1o

, 29 1 2002

: ., .

.
.

.1, .2, .1, .3 ,

.4 , . 1
1
-, , ,
2
,
3
,
4

, , , , ,
30
, , ,
.

,

.

.

.


,
HMF, , , .

.

,

. , ,
, ..

.

1932 (, ,

-1-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, ) (, ,
, ..) 17
. 1962
(, , , )
. 1977 Kapoulas et al.
(1978)
.
1983

.
, (1993), , (1993)
. (1993)
. . (1994)

, , , (2001)
. (2001) .

Thrasivoulou and Manikis
(1995), Drimtjias and Karapournioti (1995), Karapournioti & Drimtjias (1996)
Tsigouri & Pasaloglou, (2001) Manikis & Thrasivoulou (2001).
-
, ,
,

,

.
, , , , ,
, .

.
, , ,
, , , .
,
.

.

.

.

HMF
,

-2-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(.>1,0 mS.cm-1 ),
( , )
.
:
> 20%, >85%, >20%, >10%,
>45%, >10%.
,
.
.
Bogdanov et al (1997)
,
:

Chataway,
.
Schade.
(F)
White. -

Pierce - Rourtallier (1967).


4-5 .
Siegenthaler
Louveax, et al (1978).

.

65%
.
Marchalina hellenica , ,
.
, , , , , , ,
...

, pH
( 1). (>52,9%),
,
>60%
(. 498/1983).
(101/2001 .C)
2003
,

-3-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.
.

.

, , 2-5 .
.
()
(>1.0 mS.cm-1).

.
.
, , , HMF
.

.

.

1. .
/ . .-. .
. .%
% 68 16,7 14,8-18,9 1,06 34,7
% 68 0,6 0,4-0,7 0,03 5
pH 68 4,5 3,8-5,4 0,21 4,6
HMF ppm 70 2,4 0,0-8,9 2,31 96,2
% 60 24,7 22,2-28,5 2,11 8,5
% 60 30,4 26.5-36,7 2,30 7,5
+ 60 55,1 48,7-65,2 4,40 4,1
60 58,8 52,9-67,4 4,99 8,4
% 60 0,9 0,6-1,9 0,2 32,1
. meq/Kg 35 20,7 12,3-29,9 3,30 62,7
. meq/Kg 35 28.9 18,4-37,1 4,5 15,7
560 nm 35 0,6 0,348-0,925 0,2 33,3
mS.cm-1 68 1.23 1,00-1,65 0,12 9,7
DN 48 28,4 15,1-37,2 8,20 28,8
45 25,3 10,3-36,6 4,31 13,6
mg/kg 75 525 312-799 260 49,5
HD.E/P 45 0,28 0,05-0,92 0,23 82,10
mg/Kg 20 3,35 2,40-4,65 0,64 19,1
mg/Kg 20 0,45 0,15-0,75 0,85 188,8
mg/Kg 20 5,3 2,8-11,2 2,0 37,7
mg/Kg 20 3,2 0,8-6,4 1,7 53,2
mg/Kg 20 0,005 0,001-0,012 0,004 80,0
mg/Kg 20 0,007 0,000-0,014 0,004 57,10
mg/Kg 20 0,013 0,000-0,031 0,011 84,61
mg/Kg 20 0,02 0,000-0,041 0,01 50,0

-4-
1o
, 29 1 2002

5-10% .
(Abies cephalonica)
,
, , , , ,
. (Abies alba A. pectinata)

( ).
(Abies hydrida A.
borisii)
.
Santas (1983, 1988) ,
Physokermes hemicryphus Eulecanium sericeum,
Mindarus abierinus, Cinara confinis Cinara pectrinatae,
.
P. hemicryphus
, 30
.

, .
,
.

.
.
,
. -,
( 313049
/ 16.1.94)
(14 15,5%)
(8 18%).
2
, :
(.. 15,2%).
14%,
,
.
pH .
pH
HMF. ,

pH.

-5-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2. .
/ -M. .
. .%
% 80 15,7 13,0-18,5 1,18 7,5
% 80 0,85 0,4-1,2 0,13 15,2
pH 80 4,75 4,0- 5,9 0,26 5,04
HMF mg/Kg 80 3,62 0,6-7,35 2,30 63,5
% 60 24,0 21,1-27,7 1.3 5,4
% 60 32,10 27,4-37,2 2.3 7,1
+ 60 56,1 48,5-64,9 6.7 11,9
44 53,37 41,7 - 66,7 7,13 13,3
% 40 1,2 0,8-1,7 0.04 10
560 nm 80 0,285 0,189-480 0,09 30,16
mS.cm 80 1,34 1,00-1,71 0,59 44,0
DN 80 18,5 10,4-35,6 5,04 27,2
80 26,5 17,2-38,7 8,60 21,6
mg/kg 80 491 290-840 167 34,1
meq/Kg 20 25,70 22,4-29,6 2,30 8,9
meq/Kg 20 5,6 5,11-6,10 0,6 10,7
meq/Kg 20 31,3 28,6-34,1 3,5 11,1
HD.E/P 65 0,72 0,12-1,45 1,21 172
mg/Kg 20 3,93 3,05-4,45 0,45 11,4
mg/Kg 20 0,28 0,15-0,45 0,07 25,0
mg/Kg 20 3,8 2,0-7,2 1,5 39,4
mg/Kg 20 3,9 1,6-6,4 1,5 38,4
mg/Kg 20 0,39 0,004-0,177 0,05 12,8
mg/Kg 20 0,006 0,000-0,008 0,002 33,3
mg/Kg 20 0,032 0,000-0,127 0,045 140,0
mg/Kg 20 0,003 0,000-0,005 0,001 33,3

,
.
(1962),
58,78%. ...
, 83%
60%.
,
16 51,53%
69,89% 58,7.
(.. 2001/110EC)

(>45%).
( 2) .

-6-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(Castanea sativa),
.
.
Myzocallis castanicola

.
(, 1995).
3, , pH,
,
.

(Accorti et al, 1986, Persano, 1995).
pH, ,
.

.
.
, ,
. , ,
.
.
Caillas, (1971)
.
.. ,
( ). ,
,
.

12.000 1.000, .
10% .
.
.
,
.
.

4
498 . 2001/110EC
.

60%.
.

-7-
1o
, 29 1 2002

3.
/ -M. .
.%
% 25 16,4 14,8 - 17,6 0,71 4,3
% 25 0,8 0,6-1,2 0,15 18,7
pH 25 4,9 4,4- 5,4 0,19 3,8
HMF mg/Kg 25 3,50 1,68 - 8,25 1,76 50,2
% 25 29,5 23,5- 33,3 2,3 7,7
% 25 37,6 33,0- 44,8 3,2 8,5
+ 25 67,1 56,5- 78.1 5,8 8,6
25 64,1 57,8-75,6 4,9 7,6
% 25 1,5 1,1-1,9 0,25 50
560 nm 25 0,52 0,31 - 0,68 0,089 17,1
mS.cm 25 1,53 1,11 2,06 0,32 21,1
DN 25 32,5 16,5 - 51,0 8,9 27,3
25 20,4 16,4-34,3 4,0 16,6
mg/kg 25 554 432-734 139 25,0
meq/Kg 25 13,4 9,5-27,5 3,0 22,3
meq/Kg 25 17,3 12,1-21,3 4,0 23,1
% 25 90,4 85,0-95,0 3,3 3,6
mg/Kg 15 3,09 2,0-3,7 0,63 20,5
mg/Kg 15 0,26 0,15-0,35 0,05 19,9
mg/Kg 15 5,3 3,2-7,2 1,3 24,6
mg/Kg 15 4,1 2,4-6,4 1,3 32,9
mg/Kg 15 0,005 0,001-0,010 0,003 67,9
mg/Kg 15 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000
mg/Kg 15 0,010 0,005-0,017 0,004 37,8
mg/Kg 15 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000

, ,
(Kagias
1971). , 6
18 .

.
(Erica verticillata),
(Erica arborea), (Arbutus unedo)
(Rhododendron).
.
().
.

.

-8-
1o
, 29 1 2002

4.
/ . .-. .
. . .%
% 63 16,3 14,7 20,3 0,78 4,7
% 62 0,2 0,1 - 0,6 0,12 60
pH 63 3,5 3,1-4,1 0,14 4,0
HMF mg/Kg 60 5,6 0,2-15,1 2,5 44,6
% 40 26,9 24,4-35,2 5,37 19,9
% 40 37,4 30,2-44,5 1,10 2,9
+ 40 64,3 54,6-79,7 6,37 9,9
50 72,6 65,3 - 80,6 7,9 10,8
% 40 0,5 0,3-1,85 0,05 8,3
mS.cm 69 0,39 0,22 -0,60 0,09 23,3
DN 60 30.2 15,1-48,2 8,6 28,4
25 24,1 16,5-34,4 9,01 25,7
mg/kg 45 790 596-1205 232 29,3
meq/Kg 40 22,5 19,5-42,3 4,5 20
meq/Kg 40 28,5 20,1-42,1 4,2 14,7
% 60 25,6 15,5-85,1 16,8 65,6
mg/Kg 40 1,15 0,7-2,35 0,43 37,7
mg/Kg 40 0,19 0,05-0,85 0,17 88,3
mg/Kg 40 4,8 2,8-7,6 1,3 27,1
mg/Kg 40 1,6 0,4-8,4 1,8 110,4
mg/Kg 40 0,05 0,08-0,081 0,05 58,7
mg/Kg 40 0,007 0,00-0,012 0,003 48,7
mg/Kg 40 0,11 0,00-0,138 0,06 56,7
mg/Kg 40 0,05 0,002-0,123 0,07 138,7

( 5)
,
(20%).
,
.
,
.
,
.
(1-3 )
().


.

,
.
.
, ,
,
.

-9-
1o
, 29 1 2002

5.
/ . .-.
. .%
% 35 18,8 16,0 - 23,0 2,19 11,6
% 35 0,4 0,3-0,6 0,11 27,5
pH 35 4,2 3,30- 4,62 0,27 6,4
HMF mg/Kg 35 4,3 0,0 - 11,9 3,2 7,4
% 35 31,2 29,4-38,8 1,5 4,8
% 35 36,8 34,8-43,4 2,5 6,7
+ 35 68,0 64,2-82,2 4,1 6,0
35 74,3 69,8-81,7 8,3 11,1
% 35 0,25 0,20-0,50 0,04 16
560 nm 35 0,524 0,396-0,644 0,114 26,8
mS.cm 35 0,67 0,56-0,89 0,16 23,8
DN 35 27,6 15,9 - 32,1 5,3 19,20
20 19,6 12,7-39,6 4,7 29,2
mg/kg 35 536 329-931 332 61,2
meq/Kg 20 31,6 31,8-43,6 2,5 7,9
% 35 63,3 45,0-90,0 15,6 24,6
mg/Kg 20 2,38 2,15-2,55 0,13 5,69
mg/Kg 20 0,1 0,1-0,1 0,0 0,0
mg/Kg 20 5,1 4,0-6,0 0,7 13,4
mg/Kg 20 2,8 1,6-5,2 1,3 46,9
mg/Kg 20 0,03 0,00-0,042 0,02 60,7
mg/Kg 20 -. - -
mg/Kg 20 - - -
mg/Kg 20- - - -

.
.
.
.
.

