These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Determination of Quality Criteria that Allow Differentiation Between Honey Adulterated with Sugar and Pure Honey.
    Author: Nisbet C, Kazak F, Ardalı Y.
    Journal: Biol Trace Elem Res; 2018 Nov; 186(1):288-293. PubMed ID: 29572598.
    Abstract:
    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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]