuticle thickness, the length-width ratio of epidermal cells, and the cell gap size of the epidermal, mesocarp, and endocarp layers, the membership function method was used for comprehensive evaluation and found that the decay resistance of the six chestnut varieties was ranked from strong to weak as ‘Mingjian’ > ‘Taili 1’ > ‘Yanshanzaofeng’ > ‘Dabanhong’ > ‘Libozaoli’ > ‘Bayuehong’. The results were basically consistent with the storage test results. Conclusion: The thickness of the cuticle layer, the length-width ratio of epidermal cells, and the cell gap size of the epidermal, mesocarp, and endocarp layers are closely related to the occurrence of rot. The above four indicators can be used as an important reference for determining the decay resistance of chestnut.

Key words: chestnut, rot index, chetnut peel, anatomical structure, cuticle

中图分类号:

S664.2

赖海荣,郭素娟. 不同板栗品种坚果果皮结构差异及其与腐烂指数的相关性分析[J]. 林业科学, 2024, 60(12): 72-82.

Hairong Lai,Sujuan Guo. Differences in Peel Structure and Correlation Analysis with Decay Index of Different Chinese Chestnut (Castanea mollissima) Varieties[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2024, 60(12): 72-82.

图/表 11

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

图3

表4

图4

图5

图6

表5

参考文献 0

	董　乐, 李　田, 黄文印, 等. 浙江红花油茶优株筛选与综合评价. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2021, 41 (11): 35- 45.
	Dong L, Li T, Huang W Y, et al. Selection and comprehensive evaluation of superior individual plant in Camellia chekiangoleosa. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology, 2021, 41 (11): 35- 45.
	高　萌, 屈　魏, 冉　昪, 等. '徐香'与'海沃德'猕猴桃冷藏期间组织结构与生理变化差异. 园艺学报, 2020, 47 (7): 1289- 1300.
	Gao M, Qu W, Ran B, et al. Differences in tissue structure and physiological changes of ’Xuxiang’and 'Hayward’ Kiwifruit fruits during cold storage. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2020, 47 (7): 1289- 1300.
	龚晟兰, 杨治华, 吴富敏, 等. 植物精油结合壳聚糖涂膜对板栗采后的保鲜效果. 食品工业科技, 2021, 42 (22): 314- 320.
	Gong S L, Yang Z H, Wu F M, et al. Effects of plant essential oils treatment combined with chitosan coating on fresh-keeping of post-harvested chestnuts. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2021, 42 (22): 314- 320.
	黄婉莉, 郑诚乐, 王星剑, 等. 低温贮藏荔枝果皮结构与采后失水、褐变的关系研究. 中国果树, 2017, (1): 46- 48,102.
	Huang W L, Zheng C L , Wang X J, et al. Study on the relationship between pericarp structure and postharvest water loss and browning of Litchi chinensis stored at low temperature. China Fruits, 2017, (1): 46- 48,102.
	韩冬梅, 黄石连, 欧阳思颖, 等. 提升龙眼果实耐贮性的果期病害防治与养分优化管理. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55 (21): 4279- 4293. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.21.014
	Han D M, Huang S L, Ouyang S Y, et al. Optimizing management mode of disease and nutrient during the entire fruit development for improving postharvest storability of Longan fruit. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2022, 55 (21): 4279- 4293. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.21.014
	蒋侬辉, 陈金印, 徐小彪, 等. 板栗贮藏技术及采后生理研究进展. 江西农业大学学报, 2001, 23 (3): 401- 405. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2286.2001.03.024
	Jiang N H, Chen J Y, Xu X B, et al. Research progress in storage technology and postharvest physiology of chestnut. Acta Agriculturae Universitis Jiangxiensis, 2001, 23 (3): 401- 405. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2286.2001.03.024
	李宏建, 刘　志, 王　宏, 等. 苹果果实组织结构与果实失重率和硬度变化的关系. 果树学报, 2013, 30 (5): 753- 758.
	Li H J, Liu Z, Wang H, et al. Study on the relationship between organizational structure and firmness, weight-lose rate of apple fruit. Journal of Fruit Science, 2013, 30 (5): 753- 758.
	李治梅, 张玉星, 许建锋, 等. 鸭梨、黄金梨果实结构与耐贮性的关系. 果树学报, 2006, 23 (1): 108- 110. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-9980.2006.01.025