. 400 .
, .
,
, .
.

, (Olszowy,
1977). ,
,
(Olszowy, 1977, Krochmal, 1994).

.
2,4 15 40 .

-10-
1o
, 29 1 2002

( 6) ,
,


.

.
.

6. .
/ . .-. .
. .%
% 40 17,9 15,5-20,6 0,84 4,6
% 40 0,2 0,1-0,4 0,10 50,0
pH 40 3,6 2,9-4,0 0,12 3,3
HMF mg/Kg 40 4,7 1,0-8,2 1,78 37,8
% 40 35,4 30,4-39.8 6,26 17,6
% 40 39,7 34,5-46,8 2,74 7,2
+ 40 75,1 64,9-86,6 8,3 11,01
% 40 0,5 0,3-0,9 - -
mS.cm 40 0,42 0,26-0,57 0,22 52,3
DN 40 20,4 12,3-44,2 9,17 44,9
U/Kg 40 27,3 22,5-31,3 4,6 16,8
mg/kg 40 665 298-1199 352 52,9
meq/Kg 40 21,4 10,3-35,4 6,7 31,3
meq/Kg 40 25,4 15,4-36,2 5,4 21,2
% 20 40,5 21,1-81,1 17,7 43,7
mg/Kg 20 0,88 0,65-1,10 0,2 22,9
mg/Kg 20 0,05 0,05-0,05 0 0
mg/Kg 20 4,7 3,2-5,6 1,0 20,3
mg/Kg 20 4,3 1,2-9,6 2,5 58,6
mg/Kg 20 0,006 0,001-0,013 0,004 72,1
mg/Kg 20 -. - -
mg/Kg 20 0,022 0,005-0,046 0,013 57,7
mg/Kg 20 0,013 0,005-0,026 0,007 48,6

.

,
.
,

(, , ).

.

-11-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
,
.

2-7%.
.
,
.
.
, ,
.
.
( 7)

,
, , ...
.

7.
/ .-M. .
.%
% 40 17,9 16,8-19,8 0,93 5,1
% 40 0,2 0,1-0,5 0,05 25,0
pH 40 3,9 3,7-4,3 0,16 4,10
HMF mg/Kg 40 5,8 2,4-9,2 1,67 28,7
% 40 33,4 30,5-38,9 3,81 11,4
% 40 34,7 32,6-41,8 4,59 13,2
+ 40 68,1 63,1-80,7 8,4 12,3
% 40 0,43 0,2-1,64 0,08 18,6
mS.cm 40 0,60 0,45-0,76 0,98 66,6
DN 40 17,6 10,2-27,0 4,18 23,7
40 22,1 12,8-29,2 - -
mg/kg 40 432 305-650 103 238,4
40 13,3 10,2-20,3 4,5 33,8
mg/Kg 20 3,37 2,9-3,8 0,3 9,17
mg/Kg 20 0,15 0,05-0,20 0,04 32,0
mg/Kg 20 5,08 2,4-7,2 1,5 29,7
mg/Kg 20 6,5 0,8-11,6 4,7 72,7
mg/Kg 20 0,002 0,001-0,005 0,54 55,3
mg/Kg 20 -. - - -
mg/Kg 20 0,002 0,00-0,005 0,12 -
mg/Kg 20 0,06 0,055-0,071 0,51 -

.

.

-12-
1o
, 29 1 2002

3 DN
, HMF 15 mg/kg. 15 mg/kg
HMF, ,
, HMF

.
8
.
60% 101/2001 C.

8.
/ .-M. .
.%
% 35 16,9 16,0-18,5 0,66 3,9
% 35 0,1 0,1-0,2 0,05 50
pH 35 3,4 3,3-3,6 0,05 1,4
HMF mg/Kg 35 5,6 2,5-10,7 2,53 45,1
% 35 31,2 24,8-35,7 2,5 8,0
% 35 39,2 32,3-41,2 2,5 6,3
+ 35 70,4 57,1-76,9 5,1 7,2
% 35 0,43 0,2-1,2 0,02 4,6
mS.cm 35 0,19 0,15-0,31 0,08 42,1
DN 35 11,7 8,6-22,5 3,78 32,3
20 13,2 8,7-33,1 8,82 38,0
mg/kg 35 526 264-734 134 25,4
meq/Kg 35 19,5 14,4-25,2 3,2 16,4
meq/Kg 35 22,3 12,1-34,5 6,1 27,3
% 35 9,6 7,6-14,1 1,8 18,7
mg/Kg 20 0,52 0,32-0,75 0,1 18,5
mg/Kg 20 0,06 0,05-0,10 0,03 51,2
mg/Kg 20 4,0 2,0-7,2 1,5 36,5
mg/Kg 20 1,9 0,4-3,6 0,9 45,0
mg/Kg 20 0,0016 0,001-0,010 0,032 20,5
mg/Kg 20 0,021 0,0-0,014 0,021 102,9
mg/Kg 20 0,004 0,001-0,015 0,004 109,1
mg/Kg 20 0,012 0,00-0,041 0,014 122,9

) .

, ,
.
9
(Thrasyvoulou & Manikis, 1995).
10 24
. (>45%)
, , .
/
(HDE/P) (>3)

-13-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(Louveaux et al 1978).

(Sawyer 1988).

10 24. (>20)
, (15-20) ,
(10-15) ,
.

Varis et al (1982), Seijo et al (1992),
Serra Bonvehi and Mundo Elias(1998) Jato et al (1991).
.
:

.

.

.

.

1 45%.
(. 2)

2.
.

-14-
1o
, 29 1 2002

: , Brassicaceae, Labiatae
Pyrus/Prunus 3 15%
(1-3%).
:
.

90% (Louveaux et al 1978). O
90.4 4.5%, 95%
85% (.3).

3.

:

.

. Persano et al.,
(1995)
15% Thrasivoulou & Manikis (1995) 25%.


. 4
.

7,8 85,1%.

4
35%..

-15-
1o
, 29 1 2002

9.
.
E .
=14 =16 =13 =20 =21 =20 =20 =17
Acer spp (2) M(1 ) - - M(1 ) - - M(1)
Aesculus (3) - - - - - M(1) -
Asteraceae (4) M(5 ) M(6) IM(2) M(9) P(12)S(9) M(3 ) IM(4)M(5) -
Berberis - - - M(1 ) - - - M(1)
Brassicaceae (9) M(3), M(3) IM(11),S(3) IM(7) M(1) - IM(5),
IM (6) S(5)
Castanea S(7), - P(13) IM(3 ),S(7) S(2),IM(9) - IM(3), M(1)
IM(6) S(10)
M(1)
Chamaenerion - M(2 ) - - - - M(1) -
Cistus M(5) - - IM(8 ), S(5) - IM(6) - -
Circum type M(7) M(2) - M(3 ) - M(2) - -
Citrus - - - M(1 ), S(1), - - - IM(17)
IM(6)
Echium M(2) M(3 ) M(2) M(2), IM(2) - - - -
Erica spp S(2), M(9) M(6),S(1) M(2), S(2), IM(6) M(1) P(20 ) IM(2),
IM (2) IM(3) S(8)
M(10)
Eucalyptus - - - M(2 ), IM(1) - S(4),M(6 - S(4)
)
Gossypium M(7) M(3) - - M(4) M(1) M(4 ) -
Heracleum M(2) - - M(3 ) - S(20) - -
Labiatae type M(4) M(4), M(3) P(14), S(6) IM(6) S(1) - - IM(4)
IM(3)
Ligustrum M(4) M(4) M(6 ) - - IM(1) M(1) -
Liliaceae M(3) M(3) M(4 ) - - - M(1) -
Malvaceae M(1) - M(1) - - - M(1) -
Olea M(5) M(2 ) M(5) M(3 ) - - M(3) -
Onobrychis - M(1 ) M(3 ) M(1) - - - -
Phlomis - M(1) M(2 ) - - - - -
Polygonum - - - - IM(2) - M(5) -
Pyrus/Prunus M(3) M(5), M(2 ) M(8 ), IM(2) - - - IM(4)
IM(2)
Robinia M(4) M(2) - M(10),IM(1) IM(2 ), - - -
M(3)
Rosaceae - - - - IM(7) - - -
Sinapis - - - IM(2), S(1) M(2) - - -
Spirae M(3) M(4 ) - - M(8 ) - - -
Syringa M(1) M(1 ) - M(3 ) - - - -
Taraxacum M(7) M(6 ) M(4) M(10 ) IM(5) - M(2 ) -
Tilia M(1) - - M(1) - IM(1) - -
Trifolium spp M(6) - - IM(6 ), S(5) IM(2) - - IM(8)
Veronica - - - - - - M(1) -
Viburnum - - - - - - M(1) -
Vicia form M(3) M(3 ) - M(8 IM(2) - M(1) IM(4
).IM(1) M(4) )
: P=>45%, S=16-45%, IM=3-15%, M=1-3%.
.
<1% .

-16-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Castanea,
Cistus, Citrus, Compositae, Brasicaceae, Erica spp, Prunus/Pyrus, Robinia,
Taraxacum, Trifolium Vicia .

4. , .
:
80% 90%.
,
(.5).
.

5.

-17-
1o
, 29 1 2002

:
21,1% 81,7%.

(Sawyer, 1988)

6.

6
.

:
(Talpay, 1985).

3% 45% (. 7).
.

7.

:
(. 8).

-18-
1o
, 29 1 2002

7,3% 14.1%.
Brassicaceae, Erica spp
Trifolium spp

8.

) .
, ,
, , ,


.
.
.

.
. ,
, , ,
.
.
(C, 1986).

,
.


, , ,

(, 1995).

.
.

, , ,

. ,

-19-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, ,
.

,
, .
Bonrehi Gomez (1988), 10,
, ,
, .


.

10. Bonrehi Gomez (1988)

6
3

7
15

1 3 3.
3

(, , , ),
( )
. 3 ,
. ,

.

:

, , .

.
,

.
, .
.

-20-
1o
, 29 1 2002

11.
.
n - - -
-

160 73,0 75,8 70,4 79,3 69,2 51,8 62,6 51,2
90 72,7 68,3 71,9 76,4 69,6 48,2 67,5 45,7
98 67,6 61,4 73,1 71,1 64,7 56,5 62,8 42,5
120 76,6 81,1 80,3 76,0 61,1 54,8 56,1 56,9
. 16 75,4 80,2 74,1 77,2 65,3 69,4 56,6 54,7
/
. 18 75,3 76,9 72,3 76,3 69,8 56,8 56,6 50,7

. 21 74,0 72,1 70,0 71,1 61,5 67,6 64,5 49,8

. 32 69,5 70,5 69,8 75,9 62,3 47,3 59,8 48,7

. 25 78,5 77,4 70,1 69,8 66,1 59,6 56,2 51,2

. 23 71,6 72,3 67,3 68,0 55,0 45,5 48,0 55,0

/
. 15 67,7 73,4 70,1 68,6 59,6 69,4 50,8 58,9

732 73,5 74,1 72,3 72,2 63,5 55,1 53,9 52,6

=

Bonrehi Gomez (1988)

(1993)
.
, ,
( 11). ,
.

