Türkiye'nin Farklı Bölgelerinden Multifloral Balların Bazı Fizikokimyasal Özellikleri ve Şeker Bileşimi

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 38 Sayı: 1, 11 - 19, 30.04.2021

Levent Şen , Nurten Türkaslan

https://doi.org/10.13002/jafag4732

Öz

Bu çalışmada farklı Türkiye’nin iki farklı coğrafik bölgesinden elde edilen 14 farklı bal örneğinin fiziko-kimyasal özellikleri ve şeker içerikleri çok değişkenli teknikleri kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Örneklerin pH, asitlik, %nem, toplam suda çözünür kuru madde (brix), diastaz aktivitesi, toplam fenolik içeriği, HMF ve lügol reaksiyon analizleri fiziko-kimyasal paramatreler olarak analiz edilmiştir. Ayrıca örneklerin früktoz, glukoz, sukroz, maltoz, früktoz/glukoz, früktoz+glukoz değerleri HPLC-RI sistemi ile tespit edilmiştir. 14 örneğin 1 adedinin maltoz şurubu ile tağşiş edildiği, 2 adedinin diyastaz aktivitesinin yasalarda belirtilen limitlerden daha düşük, 2 adedinin ise yasalarda belirtilen limitlerden daha yüksek HMF içerdiği belirlenmiştir. Çalışmada, bal örnekleri, temel bileşen analizi ve hiyerarşik küme analizi kullanılarak ilgili fizyokimyasal özelliklerine ve şeker kompozisyonuna göre sınıflandırılmıştır. Ayrıca balın kalitesine etkileyen faktörler belirlenerek, bu faktörlerin arasındaki ilişkiler ortaya konmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bal, hiyerarşik kümeleme analizi, kemometri, tağşiş, temel bileşenler analizi

Some Physicochemical Properties and Sugar Composition of Multifloral Honeys from Different Regions of Turkey

Öz

In the present study, the physicochemical characteristics and sugar compositions of 14 different honey samples obtained from two different regions of Turkey were analyzed by using multivariate analysis methods. pH, acidity, moisture content (%), total soluble solids (Brix), diastase activity, total phenolic content, HMF and Lugol's reaction analyses of the samples were performed using the physicochemical parameters. Moreover, the fructose, glucose, sucrose, maltose, fructose/glucose, and fructose + glucose values of the samples were determined using HPLC-RI system. It was determined that 1 of 14 samples has been adulterated with maltose syrup and 2 of 14 samples have HMF content higher than the limit set by the law. The honey samples were classified based on their physicochemical characteristics and sugar compositions by making use of the principal component analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis. Moreover, the factors affecting the quality of honey were determined and the relationships between these factors were shown.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Adulteration, chemometrics, honey, hierarchical cluster analysis, principle component analysis.