	Li Z M, Zhang Y X, Xu J F, et al. Effects of fruit tissue structure of Yali and Whangkeumbae pear cultivars on the fruit storability. Journal of Fruit Science, 2006, 23 (1): 108- 110. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-9980.2006.01.025
	林河通, 席玙芳, 陈绍军, 等. 2002. 龙眼果皮形态结构比较观察及其与果实耐贮运的关系. 广西植物, 22(5): 413–419, 424–484.
	Lin H T, Xi Y F, Chen S J, et al. 2002. A comparative observation on pericarp mor-phology and structure and its relationship to storability and transport of Longan fruit. Guihaia, 22(5): 413–419, 424–484. ［in Chinese］
	林建城, 林河通, 郭振国, 等. 枇杷不同品种果实形态结构的比较及其与耐贮藏性的关系. 热带作物学报, 2009, 30 (1): 53- 58. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2009.01.011
	Lin J C, Lin H T, Guo Z G, et al. Morphology and structure and their relationships to storability of loquat fruits(Eriobotrya japonica lindl. ). Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2009, 30 (1): 53- 58. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2009.01.011
	刘　恋, 唐志鹏, 李菲菲, 等. ‘融安金柑’‘滑皮金柑’及‘脆蜜金柑’贮藏期品质、贮藏特性及果皮转录组分析. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54 (20): 4421- 4433. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.20.015
	Liu L, Tang Z P, Li F F, et al. Fruit quality in storage, storability and peel transcriptome analysis of Rong’an kumquat, Huapi kumquat and cuimi kumquat. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2021, 54 (20): 4421- 4433. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.20.015
	潘洵操, 谢宝贵. 荔枝果皮结构与果实贮藏性能关系的探讨. 广西植物, 1997, 17 (1): 79- 84.
	Pan X C, Xie B G. Study on the Relationship between the Peel Structure and Storage Quality of litchi Fruits. Guihaia, 1997, 17 (1): 79- 84.
	屈红霞, 孙谷畴, 蒋跃明. 2001. 龙眼果皮显微结构与果实耐贮性关系探讨. 武汉植物学研究, 19(1): 83–85, 90–94.
	Qu H X, Sun G C, Jiang Y M. 2001. Study on the relationship between the peel structure and keeping quality of Longan fruit. Journal of Wuhan Botanical Research, 19(1): 83–85, 90–94. ［in Chinese］
	苏丽娜, 王小庆. 板栗壳生药研究及有效成分没食子酸、绿原酸、芦丁含量测定. 食品工业科技, 2016, 37 (21): 323- 328.
	Su L N, Wang X Q. Pharmacognostical studies of chestnut epicarp and determination of active ingredients including gallic acid, chlorogenic acid and rutin. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2016, 37 (21): 323- 328.
	田爱林. 2021. 猕猴桃新优系‘金福’采后生理、质地及组织结构特性的分析. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学.
	Tian A L. 2021. Analysis of postharvest physiology, texture and tissue structure characteristics of a new kiwifruit superior line' Jinfu'. Yangling: Northwest A & F University.［in Chinese］
	王利娜, 赵　文, 孙　佳, 等. 南疆4个地区枣园土壤养分状况分析及肥力评价. 经济林研究, 2022, 40 (2): 144- 152.
	Wang L N, Zhao W, Sun J, et al. Analysis of soil nutrients and evaluation of fertility in jujube orchards in four regions of southern Xinjiang. Non-wood Forest Research, 2022, 40 (2): 144- 152.
	王晓明, 唐时俊, 李昌珠, 等. 板栗贮藏期坚果腐烂机理的研究. 果树学报, 2001, 18 (2): 98- 103. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-9980.2001.02.010
	Wang X M, Tang S J, Li C Z, et al. Mechanism of chestnut rotting during storage. Journal of Fruit Science, 2001, 18 (2): 98- 103. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-9980.2001.02.010
	瓮红利. 2006. 不同品种龙眼果实耐贮性的生物学基础研究. 福州: 福建农林大学.
	Weng H L. 2006. Studies on the basic biology of storability of longan fruit among cultivars. Fuzhou: Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University.［in Chinese］
	徐　鑫, 顾仁勇, 陶宏志, 等. 弱酸性电位水结合艾叶-石榴皮提取物对板栗涂膜保鲜效果的影响. 食品与发酵工业, 2021, 47 (20): 239- 246.
	Xu X, Gu R Y, Tao H Z, et al. Effect of slightly acidic electrolyzed water combined with Artemisia argyi-pomegranate peel extract treatment on the preservation of chestnuts. Food and Fermentation Industries, 2021, 47 (20): 239- 246.