1221/97,
50% 50%

-21-
1o
, 29 1 2002

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF GREEK UNIFLORAL HONEYS

Thrasyvoulou A. 1, Tananaki Ch. 1, Manikis I. 2, Karampournioti S. 3,

Tsellios D. 4
1
Lab. of Apiculture-Sericulture, Aristotle Univ. of Thessalonica, 2 Union of
Beekeeping Associations of Greece, 3 Beekeeping Company Attiki, 4 Hellenic
Institute of apiculture (N.AG.RE.F.)
thrasia@agro.auth.gr

Greek honeys from pine and fir honeydew, thyme, chestnut and cotton, heather,
orange and sunflower were studied. In total 30 different physicochemical
characteristics were examined, including sugars, minerals and enzymes, proline
and all the constituents mentioned in the EEC honey directive. The following
factors were found to be important in identifying the floral origin of the honey: the
electrical conductivity, the total mineral content, the amount of glucose and
fructose, the reduced sugars, the maltose and arabinoze and the microscopic
characteristics.

Accorti M., Persano Oddo, M.G.Piazza & A.G. Sabatini (1986) Schede di
caratterizzione delle principali qualita di miele italiano. Apicoltura- Revista
Scientifica di Apidologia (2):1-35
Bogdanov S., Martin P., Lullmann C. (1997 a). Introduction and General
Comment on the Methods. Apidologie. Extra Issue 1 - 10.
Bonvehi J Serra and A Gomer Pajuello (1988) Evaluation of honey quality by
organoleptical analysis. Apiacta XXIII:103-108
Caillas Alin (1971) Gagnez 20 ans de vie grace aux abeilles, Editions de ls Pensee
Moderne 48, rue Mousieur-Prince , 48 PARIS.pp234
Crane Eva, Penelope Walker and Rosemary Day (1984). Directory of Important
World Honey Sources. International Bee Research Association. Pp384
Drimjias N & Karabournioti (1995) Characteristics of Greek thymus honey.
Apiacta XXX 33-39
Louveaux J, Maurizio A, Vorwohl G (1978) Methods of melissopalynology.
BeeWorld 59, 139-157
Kapoulas VM, SK Mastronicolis, DS Galanos (1977) Identification of the lipid
components of honey. Z.Lebensum. Unters.-Forsch. 163, 96-99
Karabournioti S and N Drimjias (1996) Physicochemical characteristics of
Greek monoflora honey. Apiacta
Krochmal Connie (1994) The healing powers of honey. Am. Bee J. 134(7):470-
Manikis I & Thrasivoulou A.(2001) The relation of physicochemical
characteristics of honey and the crystallization sensitive parameters. Apiacta
XXXVI (3):106-112

-22-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Maurizio Anna (1979) How bees make honey 77-105. In The Honey A
Comprehensive Survey. Heinemann: London pp 608
Olszowy D (1977) Of bees, rhododendrons and honey. Am. Bee J. 117(8):498-500
Persano O., Piazza M.G., Sabatini AG., Accorti M. (1995). Characterization of
unifloral honeys. Apidologie 26: 453 - 465.
Pierce-Pourtallier J. (1967). Determination quantitative des sucres des miel par
chromatographie en phase gazeuse. Bull Apic. 10 : 209-212.
Santas L (1983) Insects producing honeydew exploited by bees in Greece.
Apidologie 14(2):93-103
Santas L.(1988) Physokermes hemicryphus (Dalman) a fir scale insect useful to
apiculture in Greece. Entom. Hellenica 6:11-22
Serra-Bonvehi J, Mundo Elias P (1988) A study of the pollen spectra in lin
heather, Calluna vulgaris (Hul), honeys produced in Spain. J. Apic Res 169-174
Seijo M, Aira M, Igesias I, Jato M (1992) Palynological characterization of
honey from Coruna province (NW Spain). J. Apic. Res 31: 149-155
Thrasyvoulou A., and Manikis J. (1995 ). Some physicochemical and
microscopic characteristics of Greek unifloral honeys. Apidologie 26: 441 -
452.
Varis Al, Helenius J, Koivulehto K (1982) Pollen spectrum of Finnish honey. J
Sci Agric Soc Finland 54, 403-420
White JW (1979) Composition of honey 157-194 In The Honey A Comprehensive
Survey (Ed. Eva Crane) Heinemann: London, pp 609.
Persano Oddo, MG Piazza AG Sabatini M Accorti (1995) Characterization of
unifloral honeys Apidologie 26 453-465
General Secretariat of the Council (2000)Proposal for a Council Directive
relating to honey.10/4/2000, SN2296/00
Tsigouri A. & M. Pasaloglou (2000) scientific note on the characteristics of
thyme honey from the Greek island of Kithira. Apidologie 31(3):457-458.
., ., . (1994).
. 351 (2):67-73
. (1993) .
.
. 133-137.
(1932). .
. 285-348.
, . . (1983). "
". " " 2, 7 - 10.
. & . (1993) .
:
. , 2 , 1992.
. 121-132.
(1962) . .
. . .88
, . (1987)
. . . 1(4):105-107.

-23-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.., .., .. (1978)

. . .
. . , 7(1):33-38
, . , . . (1993)
.
.
. 139-164.
(1992) .
1(5):16-20
(2001)
.
52(4):317-324
., ., ., ., .,
. (2001).
. 24(2):73-80

-24-
1o
, 29 1 2002

OY

., .
M (....)
&
.. 85, 731 00 ,

,
.

.


.


,

.

- : , , , , ,
, .

/


.
( 2001/110),
,

,
, , , .
,

(Thrasyvoulou & Manikis,
1995; Persano-Oddo et al., 1995; Drimjias & Karabournioti, 1995; Perez-Arquilleu
et al., 1995; Karabournioti & Drimjias, 1997; Mateo & Bosch-Reig, 1997; Conte et
al., 1998; Mateo & Bosch-Reig, 1998; Tsigouri & Passaloglou, 2000),
, ,
, , (F),

.

-25-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
(Low et al., 1989;
Vorwohl, 1990) ,

,
, (- -), ,
, , ,
, .. (Anklam, 1998).

,

.

, , ,
. , ,
. 170 ,
.
139 , 76%
, 15%
9%
. 70 , 54%
, 29%
17% . , 32 , 50%
, 12% 38% .
(-18C) .

Louveaux et al., 1970.
Leica DM LB
.
(Herbarium) .

(HPLC) (Refractive Index)
(Bogdanov et al., 1997).


.

.
./100..
,
,
:

-26-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, ,
( Static headspace) ,

( Headspace Solid Phase Microextraction SPME).



:
,
,
,
(screening) (Steffen & Pawliszyn, 1996; Perez
et al., 2002; Zhou et al., 2002).
,
,
SPME ( 1) .

DVB/Carboxen/PDMS Stableflex (Supelco). ,

(HP-GC 5890 II) (MS VG TRIO 2000).
DB5, 30., 0.25m,
0.25m. splitless 5min.
injector 230oC. : 60oC
3oC/min 230oC, 20min).
1ml/min. 70eV,
1scan/sec 35 320m/z.

Adams (1995) Wiley (1989).
. .
g/100..

1.
(Solid Phase Microextraction SPME)
(direct
sampling)
(headspace sampling) (Scheppers
Wercinski & Pawliszyn, 1999).

,

(HPLC) UV-Vis (Ferreres et al.,
1994; Martos et al., 2000; omas-Barberan et al., 2001).
,

-27-
1o
, 29 1 2002

: , , ,
, , , , . ,
UV-Vis
(
).
g/100..

,
1- .

SPSS. (One way ANOVA) (=0,05)
Principal Component
Analysis ( Bartlett) Stepwise Canonical Discriminant
Analysis ( Wilks lambda). ,
( )
(components, factors functions),
( 2-3 ),

. ,
(
) (loading)
. , (
) (scores)
- -
2-3
, ,
.

( 2001/110) : 1)
, 2) 15%
, 3) , 4)

, 5)


.

15% (16-45% >45%,
Louveaux .1970)


. Louveaux et.al.1970,
,

-28-
1o
, 29 1 2002

45%,
.
15% (Perez-Arquilleu et al., 1995;
Persano Oddo et al., 1995),
16% (Drimjias & Karabournioti, 1995), 18% (Tsigouri & Passaloglou,
2000) 35% (Thrasyvoulou & Manikis, 1995). ,
,
, ,
,

.
,
, , ,
(, , , , , ..)
(, , , , , ..)

( )
.
2,
, ,

.
,

( ) (
),
. , ,
,
,
, ,
.
,
(- -), ,
,
, , 3
( Principal
Component Analysis), x,
y,

.

-29-



















, 29 1 2002

" " -

+ -



-

2. (


-

./100.)
50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10
0

50

40

30

20

10
0

50

40

30

20

10

0
0








1o

+ - .





.16-45% - .
- .

- .

50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10
50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10
0

0
0

+ -

.16-45% -

.>45% -
-

-30-
50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10

50

40

30

20

10
0

0

 1o
, 29 1 2002

&
4
1 1
3 1
1 1
" "
1
2
1 1
1 11 11
1
1 11 1
1
1 11 1 1 11
1 111 11 1 1 1 11 1
111111
1 111
1111111 1111 11 1
111111 1 1 1
1 1 1111 11
0 1 1111 1 1 22 +
111122 111 2
BART factor score 2

1 1111 112 11
11 1 11111 2 2 1 2
1 2
+
-1 1 2
1 1 1
2
1 1
1
-2
1 .>45%
1
-3 1 16- 45%

-4
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

BART factor score 1

3.

(Principal Component Analysis). (1-
, 2- ).

,

.

,
( -
& - 20%)
(43-45%),
2001/110 .
,
: 13
,
,
( 0.8 mS/cm) -
( 60%),
0.8 mS/cm
- ( 60-62%),
.
,
150 .

.
4,
20

-31-
 1o
, 29 1 2002

.
x (
) ,
1-, - -, .
y,
2.

1
" "

BART factor score 2

0
+

-1

16- 45%

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2 3

BART factor score 1

4.
,
(Principal Component
Analysis) 20 .

,
16-45% (
),
,
( 1000g/100.)
( 2000g/100.),

, ( 5).
- ,
.

(=0,05)
15% ( )
1-
,
, :
(
113g/100.), (46g/100.),
(10g/100.) (16g/100.),

-32-
 1o
, 29 1 2002

10000

8000 3

2
6000
" "
1

(g/100.)

