Determination of Quality Criteria that Allow Differentiation Between Honey Adulterated with Sugar and Pure Honey
- 85 Downloads
This study used various parameters of honey to develop a potentially more robust approach to the detection of adulterated honey. For this purpose, 25 multifloral, natural honey samples and 20 samples of adulterated honey produced by bees that had been fed supplementary sucrose syrup were analysed. The mean total phenolic content of the natural honeys was considerably higher than in the adulterated honeys at 157 ± 13 and 35.2 ± 7.3 mg GAE/100 g, respectively. Similarly, considerable variation was determined between natural and adulterated honeys in terms of total flavonoids (3.3 ± 0.3 and 2.1 ± 0.4 mg QE/100 g, respectively), antiradical activity (87.9 ± 12 and 163 ± 11 mg/mL, respectively) and proline content (202 ± 26 and 71.1 ± 21.6 mg/kg, respectively.) The potassium, phosphorus, calcium and magnesium contents of natural honeys were also higher than in adulterated honeys (P < 0.01). In conclusion, the determination of the proline level, phenolic content, antioxidant activity and mineral profile may collectively provide a more holistic method approach to the differentiation of natural and adulterated honey, and also for comparing their food values.
KeywordsAdulterated honey Antioxidant Honey composition Trace elements
The authors thank Dr. Serhat Arslan for editing the content of this manuscript related to the statistical analysis and Gregory T. Sullivan (School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia) for editing the English in an earlier version of this manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
- 1.Codex Alimentarius Commission (2001) Codex standard 12, Revised Codex Standard for Honey, Standards and Standard Methods 11Google Scholar
- 3.Nicholls J, Miraglio AM (2003) Honey and healthy diets. Cereal Food World 48(3):116–119Google Scholar
- 4.Nisbet C, Guler A, Ciftci G, Yarim GF (2009) The investigation of protein profile of different botanic origin honey and density saccharose-adulterated honey by SDS-PAGE method. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg 15(3):443–446Google Scholar
- 8.Guler A, Kocaokutgen H, Garipoglu AV, Onder H, Ekinci D, Biyik S (2014) Detection of adulterated honey produced by honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies fed with different levels of commercial industrial sugar (C3 and C4 plants) syrups by the carbon isotope ratio analysis. Food Chem 155:155–160Google Scholar
- 11.Guler A, Garıpoglu A, Onder H, Bıyık S, Kocaokutgen H, Ekıncı D (2017) Comparing biochemical properties of pure and adulterated honeys produced by feeding honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) colonies with different levels of industrial commercial sugars. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg 23(2):259–268Google Scholar
- 12.Raezke KP, Elflein L (2007) LC-IRMS: A newly developed analytical method to determine adulterations with sugar and additions of sugars. Apimondia Congress, 9–14 September, Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- 14.Dimins F, Kuka P, Augspole I (2010) Characterisation of honey antioxidative properties. Food Innoua, International conference on Food Innovation 1–4Google Scholar
- 19.Estupinan S, Sanjuan E (1998) Quality parameters of honey II chemical composition. Alimentaria 297:117–122Google Scholar
- 20.www.ogm.gov.tr (2017) Bal ormanları eylem planı.101–27Google Scholar
- 21.Mbiri A, Onditi A, Oyaro N, Murago E (2011) Determination of essential and heavy metals in Kenyan honey by atomic absorption and emission spectroscopy. J Agric Sci Technol 13(1):107–115Google Scholar
- 22.Hollander M, Wolfe DA, Chicken E (2017) Nonparametric statistical methods, 3rd edition. John Wiley& Sons. Inc., ISNB: 978-0-470-038737-5, 848-9Google Scholar
- 23.Ranneh Y, Ali F, Zarei M, Akim AM, Hamid HA, Khazaai H (2018) Malaysian stingless bee and Tualang honeys: a comparative characterization of total antioxidant capacity and phenolic profile using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. LWT—Food Sci Technol 89:1–9Google Scholar
- 24.Khalil MI, Sulaiman SA, Boukraa L (2010) Antioxidant properties of honey and its role in preventing health disorder. Open Nut J 3:6–16Google Scholar
- 25.Lianda RLP, Sant’Ana LD, Echevarria A, Castro RN (2012) Antioxidant activity and phenolic composition of Brazilian honeys and their extracts. J Braz Chem Soc 23(4):618–627Google Scholar
- 32.Krell, R. (1996). Value added products from beekeeping. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin. No. 124.RomeGoogle Scholar
- 37.Alqarni AS, Owayss AA, Mahmoud AA, Hannan MA (2012) Mineral content and physical properties of local and imported honeys in Saudi Arabia. J of Saudi Chem Soc 5:618–625Google Scholar