	闫　格. 2017. 板栗低温贮藏条件的研究. 长沙: 湖南农业大学.
	Yan G. 2017. Study on low temperature storage conditions of chestnut. Changsha: Hunan Agricultural University.［in Chinese］
	易润华, 吴光金. 板栗腐烂机理及防腐保鲜技术的研究. 中南林学院学报, 2000, 20 (2): 44- 50.
	Yi R H, Wu G J. Research for the mechanism of Chinese chestnut putridity and the antiseptic and fresh keeping technique. Journal of Central South Forestry Universith, 2000, 20 (2): 44- 50.
	袁　雪. 2018. 不同品种青皮核桃耐贮性比较及其影响因素研究. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学.
	Yuan X. 2018. Study on the Storability Comparison among Different Fresh In-husk Walnut Cultivars and the Related Influencing Factors. Yangling: Northwest A & F University.［in Chinese］
	张娥珍, 廖　芬, 阳仁桂, 等. 17个品种芒果后熟过程中果皮解剖结构比较分析. 热带作物学报, 2016, 37 (11): 2238- 2243. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2016.11.032
	Zhang E Z, Liao F, Yang R G, et al. Comparison of cell structure of the fruit peel in seventeen varieties of Mangifera indica L during different postharvest stages. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2016, 37 (11): 2238- 2243. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2016.11.032
	张亦弛, 郭素娟. 2种生长延缓剂对板栗枝条生长和叶片碳氮代谢物积累的影响. 林业科学, 2020, 56 (5): 29- 36.
	Zhang Y C, Guo S J. Effects of two growth retardants on the growth of chestnut branches and the accumulation of carbon and nitrogen metabolites in Leaves. Scientia silvae sinicae, 2020, 56 (5): 29- 36.
	张宇和. 2005. 中国果树志-板栗榛子卷. 北京: 中国林业出版社.
	Zhang Y H. 2005. China fruit zhi-chestnut hazelnut roll. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House. ［in Chinese］
	赵帅琪, 张伟伟, 牛俊芳, 等. 森林草莓和栽培草莓在果实发育和成熟过程中细胞壁变化的比较. 植物生理学报, 2021, 57 (12): 2323- 2336.
	Zhao S Q, Zhang W W, Niu J F, et al. Comparison of cell wall changes of Fragaria vesca and Fragaria × Ananassa during fruit development and ripening. Plant Physiology Journal, 2021, 57 (12): 2323- 2336.
	周慧娟, 叶正文, 王　戈, 等. 采前套袋对黄肉桃货架期果皮超微结构的影响. 果树学报, 2016, 33 (8): 1000- 1006.
	Zhou H J, Ye Z W, Wang G, et al. Effect of preharvest bagging on ultrastructural changes of yellow-peach pericarp during shelf-life. Journal of Fruit Science, 2016, 33 (8): 1000- 1006.
	周会玲, 李嘉瑞. 葡萄果实组织结构与耐贮性的关系. 园艺学报, 2006, 33 (1): 28- 32. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0513-353X.2006.01.006
	Zhou H L, Li J R. The relationship between fruit texture and storage character in grapes. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2006, 33 (1): 28- 32. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0513-353X.2006.01.006
	Chu W J, Gao H Y, Chen H J, et al. Effects of cuticular wax on the postharvest quality of blueberry fruit. Food Chemistry, 2018, 239, 68- 74.
	Fernández-Muñoz R, Heredia A, Domínguez E. The role of cuticle in fruit shelf-life. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 2022, 78, 102802. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2022.102802
	Kendr G, Ozturk A. Castanea sativa Mill. (chestnut), fruit and leaf anatomy. Journal of Ankara University Faculty of Pharmacy, 2016, 40 (2): 1- 18.
	Konarska A. Morphological, histological and ultrastructural changes in fruit epidermis of apple Malus domestica cv. ligol (Rosaceae) at fruit set, maturity and storage. Acta Biologica Cracoviensia s Botanica, 2015, 56 (2): 35- 48.
	Liu Z W, Yan X W, Wang P W, et al. Changes in fruit texture and cell structure of different pumpkin varieties (lines) during storage. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 2024, 208, 112647. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2023.112647
	Macnee N C, Rebstock R, Hallett I C, et al. A review of current knowledge about the formation of native peridermal exocarp in fruit. Functional Plant Biology, 2020, 47 (12): 1019. doi: 10.1071/FP19135