4000 3
+
3
3 1
3 +
3
2
2000 1
333
3 3 1 1 1
13 1 1 16- 45%
21 2
1 1
0
-1000 0 1000 2000 3000

(g/100.)

5.
( g/100.), (1-
, 2-., 3-)

(30g/100.) (89g/100.)
(10g/100) 1 (35g/100)
. 6
(Principal Component
Analysis)
:

.

, (
): 7

, ,
1
. 8,
16-45%:
,
,

,

. 9,
,
: ,
.

, 1
, 10.

-33-
 1o
, 29 1 2002

80g/100. 7
12 >15%, ,

20g/100. >45%
- .
,
>45%
.

1
2 1 1 1
8 1
7
2
1 5
8
1 95 6
92 856 5
1
9811 18 1
6 11 515
8 1
5
6 11 72 1
0 1
1 1
4 2 11
BART factor score 2

1 11
1 6 2 1
1
-1 3
2
3
3 2
3 2 2
3

-2 2

.
3

-3
-2 0 2 4 6 8

BART factor score 1

6.

( 1: , 2:
16-45%, 3:
>45%, 4: , 5: -, 6:
-, 7: , 8: , 9:
)

,



. ,

(0,68mg/100.) Cistus (omas-
Lorente et al., 1992; Serra Bonvehi et al., 2001),

-34-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
.

0







-1




.

-2
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10

Discriminant Scores from Function 1

7.
(Canonical Discriminant
Analysis) .

T,


,
(Tomas-Barberan et al.,
1993; Tomas-Barberan et al., 2001).


-
>45% ( 11).

50-
97g/100. (Ferreres et al., 1993; omas-Barberan et al., 2001),
(7-18g/100)
(4g/100.) (Martos et al., 1997).

-35-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1



0

-1

-2

-3

-4
-10 0 10 20

Canonical Discriminant Function 1

8. 16-
45%
(Canonical Discriminant Analysis)
.

Canonical Discriminant Functions

3

Function 2

-1

-2
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Function 1

9.
(Canonical Discriminant
Analysis) .
.

-36-
1o
, 29 1 2002

140

120

100 A

" "
80


60
+



N
40
+





N N

N
20





A














.> 45%


0 16-45%
1

-20
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10. 1 (
g/100.)
.

120 1
1

100 1
1
1
1

80
1
3 " "
1
60
1
1 1
1
40 1
1
1
1 +
1
2
1
1
1 1
20 1
3 +
1
3
1
3 2
2
1
3 11 1
2
3
1 2 112 1
2
1
3
2 .> 45%
1
3
2
0
16-45%
1

-20
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

11. 1 (
g/100.)
(1-, 2-., 3-).

16-
53g/100.

-37-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.

. ,
:

-
.

, , :

,
,

, .
,
,
,
.

45%
.



(..)

.

. ,
, ,

, .
.

(.) (.
. & , ) ..1221/97.

-38-
1o
, 29 1 2002

CONTRIBUTION TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF GREEK HONEY

Gotsiou P., Kefalas P.

Mediterranean Agronomic Institute of Chania, Crete, yiota@maich.gr

Samples of Greek honey have been analysed for their sugar, phenolic and
volatile profiles, moisture and electrical conductivity. The possibility of a
correlation of these characteristics with the botanical and/or geographical origin is
being investigated. The samples originate from various areas of Greece, mostly
from the island of Crete. Some samples originate from honeys sold in the Greek
market.
Qualitative and quantitative differences in the concentration of oligosaccharides
and volatile components have been observed between honey samples of different
botanical origin, whereas the variation that has been observed in the concentration
of flavonoids was found to be correlated to both the botanical and the geographic
origin of honey.

Adams, R.P. 1995. Identification of essential oil components by Gas

Chromatography- Mass Spectroscopy. Allured Publ.Co., Illinois, USA.
Anklam E. 1998. A review of the analytical methods to determine the
geographical and botanical origins of honey. Food Chemistry. 63(4): 549-552.
Bogdanov S., Martin P. and Lllmann C. 1997. Harmonised methods of the
European honey commission. Apidologie (extra issue) 1-59 (1997).
Conte, L.S., Miorini, M., Giomo, A., Bertacco, G. and Zironi, R. 1998.
Evaluation of some fixed components for unifloral honey characterization.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 46(5): 1844-1849.
Drimjias, N. and Karabournioti, S. (1995) Characteristics of Greek Thymus
honey. Apiacta. 1995, 30: 2, 33-39
Ferreres, F., Tomas-Barberan, F.A., Soler, C., Garcia-Viguera, C., Ortiz, A. &
Tomas-Lorente, F. 1994. A simple extractive technique for honey flavonoid
HPLC analysis. Apidologie 25: 21-30.
Ferreres, F; Garcia-Viguera, C; Tomas-Lorente, F., Tomas-Barberan, FA.
1993. Hesperetin: A marker of the floral origin of citrus honey. Journal of the
Science of Food and Agriculture. 1993, 61: 1, 121-123.
Karabournioti, S. and Drimjias, N. 1997. Some physicochemical characteristics
of Greek monofloral honeys. Apiacta 32: 2, 44-50.
Louveaux, J., Maurizio, A. and Vorwohl, G. 1970. Methods of melisso-
palinology. Bee World 51(3): 125-138.
Low, N.H., Schweger, C. and Sporns, P. 1989. Precautions in the use of
melissopalynology. Journal of Apicultural Research. 28(1): 50-54
Martos, I., Cossentini, M., Ferreres, F. and Tomas-Barberan, FA. 1997.
Flavonoid composition of Tunisian honeys and propolis. Journal of
Agricultural and Food Chemistry 45(8): 2824-2829.

-39-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Martos I., Federico Ferreres, and Francisco A. Toms-Barbern. 2000.

Identification of Flavonoid Markers for the Botanical Origin of Eucalyptus
Honey. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 48(5): 1498-1502.
Mateo, R. & Bosch-Reig, F. 1997. Sugar profiles of Spanish unifloral honeys.
Food Chem.60: 33-41
Mateo, R. & Bosch-Reig, F. 1998. Classification of Spanish Unifloral Honeys by
Discriminant Analysis of Electrical Conductivity, Color, Water Content,
Sugars, and pH, Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 46(2); 393-400.
Perez-Arquilleu, C., Conchello, P., Arino, A., Juan, T. and Herrera, A. 1995.
Physicochemical attributes and pollen spectrum of some unifloral Spanish
honeys. Food Chemistry. 1995, 54: 2, 167-172
Perez RA, Sanchez-Brunete C, Calvo RM. and Tadeo JL. 2002. Analysis of
volatiles from spanish honeys by solid-phase microextraction and gas
chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Agric Food Chem.50(9):2633-7.
Persano Oddo, L., Piazza, M. G., Sabatini, A. G. and Accorti, M. 1995.
Characterization of unifloral honeys. Apidologie 26: 453-465
Scheppers Wercinski, S.A. & Pawliszyn, J. 1999. Solid Phase Microextraction
theory. In Solid phase Microextraction. A practical guide (ed.Wercinski S.
S.A.). Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, pp.1-26.
Serra Bonvehi, J., Torrento, M.S. & Lorente, C.E. 2001. Evaluation of
polyphenolic and flavonoid compounds in honeybee-collected pollen produced
in Spain. J.Agric.Food Chem., 49(4): 1848-1853.
Steffen, A. & Pawliszyn, J. 1996. Analysis of flavor volatiles using headspace
solid-phase microextraction. J.Agric.Food Chem.44: 2187-2193
Thrasivoulou, A. & Manikis, J. 1995. Some physicochemical and microscopic
characteristics of Greek unifloral honeys. Apidologie, 26: 441-452
Tomas-Barberan, FA, Ferreres, F., Garcia-Viguera, C. & Tomas-Lorente, F.
1993. Flavonoids in honey of different geographical origin. Zeitschrift-fur-
Lebensmittel-Untersuchung-und -Forschung 196: 38-44
Tomas-Barberan, FA, Martos, I, Ferreres, F, Radovic, BS & Anklam, E. 2001.
HPLC flavonoid profiles as markers for the botanical origin of European
unifloral honeys. Jurnal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 81(5): 485-
496.
Tomas-Lorente, F., Garcia Grau, M., Nieto, JL & Tomas Barberan, F.A. 1992.
Flavonoids from Cistus ladanifer bee pollen. Phytochemistry 31(6): 2027-
2029.
Tsigouri, A Passaloglou-Katrali, M. 2000. A scientific note on the characteristics
of thyme honey from the Greek island of Kithira. Apidologie 31(3): 457-458
Vorwohl, G. 1990. Fortschritte, Probleme und zukunftige Aufgaben der
Melissopalynologie [Progress, problems and future tasks of
melissopalynology] Apidologie 21(5): 383-389.
Wiley Library 1989. John Wiley and sons.
Zhou Q, Wintersteen CL, Cadwallader KR. 2002. Identification and
Quantification of Aroma-Active Components that Contribute to the Distinct
Malty Flavor of Buckwheat Honey. J Agric Food Chem. 50(7):2016-21.

-40-
1o
, 29 1 2002

. .1, .2
1
, ,
- , /
, 157 71, , chinou@pharm.uoa.gr
2
A . , 18,
.

, ,

,
.

, .
15.000 ,
70% , 20% 10%
.
130.000 ,
31.000 , 31.000 , 15.000
, 11.000 , 140.000
.. .
1.6 kg/
, , 1.1 kg/
,
0.3 kg/ .
,
,
, ,
49 (- ) 30
.T 10 , Thymus
( 1): M A (41.28%),Ko B (55%), K1 C (58.57%),
K2 D (46.12%), K E (67.74%), () F (72.29%),
() G (24.25%), H (83.79%), I (55.58%), K () J
(49.15). (A-J)
(n-pentane, CH2Cl2, EtOAc,
BuOH),
B, C, E, F, H, I (55%, 58.57%, 67.74%,
72.29%, 83.79% 55.58 Thymus sp.) . T

(1D, 2D NMR) E-4-(1,2,4-Trihydroxy-2,6,6-
trimethylcyclohexyl)-but-3-en-2-one.
% Thymus sp.

-41-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,

, .
49
.

, methyl anthranilate
.
, n-alkanes
3-aminoacetophenone,
.
: (HMF)
hydroxymethyl furfural, ,,
3,4,5 trimethoxybenzoate,
(Leptospermum
scoparium), -
3-hydroxy-4-phenyl-2-butanone
, 5, 49
. ,
,

. ,
,
(disc diffusion hole-plate ),
MIC.
6 Gram (+)
(S. aureus (ATCC 25923), S. epidermidis (ATCC 12228),
E. coli (ATCC 25922), P. aeruginosa (ATCC 27853), K. pneumoniae (ATCC
13883), E. cloaceae (ATCC 13047), 17
, C.
Albicans (ATCC10231), C. Tropicals (ATCC 13801), C. Glabrata (ATCC
28838).
.
, (
) C 0.15-3.2mg/mL and 0.04-
2.1mg/mL .
,
(, ,
(, , )
, ,

- ,
/ , .

