Quality of honeys from different botanical origins.

Antioxidant CATA Honey Rheology Sensory analysis

Journal

Journal of food science and technology
ISSN: 0022-1155
Titre abrégé: J Food Sci Technol
Pays: India
ID NLM: 0056471

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Historique:
revised: 23 10 2020
accepted: 28 10 2020
entrez: 20 9 2021
pubmed: 21 9 2021
medline: 21 9 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Botanical origin is one of the principal factors influencing the composition and quality of honey. This study aimed to evaluate different single-flower (assa-peixe, coffee, eucalyptus, laranjeira, and vassourinha), polyfloral (silvestre), extrafloral (sugarcane), and honeydew (bracatinga) honeys with regard to their chemical, physicochemical, and physical properties; rheological behavior; bioactive compounds; and antioxidant activity. In addition, we assessed their sensory characteristics using the acceptance test and the check-all-that-apply test (CATA). All honeys were compliant with current legislation and presented Newtonian behavior. The honeys of assa-peixe, laranjeira, and coffee presented the highest viscosity, sugarcane honey showed the highest antioxidant activity, and the bracatinga honey had the highest phenolic compound content. With respect to sensory characteristics, floral honeys presented higher acceptability than did honeydew and extrafloral honeys, because honey from honeydew was negatively influenced by its bitter, alcoholic, and astringent taste and extrafloral honey by its burnt smell. These findings indicate that the botanical origin directly influences the characteristics of honeys and can be considered a factor for their differentiation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34538901
doi: 10.1007/s13197-020-04884-7
pii: 4884
pmc: PMC8405766
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

4167-4177

Informations de copyright

© Association of Food Scientists & Technologists (India) 2020.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interestThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Références

Food Chem. 2016 Apr 1;196:309-23
pubmed: 26593496
Food Res Int. 2019 Feb;116:745-754
pubmed: 30717004
Chemosphere. 2016 Feb;144:848-54
pubmed: 26421624
Foods. 2019 Mar 20;8(3):
pubmed: 30897757
Food Chem. 2015 Aug 1;180:133-141
pubmed: 25766810
Food Chem Toxicol. 2010 Feb;48(2):544-8
pubmed: 19909782
Food Chem. 2016 Jul 15;203:252-257
pubmed: 26948612
Free Radic Biol Med. 1999 May;26(9-10):1231-7
pubmed: 10381194

Auteurs

Maria Cecília Evangelista Vasconcelos Schiassi (MCEV)

Department of Food Science, Federal University of Lavras, Post Office Box 3037, Lavras, MG 37200-000 Brazil.

Vanessa Rios de Souza (VR)

Department of Food Science, Federal University of Lavras, Post Office Box 3037, Lavras, MG 37200-000 Brazil.

Amanda Maria Teixeira Lago (AMT)

Department of Food Science, Federal University of Lavras, Post Office Box 3037, Lavras, MG 37200-000 Brazil.

Gabriel Ribeiro Carvalho (GR)

Department of Food Science, Federal University of Lavras, Post Office Box 3037, Lavras, MG 37200-000 Brazil.

Paula Nogueira Curi (PN)

Department of Agriculture, Federal University of Lavras, Post Office Box 3037, Lavras, MG 37200-000 Brazil.

Angélica Sousa Guimarães (AS)

Department of Food Science, Federal University of Lavras, Post Office Box 3037, Lavras, MG 37200-000 Brazil.

Fabiana Queiroz (F)

Department of Food Science, Federal University of Lavras, Post Office Box 3037, Lavras, MG 37200-000 Brazil.

Classifications MeSH