编号 NO.	品种 Varieties	种源地 Source
1	‘荔波早栗’ ‘Libozaoli’	贵州荔波 Libo，Guizhou
2	‘八月红’ ‘Bayuehong’	湖北罗田 Luotian，Hubei
3	‘明拣’ ‘Mingjian’	陕西长安 Changan，Shanxi
4	‘泰栗1号’ ‘Taili 1’	山东泰安 Taian，Shandong
5	‘燕山早丰’ ‘Yanshanzaofeng’	河北迁西 Qianxi，Hebei
6	‘大板红’ ‘Dabanhong’	河北宽城 Kuancheng，Hebei

腐烂等级 Rot level	判别标准 Judgement standard
0	未发生腐坏 No decay occurred
1	10%≤DA<30%
2	30%≤DA<70%
3	70%≤DA

品种 Varieties	果实状态 State of fruit	角质层 Cuticle/μm	表皮层 Epidermal/μm	栅栏组织层 Palisade/μm	外果皮层 Exocarp/μm	中果皮层 Medocarp/μm	内果皮层 Endocarp/μm	果皮层 Total peel/μm
‘荔波早栗’ ‘Libozaoli’	完好果 Healthy fruit	1.35±0.05 C	13.55±1.57 A	110.35±4.23 C	123.90±5.80 CD	451.94±8.40 A	27.48±3.39 B	604.67±23.44 A
‘荔波早栗’ ‘Libozaoli’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	0.33±0.14 D	7.14±0.22 B	100.32±8.79 C	107.79±3.87 C	328.32±9.07 B	5.73±2.35 C	441.84±7.45 C
‘八月红’ ‘Bayuehong’	完好果 Healthy fruit	0.86±0.11 D	10.52±1.12 B	187.44±7.46 A	197.96±8.58 A	254.36±14.70 D	46.06±11.58 A	499.24±34.97 B
‘八月红’ ‘Bayuehong’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	0.37±0.26 D	9.43±2.31 A	200.25±6.03 A	210.05±3.78 A	318.89±24.20 B	9.86±2.98 B	538.80±13.68 B
‘明拣’ ‘Mingjian’	完好果 Healthy fruit	2.41±0.04 B	6.77±1.44 C	110.09±4.33 C	116.74±5.77 D	249.24±4.26 D	8.97±1.73 C	377.36±11.80 C
‘明拣’ ‘Mingjian’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	2.34±0.29 A	6.60±0.48 C	131.89±9.20 B	140.83±5.34 B	430.71±4.25 A	8.88±1.75 B	580.42±7.37 A
‘泰栗1号’ ‘Taili 1’	完好果 Healthy fruit	3.09±0.06 A	7.79±0.48 C	123.30±5.88 B	131.09±6.36 BC	218.67±9.76 E	9.87±1.17 C	362.68±17.35 C
‘泰栗1号’ ‘Taili 1’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	2.31±0.35 A	8.43±0.35 AB	130.39±6.23 B	141.13±4.17 B	306.84±12.84 B	9.53±0.67 B	457.50±7.76 C
‘燕山早丰’ ‘Yanshanzaofeng’	完好果 Healthy fruit	2.38±0.07 B	7.62±1.10 C	129.36±3.28 B	136.98±4.38 B	328.39±3.66 C	28.77±0.85 B	496.52±8.96 B
‘燕山早丰’ ‘Yanshanzaofeng’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	1.93±0.32 B	7.82±0.72 B	132.48±1.04 B	142.23±0.95 B	297.05±4.62 B	11.50±0.28 A	450.78±4.21 C
‘大板红’ ‘Dabanhong’	完好果 Healthy fruit	1.58±0.06 C	4.43±0.90 D	103.11±3.04 C	107.54±3.94 E	381.06±9.80 B	9.38±1.78 B	499.56±15.58 B
‘大板红’ ‘Dabanhong’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	1.24±0.12 C	5.15±0.53 D	121.43±2.02 B	127.82±1.12 B	299.26±7.16 B	9.03±1.48 B	436.11±6.15 C