-42-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1: 10 ,
Thymus sp.,

T 10 ,
Thymus
:
M A (41.28%)
Ko B (55%)K1
C (58.57%)K2 D
(46.12%)K E
(67.74%)()F
(72.29%)()G
(24.25%) H (83.79%)
I (55.58%)
K () J (49.15

/ , ....(1997-98),
(1999-2000)
(),
(2001-2003) .
, (2002-
2005) .

-43-
1o
, 29 1 2002

CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GREEK BEE-HONEYS BIOLOGICAL

ACTIVITIES
Chinou I.B. 1, Karabournioti S. 2
1
Univ. of Athens, School of Pharmacy, Division of Pharmacognosy,
chinou@pharm.uoa.gr
2
Attiki Beekeeping Company

Greek honey has been famous since ancient times, and now there is a renewed
and increasing interest in using it as part of the traditional Mediterranean diet. This
report is one part of the systematic research into the chemical composition and
biological properties of this celebrated natural product. In this study we report the
detection and isolation of 3-hydroxy-4-phenyl-2-butanone in five out of forty Greek
honeys. This hydroxyketone has never been detected in any kind of bee-honeys before
- it has been found naturally only in wine and among the flower volatiles of Wisteria
floribunda (Fuji) from Japan, and Mimusops elengi found in Malaysia. Forty Greek
mono- and unifloral bee-honeys samples produced in thirty different regions of
Greece, were studied for their volatile secondary metabolites. In five, out of the six
Thymus bee-honeys examined samples, (67.74 and 72.29% in Thymus) , a trihydroxy
ketone was detected, ranges from from 12.98-68.29%. The compound has been
isolated and identified by modern spectral means (1D, 2D NMR). This triol has
been shown to be unique to samples with the higher percentages of Thymus sp. and
thus may serve as proof of the floral source of these honeys.
The antimicrobial activities of samples as well as the pure isolated compound were
determined, using the dilution technique, by measuring their MIC, against two Gram-
positive bacteria: S. aureus and S. epidermidis, four Gram-negative bacteria: E. coli,
E. cloacae, K. pneumoniae and P.aeruginosa and three pathogenic fungi Candida
albicans, Candida tropicalis and Candida glabrata all of them strains of ATCC.
Through the antimicrobial screening, the bee-honeys as well the characteristic
hydroxyketone, proved to be significantly active against all nine tested
microorganisms (MIC values 0.04-3.2mg/mL). The results of our studies suggest that
the activity of the studied bee-honeys can be attributed to the existence of the isolated
hydroxyketone, as well as to the triol, which appeared to possess strong activities
against all tested microbia. Since this compound appears to occur only in thyme
honeys, it can be used to prove the floral source of these honeys, which command top
prices in the Greek honey market.

-44-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(IRMS)

. & .
, ,
gxk-dxy@ath.forthnet.gr

.

.
,
,
, .

.

. : 18/16,
13C/12C, 15N/14N 2/1.

.


(IRMS) (-IRMS),
(Py-IRMS) (GC-IRMS).

.

, .
C, , , .
,

, ,
.
:
C2
1,5
(C3 ) C3.
13C 13C
28 -23.

-45-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(), , , , , ,
.
C4. C2

( C4 ). 13C
C3 13C 10.
.
(
C Crassulacean Acid Metabolism).
13C 18 -12.
, .
(IRMS) C
(13C/ 12C)
(.. ). C
CO2 2 C (13C, 12C)
2 , 13C1616 12C1616
45 44 , .
- C
13C
.

: (IRMS) 3

, ,


,
,
(He, CO2 O2)
.
. (, ..)
.

1700 0C CO2
NOx, H2O. CO2
, ,
13C , (
).

( )
C C ,
.

-46-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.


. H
AOAC [978.17 991.41 (
)].
2001
1

1.


2001 117 38 79 7
2002 88 35 43 12
: ,

--- .
. C3
C4 .
13C .

.

.
( 2).

2.


208 145 40 23
: , , ,

, ,
13C.
3

-47-
1o
, 29 1 2002

3.


35 23 3 2

.
(OLAF)

. (IRMS).
:
.
. 1576/89
(C4 ),

.
12C1618 ( 46),

( 822/97). H 18O/16O
O
.
.
,
,
18O/16O.
.
,
13C/12C ,
AOAC 982.21 981.09.

, ..
13C , 15
, 18 , .

-48-
1o
, 29 1 2002

ANALYSIS OF HONEY SAMPLES WITH ISOTOPE RATIO MASS

SPECTROMETRY IN THE LABORATORY OF D CHEMICAL
SERVICES OF ATHENS OF THE GENERAL CHEMICAL STATE
LABORATORY

Zoulis N., Bolkas S.

General Chemical state Laboratory, D Chemical Services of Athens,
gxk-dxy@ath.forthnet.gr

The adulteration of honey with isoglucose or other syrups derived from corn can
be detected by the isotope ratio mass spectrometry. The use of an internal
standard with the analysis of honey proteins means that all types of honey can be
tested accurately for corn syrups.
The vast majority of honey samples from Greek producers examined in the
laboratory of D Chemical Services of Athens of the General Chemical State
Laboratory were free from added syrups.

-49-
1o
, 29 1 2002

. 1, . -2, . 1,
. 3
1
, ...
2
, ...
3
- , ...

,
.
(Ferric Reducing
Antioxidant Power, FRAP),
, Pseudomonas
syringae Bacillus subtilis,
( MICs MBCs).
.
: 115990, MICs MBCs
10%-20% 12%-25% (w/v)
, MICs 15%-25%
MBCs >25%.
, .

: , , .

,
.


, , , , -
, , ...
.


( )
(reactive oxygen species, ROS).


, , ,
, , .
.

-50-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(, ,
..).
.
.


, .
() ()
(ROS), O. (singlet oxygen),
(2-), (22), (.),
(3) (),
.
.

,
.

,

DNA .
()
,
,
P450.
ROS ,
, , , ,
, ..

.
.
,
, (
) .
.

,
.
,
.


.
, .

-51-
1o
, 29 1 2002

- ( ), ( C), -
( ), .

.
.

.

()
(Ferric
Reducing Antioxidant Power, FRAP).
, FRAP , .

- ,
, Fe+3- (TPTZ-Fe+3),
.
Fe+3-
593nm:
TPTZ-Fe+3 Fe+2-TPTZ
() ()

()

.

1. 0,3 , pH 3,6
2. tripyridyl-s-triazine, 10mM
3. HCl, 40mM
4. FeCl3.6H2O, 20mM
5. FRAP: 10ml 2 1ml
3 1ml 4.
6. : 1000
( C).

3ml FRAP 100l
.
vortex 4 min
37 C.
593nm.
FRAP :
[(593nm / 593nm )] . FRAP .
FRAP .

-52-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2.0
FRAP . 1000 FRAP
2000.

,
(, , )
, 1-3.


.

(.. )
(.. ).

1.
)

(Abies spp)
(/25 mg )
871,62
901,35
813.5
624,32
978,38
878,38

2.

(/25 mg
(Citrus aurantium)
)
193,24
114,86
200
197,3
248.65
131,08

3.

(Thymus spp) (/25 mg )
235,13
327,02
224,32
283,78
644,6
777,02

-53-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.

,
.


.
,
( )
( ).

,
( ).

, (pH 3,2 5,5)
22.
, ..
( , , , ..).

.

,
. T 22
.
inhibine.To H2O2,
(
),
H2O2 + .

.

inimum inhibition concentrations (MICs) inimum

bactericidal concentrations (MBCs).

.

.
: ) Pseudomonas syringae ) Bacillus
subtilis. ,
NAG
22-24 .
(10l) 103-105 /ml (1 OD600= ~ 109
/ml).

-54-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.
(minimum
inhibition concentrations, MICs minimum bactericidal concentrations, MBCs)

(96 , U ),
:
0%, 5%, 8%, 10%, 12%, 15%, 20%, 25% w/v.
50% , - . A
NAG, (Nutrient
agar glycerol) ( 1Liter , 3,3g Bacto peptone, 2,7g Nutrient
broth, 2,0g yeast extract, 25ml glycerol),
.
, 10l
(inoculum). ,

"" (blanks), ' .
221 C 24 hr.

,
(OD 600nm, Multiskan RC, Labsystems)
24 .
0,05
, MICs.
,
NAG
, 48
. 48
( o ).
MBCs.
.

4-6 1-20.

(Minimum Inhibition Concentrations, MICs)
(Minimum Bactericidal Concentrations, MBCs)
,
.
,

.
,
, Bacillus subtilis
Pseudomonas syringae. -

-55-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(dose response),
( , , .).

4. MIC:
MBC:

P. syringae B. subtilis
(Abies spp)
MIC MBC MIC MBC
15% 20% 12% 15%
20% 25% 15% 20%
- 25% 15% 20%
15% 20% 10% 15%
12% 15% 10% 15%
- 20% 12% 15%

5.MIC:
MBC:

P. syringae B. subtilis
(Thymus spp) MIC MBC MIC MBC
- 20% 15% 20%
- 20% 15% 20%
- 20% 10% 20%
12% 15% 12% 15%
15% 20% 12% 20%
12% 15% 10% 12%

6.MIC:
MBC:

P. syringae B. subtilis
(Citrus aurantium) MIC MBC MIC MBC
15% 20% 15% 20%
>25% >25% 20% >25%
20% >25% 15% >25%
20% >25% 20% 25%
20% >25% 20% 25%
20% >25% 20% 25%

-56-
1o
, 29 1 2002

4)
1) 140
140
120
120

% growth
100
% growth

100 P. syringae
P. syringae 80
80 B. subtilis
B. subtilis 60
60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

5)
140 6)
140
120 P. syringae
120
% growth

P. syringae
% growth

100 B. subtilis 100

B. subtilis
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

8)
7) 140
140
120
120
% growth

P. syringae
% growth

P. syringae 100
100
B. subtilis 80 B. subtilis
80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

-57-
1o
, 29 1 2002

9) 1 10) 2
140 140
120 120
% growth

% growth
100 P. syringae 100 P. syringae
80 B. subtilis 80 B. subtilis
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

11) 3 12)
140 140
120 120
% growth
% growth

100 P. syringae 100 P. syringae

80 B. subtilis 80 B. subtilis
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

13) 14)
140 140
120 120
% growth

% growth

100 100 P. syringae

P. syringae
80 80
B. subtilis B. subtilis
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

-58-
1o
, 29 1 2002

15) 16) 1
140 140
120 120

% growth
% growth

100 P. syringae 100 P. syringae

80 B. subtilis 80 B. subtilis
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

17) 2
140 18) 1
140
120 120
% growth

% growth

100 P. syringae 100 P. syringae

80 B. subtilis 80 B. subtilis
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

19) 2 20) 3
140 140
120 120
% growth

% growth

100 100
P. syringae P. syringae
80 80
B. subtilis B. subtilis
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
% [] % []

-59-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(
: 115990) .
MICs MBCs 10%-
20% 12%-25% (w/v) , MICs
15%-25% MBCs >25%
,
.
, ,
, ,

.
.