Kaynakça

• Abdulkhaliq A and Swaileh KM (2017). Physico-chemical properties of multi-floral honey from the West Bank, Palestine. International Journal of Food Properties, 20: 447-454.
• Ahmed M, Djebli N, Aissat S and Douichene S (2012). The Relationship betwee n fructose, glucose and maltose content with Diastase number and anti-Pseudomonal activity of natural honey combined with potato starch. Organic Chemistry Current Research, 1:1-5.
• Almeida‐Muradian LB, Stramm KM, Horita A, Barth OM, Silva de Freitas A and Estevinho LM (2013). Comparative study of the physicochemical and palynological characteristics of honey from Melipona subnitida and Apis mellifera. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 48: 1698-1706.
• Anklam E (1998). A review of the analytical methods to determine the geographical and botanical origin of honey. Food chemistry, 63, 549-562.
• Bertoncelj J, Doberšek U, Jamnik M and Golob T (2007). Evaluation of the phenolic content, antioxidant activity and colour of Slovenian honey. Food Chemistry, 105: 822-828.
• Bilandžić N, Đokić M, Sedak M, Kolanović BS, Varenina I, Končurat A and Rudan N (2011). Determination of trace elements in Croatian floral honey originating from different regions. Food chemistry, 128, 1160-1164.
• Bogdanov S, Martin P and Lullmann C (2009). Harmonised methods of the international honey commission. Swiss Bee Research Centre, FAM, Liebefeld.
• Bogdanov S, Ruo K, and Oddo, L (2004). Physico-chemical methods for the characterization of uniflorall honeys: a review, Apidologie, 35: 4-17.
• Buba F, Gidado A and Shugaba A (2013). Analysis of biochemical composition of honey samples from North-East Nigeria. Biochemistry and Analytical Biochemistry, 2: 1-7.
• Can Z, Yildiz O, Sahin H, Turumtay EA, Silici S and Kolayli S (2015). An investigation of Turkish honeys: their physico-chemical properties, antioxidant capacities and phenolic profiles. Food Chemistry, 180: 133-141.
• Çetin K, Alkın E and Uçurum H.Ö. (2011). Determınatıon of qualıty parameters offlower honey sold on the market. Journal of Food and Feed Science - Technology 11: 49-56.
• European Commission (2002). Council Directive 2001/110/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to honey, Off. J. Eur. Commun. L10, 47–52.
• FAO (2017). Livestock primariy statistics for honey production. Available at http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/?#data/QL (accessed Jan 18, 2018).
• Fujita I (2012). Determination of maltose in honey. International Journal of Food Science, Nutrition and Dietetics, 1: 1-2.
• Kıvrak Ş, Kivrak I and Karababa E (2017). Characterization of Turkish honeys regarding of physicochemical properties, and their adulteration analysis. Food Science and Technology (Campinas), 37(1): 80-89.
• Koç Uçak A., Karacaoğlu M and Doğan M (2017). Comparison of Some Quality Criteria of Chaste Tree (Vitex agnus-castus), Pine and Multifloral Honey. Journal Of Adnan Menderes Unıversity Agricultural Faculty, 14: 17-21.
• Krell R (1996). Value-added products from beekeeping (No. 124). Food & Agriculture Org.
• Li S, Shan Y, Zhu X, Zhang X and Ling G. (2012). Detection of honey adulteration by high fructose corn syrup and maltose syrup using Raman spectroscopy. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 28, 69-74.
• Meda A, Lamien CE, Romito M, Millogo J and Nacoulma OG (2005). Determination of the total phenolic, flavonoid and proline contents in Burkina Fasan honey, as well as their radical scavenging activity. Food Chemistry, 91(3), 571-577.
• Mendes E, Proenca EB, Ferreira, IMPLVO, Ferreira, MA (1998). Quality evaluation of Portuguese honey. Carbohydrate Polymers 37: 219-223.
• Preedy VR (Ed.). (2012). Dietary sugars: Chemistry, analysis, function and effects. Royal Society of Chemistry.
• Pyrzynska K and Biesaga M (2009). Analysis of phenolic acids and flavonoids in honey. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 28: 893-902.
• Rybak-Chmielewska H and Szczęsna T. (2003). Determination of saccharides in multifloral honey by means of HPLC. Journal of Apicultural Science 47: 93-101.
• Sanchez V, Baeza R, Ciappini C, Zamora MC and Chirife J (2010). Comparison between Karl Fischer and refractometric method for determination of water content in honey. Food Control, 21: 339-341.
• Turkish Food Codex Honey Directive (2012). 2012/58 Turkish Food Codex Honey Directive.
• USDA (1985). Standards for Honey Grading. United States Department of Agriculture. USDA, Washington DC.
• Yılmaz MT, Tatlisu NB, Toker OS, Karaman S, Dertli E, Sagdic, O and Arici M (2014). Steady, dynamic and creep rheological analysis as a novel approach to detect honey adulteration by fructose and saccharose syrups: Correlations with HPLC-RID results. Food Research International, 64: 634-646.
• Zhelyazkova I and Lazarov S (2017). Comparative study of rapeseed, monofloral types and multifloral honey by some physicochemical parameters. Agricultural Science and Technology, 9: 277-281.