Multidisciplinary analysis of Italian Alpine wildflower honey reveals criticalities, diversity and value.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 09 2021
29 09 2021
Historique:
received:
25
05
2021
accepted:
30
08
2021
entrez:
30
9
2021
pubmed:
1
10
2021
medline:
25
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Wildflower honeys produced in mountain grasslands are an expression of the biodiversity of these fragile habitats. Despite its importance, the botanical origin of honey is often defined without performing formal analysis. The aim of the study was to characterize six wildflower mountain honeys produced in the Italian Alps with different analytic techniques (SPME-GC-MS, HPLC-Orbitrap, cicatrizing and antioxidant activity) alongside melissopalynological analysis and botanical definition of the production area. Even though the apiaries were in mountain grasslands rich in Alpine herbaceous species, the honey could be defined as rhododendron/raspberry unifloral or raspberry and rhododendron bifloral while the honey produced at the lowest altitude differed due to the presence of linden, heather and chestnut. The non-compliance of the honey could be due to habitat (meadows and pastures) fragmentation, but also to specific compounds involved in the plant-insect relationship, such as kynurenic acid, present in a high quantity in the sample rich in chestnut pollen. 255 volatile compounds were detected as well as some well-known markers of specific botanic essences, in particular chestnut, linden and heather, also responsible for most of the differences in aroma profiling. A high correlation between nicotinaldehyde content and percentage of raspberry pollen (r = 0.853, p < 0.05) was found. Phenolic acid and hydroxy-fatty acid were predominant in the chestnut pollen dominant honey, which presented the highest antioxidant activity and the lowest cicatrizing activity, while the flavonoid fraction was accentuated in one sample (rhododendron pollen prevalent), that was also the one with the highest effect on wound closure, although all samples had similar cicatrizing effects apart from the chestnut pollen dominant honey (lowest cicatrizing activity). Our study highlighted the difficulty of producing mountain wildflower honey and the importance of a thorough characterization of this product, also to encourage its production and valorisation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34588574
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-98876-y
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-98876-y
pmc: PMC8481395
doi:
Substances chimiques
Volatile Organic Compounds
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
19316Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Molecules. 2020 Mar 18;25(6):
pubmed: 32197420
J Agric Food Chem. 1998 Feb 16;46(2):625-633
pubmed: 10554289
Food Chem. 2021 Jan 1;334:127575
pubmed: 32707361
J Agric Food Chem. 2002 Oct 9;50(21):5870-7
pubmed: 12358452
J Chromatogr A. 2017 May 26;1499:78-89
pubmed: 28390668
Nature. 2002 Oct 31;419(6910):920-2
pubmed: 12410309
Molecules. 2020 Jan 23;25(3):
pubmed: 31979422
Life (Basel). 2020 Oct 27;10(11):
pubmed: 33120979
J Agric Food Chem. 2018 Mar 14;66(10):2432-2442
pubmed: 28166628
Wound Repair Regen. 2015 Mar-Apr;23(2):171-83
pubmed: 25703533
J Anim Ecol. 2019 Feb;88(2):236-246
pubmed: 30289166
J Agric Food Chem. 2012 Dec 19;60(50):12304-11
pubmed: 23176387
J Funct Biomater. 2018 May 08;9(2):
pubmed: 29738478
Sci Rep. 2021 May 6;11(1):9695
pubmed: 33958670
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 01;9(10):e107527
pubmed: 25271418
Arch Dermatol Res. 2013 Sep;305(7):619-27
pubmed: 23812412
Oecologia. 2001 Oct;129(2):271-280
pubmed: 28547606
Int J Mol Sci. 2011;12(12):9514-32
pubmed: 22272147
Planta Med. 2007 Dec;73(15):1592-5
pubmed: 17999354
Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2010 Nov;9(6):620-634
pubmed: 33467823
Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2011 Sep-Oct;33(5):538-47
pubmed: 21763768
Wound Repair Regen. 2012 Sep-Oct;20(5):778-85
pubmed: 22882448
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2010 Feb;22(2):217-25, e68
pubmed: 19735360
Food Chem. 2019 Feb 15;274:629-641
pubmed: 30372988
PLoS One. 2015 Aug 26;10(8):e0134735
pubmed: 26308362
J Agric Food Chem. 2006 Sep 20;54(19):7235-41
pubmed: 16968088
Front Plant Sci. 2019 Oct 15;10:1265
pubmed: 31708938
Insects. 2019 Oct 25;10(11):
pubmed: 31731405
Br J Dermatol. 2008 Sep;159(3):537-45
pubmed: 18616790
Molecules. 2020 Jan 16;25(2):
pubmed: 31963290
J Sep Sci. 2005 Jun;28(9-10):1093-100
pubmed: 16013836
Food Chem. 2015 Feb 15;169:34-40
pubmed: 25236195
Food Chem. 2013 Jun 1;138(2-3):851-6
pubmed: 23411187
J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2007 Jan;114(1):33-41
pubmed: 16932989
Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2012 Apr;66(4):583-592
pubmed: 26213439
Methods Mol Biol. 2020;2109:225-229
pubmed: 31414347
Food Chem. 2013 May 1;138(1):32-40
pubmed: 23265452
J Neurochem. 2011 Sep;118(5):796-805
pubmed: 21711351
Heliyon. 2019 Jun 26;5(6):e01894
pubmed: 31304409
J Antibiot (Tokyo). 2011 Jan;64(1):117-22
pubmed: 21102595
J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2009 Oct 15;50(3):432-9
pubmed: 19560302
Int J Mol Sci. 2019 Feb 11;20(3):
pubmed: 30754672
R Soc Open Sci. 2017 Aug 30;4(8):170344
pubmed: 28878985
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008 Jan;20(1):53-62
pubmed: 17973632
Foods. 2020 Dec 14;9(12):
pubmed: 33327474
Chem Biodivers. 2010 Sep;7(9):2309-25
pubmed: 20860033