,
.
1940
, .
,
.


(. ).
(in vitro),

.

,
,

.

. ,
,

,
.

. (-)
.
, Apitherapy

, (, , , , )

. Apitherapy

-60-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
.


.

1221/97,
50% 50%

ANTIOXIDANT AND ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITY OF GREEK HONEY

1 2 1 3
Sardalou G. , Mengissoglu-Spiroudi U. , Diamantidis G. , Thrasyvoulou .
1
Laboratory of Agricultural Chemistry
2
Pestcide Science Laboratory
3
Laboratory of Apiculture, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, School of
Agriculture

Honey has been known since ancient times for its therapeutic and medical uses.
It has been used as a medicine for thousands of years and its curative properties are
well documented. Honey possesses antioxidant and antibacterial substances that
inhibit growth of a wide range of bacteria and fungi, which cause various abscesses
and surgical infections. It is a traditional remedy for the treatment of infected
wounds, which has recently been rediscovered by the medical profession,
particularly where conventional modern therapeutic agents are failing.
Oxidative stress, defined as an imbalance between free radical production and
antioxidant defense system favoring oxidation, plays a significant role in the
development of chronic diseases. Free radicals and reactive oxygen species have
been implicated in contributing to ageing and to many disease states including
cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Humans protect themselves from reactive
oxygen species, in part, by consuming dietary antioxidants. Honey is an agricultural
product that can be a source of antioxidants.
The antibacterial activity of honey had been attributed to: a) the osmotic effect,
whereby water is drawn away from the microorganisms reducing their ability to
survive b) acidity, its pH being between 3.2 and 4.5, and mainly to c) hydrogen
peroxide, which is produced enzymically in the honey by the bee. Recent studies
have shown that honey has phytochemical antibacterial components, which are
believed to be the main non-peroxide antimicrobial factors.
Honey from three floral sources (spruce, orange and thymus) and from
different geographic regions of Greece, were characterized for their antioxidant and
antibacterial activity. Antioxidant capacities of honey were determined using the
FRAP assay (Ferric Reducing Antioxidant Power), while their growth inhibition
against two phytopathogenic bacteria Pseudomonas syringae and Bacillus subtilis
were determined using the broth dilution method. Specifically the minimum

-61-
1o
, 29 1 2002

inhibition (MICs) and bactericidal concentrations (MBCs) of honeys have been

estimated.
In this study all analyzed honeys have shown antioxidant and antibacterial
activity. FRAP values ranged from 115 to 990 , while MICs values have
been estimated for spruce and thymus in the range of 10% to 20% (w/v) of honey
solutions and MBCs values in the range of 12% to 25%, while for orange MICs
values have been estimated in the range of 15%-25% and MBCs values >25%.
Furthermore darker colored honey (spruce) contained higher antioxidant power
than lighter honey (orange). The bacteria specie Bacillus subtilis was more
sensitive than Pseudomonas syringae. Honey from different floral sources and
geographic regions have shown great variability in antioxidant and antibacterial
activity.

:
Cross, C., Viliet, A., ONeill, C., & Eiserich, J. P. (1994) Reactive oxygen
species and the lung. The Lancet 344, 930-933
Benzie, I. F. F., & Strain, J. J.(1999) in Methods in Enzymology, Vol. 299,
A, pp. 15-28
Campo, R. P., Torres, M. L., & Cadenas, S. (1998) The rate of free radical
production as a determinant of the rate of aging: evidence from the comparative
approach. Journal of Comparative Physiology 168, 149-158
Frankel, S., Robinson, G. E., & Berenbaum, M. R. (1998) Antioxidant
capacity and correlated characteristics of 14 unifloral honeys. Journal of
Apicultural Research 37 (1), 27-31
Sarma, A. D., & Sharma, R. (1999) Anthocyanin-DNA copigmentation
complex: mutual protection against oxidative damage. Phytochemistry 52, 1313-
1318
White, J. W., & Subers, H. (1963) Studies on honey inhibine. 2. A chemical
assay. Journal of Apicultural Research. 1 (2), 93-99
Molan, P. (1992) The antibacterial activity of honey 1. The nature of the
antibacterial activity. Bee World 75 (1), 5-28
Snowdon, A. J., & Cliver, D.O. (1996) Microorganisms in honey.
International Journal Food Microbiology. 31, 1-26
Molan, P. (1999) Why honey is effective as a medicine. I. Its use in modern
medicine. Bee World 80 (2), 80-92
Taormina, P. J., Niemira, B. A., & Beuchat, L. R. (2001) Inhibitory activity
of honey against foodborne pathogens as influenced by the presence of hydrogen
peroxide and level of antioxidant power. International Journal of Food
Microbiology 69, 217-225
Spiroudi, M. U., Karamanoli, K., Spiroudis, S., & Constantinidou, H. A.
(2001) Hypervalent Iodine Compounds as Potent Antibacterial Agents against Ice
Nucleation Active (INA) Pseudomonas syringae Journal of Agricultural and Food
Chemistry 49, 3746-3752
Bogdanov, S. (1997) Nature and Origin of the Antibacterial substances in
Honey Food Science and Technology 30, 748-753

-62-
1o
, 29 1 2002

., .
, ,
75, 118 55,

(, ,
).
.
. ,
, ,
. ,
/ (GC/MS).

. ,

. ,
()-2,6-dimethyl-2,7-octadiene-1,6-diol .
Citrus .
1-phenylethyl alcohol,
. -3,5,5-
trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-
. , exo-2-hydroxycineole ,
1,8-cineole . ,
,
,
phenylacetic acid.

.
. ,

. ,
,
, . ,
, ,
(Persano oddo et al., 1995). ,

(Tan et al., 1989).
,
.

-63-
1o
, 29 1 2002

60
.
Anklam (1998).
,
. Bonaga
Giumannini 1986 "

, ,
. , Tan
(1989)
,
.
,
,
Nickerson Likens 1966.
(Bicchi et al., 1983 * Bouseta and Collin, 1995).
, ,
(Bicchi et a., 1983 * Mills, 1978).
, (Bouseta et al.,
1992 * Maignial et al., 1992 * Radovic et al., 2001).
,
.
(Cocito et al., 1995 * Vila et al., 1999),
.

&

,
,
..., 4
(, ,
).
- (Merck, pro analysi).

460 Elma,
35 kHz. 100 mL 40
g , 22 mL 1,5 g MgSO4.

200 mL. 15 mL -
: (1:2), . ,
, 10 .
,
.

-64-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
20 mL NaCl.
10 ,
() .
, 15 mL .

,
.
3000 rpm 1,5 ,
8-10 ,
.
MgSO4 2 1 mL.

.

, 5 g
30 mL -: (1:2) 200 mL
10 .
, MgSO4
, 2 0,5 mL
.

(Gas
Chromatography, GC) Hewlett Packard 5890 II,
HP-5MS ( 30 m, 0,25mm 0,25m)
(Mass Spectrometer Detector,
MSD) Hewlett Packard 5972. , 1 mL/min.
40 oC 3 ,
2 oC/min ( ) 4 oC/min (
) 180 oC, 250 oC
10 oC/min, 5 .
MS . 70 eV
m/z 50-550.

220 290 oC . GC/MS 1 L.

NBS75K
.

-65-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
,
Nickerson & Likens (1966), Bicchi
(1983), Bonaga & Giumanini(1986) Bouseta & Collin (1995). ,
220,
headspace. ,
, . ,
.


.

GC,

.

, 1-phenylethanol
,
.
Bonaga Giumanini (1986), ,
Gyuot (1998) ,
acetophenone 2-aminoacetophenone.
, ,
, .
"" "" .
, , 1-phenylethanol
. ,


.

( 1, 1).

, .

Carduus nutans (Wilkins et al., 1993).
Carduus,
. ,
Carduus,
.

-66-
1o
, 29 1 2002

A b u n d a n c e

T I C : P O R T O K 5 . D
1 8 0 0 0 0

1 7 0 0 0 0
11
1 6 0 0 0 0

1 5 0 0 0 0

1 4 0 0 0 0

1 3 0 0 0 0

1 2 0 0 0 0

1 1 0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0

9 0 0 0 0

8 0 0 0 0 5 7
7 0 0 0 0

6 0 0 0 0 1
5 0 0 0 0 10
4 0 0 0 0 3
3 0 0 0 0 8
2 0 0 0 0
2 4 6
1 0 0 0 0 9
0
5 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 1
0 5 . 0 2
0 0 . 0 2
0 5 . 0 3
0 0 . 0 3
0 5 . 0 4
0 0 . 0 4
0 5 . 0 5
0 0 . 0 5
0 5 . 0 6
0 0 . 0 6
0 5 . 0 0
T i m e - - >

1. .

1.

A/A /
1 3,7-dimethyl-1,5,7-octatrien-3-ol 7
(hotrienol)
2 8
3 9 (E)-2,6-dimethyl-6-hydroxy-
2,7-octadienal
4 10 (Z)-2,6-dimethyl-2,7-
octadiene-1,6-diol
5 2,6-dimethyl-3,7-octadiene-2,6-diol 11 (E)-2,6-dimethyl-2,7-
octadiene-1,6-diol
6
.

,
"3,5,5-trimethyl-2-cyclohexene-" (
2), dehydrovomofoliol [4-hydroxy-4-(3-oxo-1-butenyl)-3,5,5-
trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one] 3-oxo--ionone [4-(3-oxo-1-butenyl)-3,5,5-
trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one]. 4-
oxoisophorone 3-oxo-7,8-dihydro--ionone [4-(3-oxobutyl)-3,5,5-trimethyl-2-
cyclohexen-1-one], 3-oxoertro--ionone [4-(3-oxo-butylidene)-
3,5,5-trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one], 3-oxoertro--ionol [4-(3-oxo-butylidene)-
3,5,5-trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-ol] ,
.

-67-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2. .