品种 Varieties	果实状态 State of fruit	表皮细胞长度 Epidermal cell length/μm	表皮细胞厚度（宽度） Epidermal cell thickness(width)/μm	表皮细胞横截面积 Epidermal cell cross-sectional area/μm²	表皮细胞长宽比 Epidermal cell aspect ratio	表皮细胞层间隙率 Epidermal cell gap rate（%）	中、内果皮层间隙率 Mesocarp and endocarp gap rate（%）
‘荔波早栗’ ‘Libozaoli’	完好果 Healthy fruit	17.26±1.07 A	13.55±1.57 A	233.94±31.10 A	1.27±0.17 C	0.29±0.09 B	0.83±0.25 A
‘荔波早栗’ ‘Libozaoli’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	14.45±1.34 A	7.14±0.22 C	103.17±9.45 C	2.02±0.21 B	25.33±2.27 B	20.26±0.85 B
‘八月红’ ‘Bayuehong’	完好果 Healthy fruit	13.56±1.87 B	10.52±1.12 B	144.06±25.64 B	1.29±0.21 C	0.67±0.16 A	0.61±0.22 B
‘八月红’ ‘Bayuehong’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	10.84±2.43 B	9.43±2.31 A	102.22±18.76 C	1.15±0.41 D	36.36±3.24 A	35.10±1.14 A
‘明拣’ ‘Mingjian’	完好果 Healthy fruit	19.04±2.41 A	6.77±1.44 C	127.44±27.50 B	2.95±0.82 A	0.12±0.03 C	0.23±0.08 CD
‘明拣’ ‘Mingjian’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	14.51±1.10 A	6.60±0.48 D	95.70±10.19 C	2.20±0.21 A	6.86±0.28 D	14.19±0.51 C
‘泰栗1号’ ‘Taili 1’	完好果 Healthy fruit	18.10±2.84 A	7.79±0.48 C	141.93±25.91 B	2.32±0.22 B	0.16±0.04 C	0.17±0.03 D
‘泰栗1号’ ‘Taili 1’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	15.46±1.00 A	8.43±0.35 B	130.33±4.63 A	1.83±0.31 C	9.76±0.21 C	15.17±0.55 C
‘燕山早丰’ ‘Yanshanzaofeng’	完好果 Healthy fruit	19.60±3.66 A	7.62±1.10 C	151.27±20.82 B	2.57±0.31 AB	0.11±0.07 C	0.27±0.17 CD
‘燕山早丰’ ‘Yanshanzaofeng’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	14.81±0.60 A	7.82±0.72 B	115.81±8.19 B	1.89±0.12 C	6.70±0.18 D	10.09±0.33 D
‘大板红’ ‘Dabanhong’	完好果 Healthy fruit	10.60±2.36 B	4.43±0.90 D	47.16±9.05 C	2.40±0.71 B	0.05±0.03 D	0.35±0.04 C
‘大板红’ ‘Dabanhong’	腐烂果 Rotten fruit	10.34±1.33 B	5.15±0.53 E	53.25±5.98 D	2.01±0.17 B	6.00±0.13 D	7.09±0.25 E

品种名称 Varieties	角质层厚度 Cuticle thickness	表皮细胞层间隙率 Epidermal cell gap rate	中、内果皮层间隙率 Mesocarp and endocarp gap rate	表皮细胞长宽比 Epidermal cell thickness Length/width ratio	综合得分值 Comprehensive score	排序 Rank
‘荔波早栗’ ‘Libozaoli’	0.22	0.61	0.00	0.00	0.19	5
‘八月红’ ‘Bayuehong’	0.00	0.00	0.33	0.01	0.09	6
‘明拣’ ‘Mingjian’	0.70	0.89	0.91	1.00	0.88	1
‘泰栗1号’ ‘Taili 1’	1.00	0.82	1.00	0.63	0.86	2
‘燕山早丰’ ‘Yanshanzaofeng’	0.68	0.90	0.85	0.77	0.80	3
‘大板红’ ‘Dabanhong’	0.32	1.00	0.73	0.67	0.68	4
权重 Weight	0.24	0.23	0.26	0.27