A/ /
A
1 2,3-butanediol 16 3,4,5-trimethyl phenol
2 2,4-dimethyl-1-heptene 17 (Z)-2,6-dimethyl-2,7-octadiene-1,6-
diol
3 p-xylene 18 (E)-2,6-dimethyl-2,7-octadiene-1,6-
diol
4 p-dichlorobenzene 19 -3,5,5-trimethyl-
cyclohexen-
5 benzyl alcohol 20 3,4-dihydro-3-oxoactinidol (1o
)
6 cis-linalool oxide 21 3,4-dihydro-3-oxoactinidol (2o
)
7 trans-linalool oxide 22 3,4-dihydro-3-oxoactinidol (3o
)
8 hotrienol 23 3,4-dihydro-3-oxoactinidol (4o
)
9 phenylethyl alcohol 24 3-oxo--ionone [4-(3-oxo-1-
butenyl)-3,5,5-trimethyl-2-
cyclohexen-1-one]
10 4-oxoisophorone (2,6,6-trimethyl- 25 3-oxo-7,8-dihydro--ionone [4-(3-
cyclohexen-1,4-dione) oxobutyl)-3,5,5-trimethyl-2-
cyclohexen-1-one]
11 2,6-dimethyl-3,7-octadien-2,6-diol 26 3-oxoertro--ionone [4-(3-oxo-
butylidene)-3,5,5-trimethyl-2-
cyclohexen-1-one]
12 exo-2-hydroxycineole 27 3-oxoertro--ionol [4-(3-oxo-
butylidene)-3,5,5-trimethyl-2-
cyclohexen-1-ol]
13 2,3-dihydrobenzofuran 28 26
14 HMF 29 dehydrovomofoliol [4-hydroxy-4-(3-
oxo-1-butenyl)-3,5,5-trimethyl-2-
cyclohexen-1-one]
15 1,3-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl) benzene

, 4 3,4-dihydro-3-oxoactinidol,
D'Arcy (1997).
3,5,5-trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-
. ,
.
(Tan et al., 1989), Guyot (1999)
.
exo-2-hydroxycineole,
.
.

-68-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
. , ,
,
, .
,
.

70%
(cinnamic acid),
(phenylpropanes, 2, 3).
phenylacetic acid.
,
, .
, '
benzoic acid. , 1-
phenyethanol.

2. .

3. .
A/A /
1 Benzyl alcohol 8 Cinnamyl alcohol
2 Phenylethyl alcohol 9 Benzenepropanal
3 Benzoic acid 10 Benzenepropanoic acid
4 Benzenepropanol 11 p-Anisic acid
5 Cinnamaldehyde 12 Cinnamic acid
6 Phenylacetic acid 13 p-methoxy Cinnamic acid
7 m-Toluic acid

-69-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, .
, ,
. , ,

. ,
,
.
,

, , .

.
,

.

ULTRASOUND-ASSISTED ISOLATION OF THE VOLATILE

COMPOUNDS FROM SOME UNIFLORAL GREEK HONEYS

Alissandrakis E., Harizanis P.

Lab. of Sericulture and Apiculture, Agricultural Univ. of Athens,
alissandrakis@yahoo.com

The volatile fraction of four unifloral Greek honeys (orange, eucalyptus,

chestnut and cotton) was studied. A new procedure for isolating the volatile
compounds from honey was developed, employing ultrasounds to assist solvent
extraction. This procedure does not require heat, thus no thermally generated
artifacts are produced. Furthermore, it is quite rapid, easily carried out and does
not require special equipment.
The extraction was followed by GC/MS analysis. Certain volatile compounds
seem to be characteristic for each unifloral honey, depending on the botanical
source it comes from. In most cases, correlation between the honey extract and the
flower extract of the corresponding botanical source is adequate. Linalool
derivatives predominate in the orange honey extract, with (E)-2,6-dimethyl-2,7-
octadien-1,6-diol being the most abundant, while in the citrus flower extract
linalool predominates.
Chestnut honey is characterised by the presence of 1-phenylethyl alcohol, a
compound also found in the flower extract. Compounds possessing 3,5,5-
trimethyl-2-cyclohexen- skeletons were the most abundant in eucalyptus honey.
Moreover, exo-2-hydroxycineole is present only in eucalyptus honey, while 1,8-
cineole (eucalyptol) predominates in the flower extract. Finally, the extract of
cotton honey consists of an array of sikimate-pathway derived aromatic
compounds, with phenylacetic acid being the major constituent.

-70-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Anklam, E. (1998). A review of the analytical methods to determine the

geographical and botanical origin of honey. Food Chemistry, 63, 549-562.
Bicchi, C., Beliardo, F., & Fratini C. (1983). Identification of the volatile
components of some Piedmontese honeys. Journal of Apicultural Research, 22,
130-136.
Bonaga, G., & Giumanini, A. G. (1986). The volatile fraction of chestnut honey.
Journal of Apicultural Research, 25, 113-120.
Bouseta, A., & Collin, S. (1995). Optimized Likens-Nickerson methodology for
quantifying honey flavors. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 43,
1890-1897.
Bouseta, A., Collin, S., & Dufour, J.-P. (1992). Characteristic aroma profiles of
unifloral honeys obtained with a dynamic headspace GC-MS system. Journal of
Apicultural Research, 31, 96-109.
Cocito, C., Gaetano, G., Delfini, C. (1995). Rapid extraction of aroma compounds
in must and wine by means of ultrasound. Food Chemistry, 52, 311-320.
D Arcy, B., Rintoul, G. B., Rowland, C. Y., & Blackman, A. J. (1997).
Composition of Australian honey extracts. 1. Norisoprenoids, monoterpens, and
other natural volatiles from blue gum (Eucalyptus leucoxylon) and yellow box
(Eucalyptus melliodora) honeys. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,
45, 1834-1843.
Mills, F. D. (1978). Ring contraction products from 2,3-dihydro-3,5-dihydroxy-6-
methyl-4(H)-pyran-one:4-hydroxy-5-hydroxymethyl-2-methyl-3(2H)-furanone
and 2,5-dimethyl-4-hydroxy-3(2H)-furanone. Journal of Agricultural and Food
Chemistry, 26, 894-898.
Nickerson, G. B., & Likens, S. T. (1966). Gas chromatographic evidence for the
occurrence of hop oil components in beer. Journal of Chromatography, 21, 1-5.
Radovic, B. S., Careri, M., Mangia, A., Musci, M., Gerboles, M., & Anklam,
E. (2001). Contribution of dymanic headspace GC-MS analysis of aroma
compounds to authenticity testing of honey. Food Chemistry, 72, 511-520.
Tan, S. T., Wilkins, A. L., Holland, P. T., & McGhie, T. K. (1989). Extractives
from New Zealand unifloral honeys. 2. Degraded carotenoids and other
substances from heather honey. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,
37, 1217-1221.
Tan, S. T., Wilkins, A. L., Molan, P. C., Holland, P. T., & Reid M. (1989). A
chemical approach to the determination of floral sources of New Zealand
honeys. Journal of Apicultural Research, 28, 212-222.
Wilkins, A. L., Lu, Y., & Tan, S. T. (1993). Extractives from New Zealand
honeys. 4. Linalool derivatives and other substances from nodding thistle
(Carduus nutans) honey. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 41, 873-
878.
Vila, D. H., Mira, F. J. H., Lucena, R.B., & Recamales, M. A. F. (1999).
Optimization of an extraction method of aroma compounds in white wine using
ultrasound. Talanta, 50, 413-421.

-71-
1o
, 29 1 2002

ROSACEAE
LAMIACEAE
*

.1, .1, .2, .1

1. . -. . . . .
2. ...... .. 57000

Rosaceae Lamiaceae
,
,
. , Rosaceae
, ,
Lamiaceae , , .

,
. ,

, .

-: , , Labiateae form, Prunus/Pyrus

form

.

.

.

( Zurcher et al., 1975,
Varis et al, 1982, Seijo et al., 1992, Jhansi et al, 1994, Thrasyvoulou & Manikis,
1995).

1962-1965 (Maurizio & Louveaux,
1970). ,
Rosaceae Lamiaceae
.
Lamiaceae form Prunus/Pyrus form
,

-72-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.

.. .
,
.

,
.
, 10 Rosaceae 7
Lamiaceae, ,
.

,
.

10 Rosaceae, : Malus communis
(), Pyrus communis (), Cydonia oblonca (), Prunus persica
(), Prunus armeniaca (), Prunus domestica (),
Prunus amygdalus (), Pyrus amygdaliformis (), Prunus avium
() Prunus cerasus (), 7
Lamiaceae, Lavantula vera (), Hyssopus oficcinalis (),
Rosmarinus oficcinalis (), Salvia triloba (), Salvia viridis
(), Salvia clare (), Origanum vulgaris ()
Thymus capitatus () , , .
,

.
2-3
.
,
.
edelan .
(OLYMPUS BX
40) 20
. LYMPUS,
CAMEDIA C 2000 Z, . ,
Rosaceae,
,
.
Lamiaceae ,
, .
OLYMPUS DP-Soft Version 3.0.

-73-
1o
, 29 1 2002

20
(CV% <3%).
,
(MANOVA)
, (discriminant analysis)
. ,
SPSS.

-
Rosaceae, ,
Duncan 1.
Lamiaceae, 3. H

Rosaceae 2, Lamiaceae 4.

Duncan, 5.
, ,
(CV%<5%)
20
Lamiaceae, ()
( 4),
,
.
Lamiaceae ,
. , ,
,
Lamiaceae,

. (discriminant analysis)
95,3%
( 1). , .
, ,
, , ,
.

,

( 5), ,

.
Rosaceae, ()
( 2),
,
. ,
( ),

-74-
1o
, 29 1 2002

. , Rosaceae,

. (discriminant analysis)
96%
( 2). ,
,
.
, , (
pomoideae) ,
.

1. Duncan
ROSACEAE


n 2
20 772,7 a 104,9 a 11,0 b c 31,5 a
20 817,1 a b 113,8 b 11,7 c 32,2 a b
20 847,1 b 115,7 b c 10,5 b 33,3 b
20 936,2 c 125,2 d 12,6 d 35,2 c
20 938,6 c 122,2 c d 12,6 d 34,8 c
20 962,8 c 128,5 d 13,8 d 35,2 c
20 1046,8 d 125,2 d 8,8 a 36,8 d
20 1229,8 e 145,2 e 16,2 f 40,0 e
20 1570,9 f 151,2 e 13,1 d e 45,8 f
20 1589,8 f 161,3 f 17,0 f 44,9 f
(af),
p 0,05

2. Rosaceae

0,533** 1
n: 200
0,590** 0,821** 1
n:200 n:200
0,563** 0,989** 0,824** 1
n:200 n:200 n:200
** (p0,01)

-75-
1o
, 29 1 2002

3. Duncan
LAMIACEAE

n 2
20 562,2 a 90,6 a 29,3 a 25,6 a
20 608,3 a b 94,1 a b 28,9 a 26,4 a b
20 653,9 a b 96,0 a b 29,4 a 27,7 b c
20 657,2 a b 96,8 a b 29,7 a 27,9 b c
20 674,0 b 97,6 b 30,4 a 27,7 b c
20 679,2 b 98,2 b 29,9 a 28,5 c
20 828,3 c 110,6 c 32,7 b 31,9 d
20 897,3 c d 113,0 c d 35,5 c 31,9 d
20 991,9 d e 119,7 d e 37,1 c d 34,0 e
20 1030,7 e 121,8 e 38,1 d 34,3 e
20 1285,4 f 138,9 f 43,9 e 37,0 f
(af),
p 0,05

4. Lamiaceae

0,928** 1
n: 220
0,976** 0,969** 1
n:220 n:200
0,982** 0,968** 0,993** 1
n:220 n:220 n:220
** (p0,01)

5. Duncan


2
29,3 a 25,6 a 90,6 a 562,2 a
28,9 a 26,4 a 94,1 b 608,3 b
29,4 a 27,7 b 96,0 b c 653,9 c
30,4 b 27,7 b 97,64 c 674,0 c
(af),
p 0,05

-76-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1. Lamiaceae
( )

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0

*

-77-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2. Rosaceae

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
*

-78-
1o
, 29 1 2002

( ),
,
. , 5
(
)
.
, Labiateae

( 4) ,
Rosaceae ( 2).

Rosaceae. ,
,

.

,

Rosaceae Lamiaceae .

,
. ,


.

,

,

.

1221/97,
50% 50%
.

-79-
1o
, 29 1 2002

A METHOD THAT RECOGNIZES POLLEN GRAINS OF DIFFERENT

SPECIES WITHIN THE ROSACEAE AND LAMIACEAE FAMILIES

Papachristoforou A. 1, Bladenopoulos K. 2 , Thrasyvoulou A. 1

1
Apiculture and Sericulture Lab., Department of Agriculture, Aristotle Univ.
alpapa@agro.auth.gr
2
Cereals Institute (N. AG. RE. F)

Pollen grains from melliferous plant species of the Rosaceae and Lamiaceae
families were photographed under the optical microscope with a digital camera and
their dimensional characteristics were measured using an appropriate software
programme. For the 10 Rosaceae species examined, the opening (length) of the
germ pore, median, circumference and area, were measured, and for the 8
Labiateae species, the length, width, circumference and area of pollen grains were
measured.
The statistical analysis of data collected showed that certain measurable pollen
grain characteristics alone, or in combination, can be used to distinguish the
different plant species. In addition, if the differences between species in the
measured pollen grain characteristics are small, it is possible to combine them with
morphological characteristics to increase the degree of accuracy of plant
identification.
This methodology can be applied to identify the plant origin of bee honey.

Jhansi P, Kalpana TP, Ramanujam CGK (1994) Pollen analysis of some Apis
cerana Fabr honeys from Andhra Pradesh, India. Apidologie 25:289-296.
Maurizio A & Louveaux J (1970)Report of the I.U.B.S. International
Commission for bee botany 1966-1969. Bee world 51(2):70-74.
SeijoMC Aira MJ, IglesiasI & Jato MV (1992) Palynological characterization of
honey from La Coruna province (NW Spain) J.Apic. Res. 31(3/4):149-155
Steel,G.R & Torrie (1960)Principles and Procedures of Statistic. McGraw-Hill
Book Co. London 481pp
Thrasyvoulou & Manikis, (1995) some physicochemical and microscopic
characteristics of Greek unifloral honeys. Apidologie 26:441-452.
Varis Anna Lisa, Juha Helenius and Karl Koivulehto(1982) Pollen spectrum of
Finnish honey. Journal of the Scientific Agricultural Society of Finland 54:403-
420
Zurcher A. Maurizio A & Hadorn F. (1975) Untersuchngen an handelshoniger
mit spezieller berucksichtigung des zuckerspektrums. Apidologie 6(1):59-60

-80-
1o
, 29 1 2002

., ., .
, -, ....

.
,
.

(2001/110) ,
.
, , ,
.

.

. ,
-
.

: , , Purge & Trap - GC MS

,
.
,
.

,
.

(2001/110 )
..

, ,

.

,

( Purge & Trap - GC MS).

-81-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.


.
. (Tan et. al. 1988, 1989
1990, Bouseta et.al. 1992, Ferreres et. al. 1993, Rowland et. al. 1995,
Shimodo et. al. 1996, Guyot et.al 1998 1999, Radovic et.al. 2001).

, ,
( - ), ,
, ,
. Radovic
(2001) GC-MS
, , , , , ,
,
. Gilliber
(1981)
, ,


. Pawlavska Armstrong (1994),

D- D-
. Delgado
(1994) )
HPLC CE
, .



.
, , , , HMF

(P. Crecent, H. Latorre. 1993, Sporns et. al. 1992).
Radovic Alkman (1999) HT-MS
, , , ,
, .

. , ,
, ..

-82-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,
.

: -O. I. Analytical 4560
: -Agilent 6890
: -Agilent 5793
:
) .

, Purge & Trap.

i. ( 50 C)
ii. ( 45 min)
iii. (8 min 180 C)
iv. ( 200 C)
)
.

GC (P5, 30m x 0,25mm x 0,25 m SGE) ,
( = 40 C, =240 C).
)


Nist.
.

.
,
, ,
1 --2,3-.

1.

,
. 1
, .

:

(, , 1---2,3-)

, ,

-83-
1o
, 29 1 2002

(
1).

(, )

( 2).
lilac aldehyde
,
.

(5% 2% ).



.

.
, ,
,
,
.
3
.
.
.


.

.

1 : ,
,

-84-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1:

/ RT Compounds Kithira Kalimnos Galaxidi Rodos Crete

1 5.250 Octene 0,807
2 5.539 Octane 1,942 1,676 6,413 3,344 3,138
3 7.099 Furfural 1,457 5,417 2,291 2,225
4 7.413 4-hydroxy-4-methyl-2-pentanone 0,357 0,119 0,112
5 8.093 3,5,5-trimethyl-2-cyclopent-1-one 0,113 0,026 0,046
6 8.288 Ethylbenzene 0,080 0,027 0,081
7 8.688 xylene 0,010 0,175 0,062 0,291
8 9.008 1-hexanol 0,084 0,122 0,069
9 10.515 2,5-diethyl-tetrahydro-furan 5,304 1,155 0,656 2,371 1,263
10 10.757 Nanane 1,116 0,640 2,255 1,337 1,957
11 10.894 Heptanal 0,151 0,060 0,187 0,133 0,156
12 11.568 1-(2-furanyl)-Ethanone 0,054 0,219 0,091 0,107
13 15.272 Benzaldehyde 16,522 8,965 4,593 10,027 5,200
14 17.609 Benzonitrile 0,126 0,042 0,041
15 18.335 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one 0,111 0,169 0,262 0,181 0,261
16 18.604 2-pentyl furan 1,178 0,552 1,145 0,959 0,521
17 19.547 Decane 0,280 0,101 0,187 0,189 0,126
18 19.833 Octanal 0,555 0,786 0,447 0,704
19 19.941 1,2-dichloro benzene 6,353 3,161 1,174
20 20.101 2,6-dimethyl-(Z)-1,6-Octadiene 0,069 1,242
21 20,519 2,4-Octadiene 0,166
22 21.519 4 C Benzene 0,928 0,364 0,275 0,523 0,415
23 21.867 Limonene 0,025 0,023 0,126 0,058 0,042
24 22,644 2-ethyl-1-hexanol 0,078 0,026 0,037
25 23.056 2-hydroxy-benzaldehyde 0,023 0,008
26 23.279 Benzeneacetaldehyde 27,012 67,123 30,259 41,464 58,183
27 24.519 4C isomer Benzene 0,179
1-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-1,4-
28 24.585 0,081 0,174 0,147
Cyclohaxadiene,
29 24,942 1-chloro-octane 0,204
30 25.056 acetophenone 0,104 0,035
31 25.456 Cycloheptanemethanol 0,061 0,069 0,121 0,084 0,097
32 25.674 cis-linaloloxide 0,801 0,267 0,351
33 26.119 1-octanol 0,031 0,036 0,119 0,062 0,038
34 26.434 1-methyl-3-(1-methylethenyl)-Benzene 0,038 0,114 0,051 0,065
35 26.828 1-methyl-4-(1-methylethenyl)-Benzene 0,304 0,105 0,166 0,192 0,160
36 27,44 2-Nonanone 0,068 0,031 0,220 0,076
37 27.920 Undecane 0,427 0,511 0,312 0,463
38 27.944 1,6-Octadien-3-ol 3,7-dimethyl 1,314

-85-
1o
, 29 1 2002

/ RT Compounds Kithira Kalimnos Galaxidi Rodos Crete

39 28.200 Nonanal 2,383 2,414 6,468 3,755 4,057
40 28.680 Phenylethyl Alcohol 0,184 0,327 0,170
41 28.900 Isopherone 0,059
42 30.217 Benzyl nitrile 11,764 3,500 0,405 5,223 1,216
43 30.700 Isomer lilac aldehyde (A,B,C,D) 5,130 1,710 2,229
1-(1,4-dimethyl-3-cyclohexen-1-yl)
44 30.750 0,432
ethanone
45 31.188 Lilac aldehyde (A,B,C,D) 9,227 3,076 3,446
46 32.001 Isomer lilac aldehyde (A,B,C,D) 4,425 1,088
47 32.372 Naphalene Azulene 12,662 0,354 4,339 0,032
48 32.520 Nonanol 0,117 0,208 0,722 0,349
3,6-Dimethyl-2,3,3a,4,5,7a-
49 32.847 1,293 0,168
hexahydrofuran
50 33.052 Nonanenitrile 0,058 0,018 0,148
51 33.338 Methyl Salicate 0,199
52 33,378 (+)-alpha-terpineol 0,187 0,016
2,6,6-trimethyl1,3-cyclohaxadiene-1-
53 33.629 0,143 0,103
carboxaldehyde
54 34.344 n-Decanal 3,173 3,572 7,557 4,768 6,564
Bicyclo [3,2,2]non-8-en-6-ol (Ir 5 CIS
55 34.557 0,185 1,657 0,494
6 CIS)
a 4-dimethyl-3-cyclohexen-1-
56 34.681 0,177 1,869 0,377
acetaldehyde
57 34.824 3-phenyl furan 1,823 0,867 0,397 1,029 0,318
1,7,7-trimethyl-bicyclo [2,2,1]hept-2-
58 35.200 0,141 0,162 0,029
ene
5,5-dimethyl 2(5H)-furanone 2-ethyl-
59 35.390 0,063 0,108 0,057
Thiophene
60 35.795 2-methyl-3-phenyl-Propanal 0,173 0,101 0,091
61 36.584 4-methoxy-benzaldehyde 0,037 0,054 0,030
62 37.704 1-Propanone, 2-methyl-1-phenyl 0,265 0,683 0,316
63 38.339 Decanentrile 0,032
64 38.853 Thymol 0,000 0,022 0,007
65 39.002 Tridecane 0,142 0,050 0,133 0,108 0,112
66 39.379 Undecanal 0,158 0,095 0,162 0,139 0,106
2,6,6 trimethyl-2-cyclohexene-1-
67 40.328 0,063
carboxaldehyde
68 40.807 2-amino-methyl ester benzioc acid 0,076 0,017
69 41.019 3-hydroxy-4-phenyl-2-butanone 0,780 0,149 0,310
70 41.210 1,2-dihydro-1,1,6 trimethyl-napthalene 0,706 0,227 0,155 0,363 1,393
1-(2,6,6-trimethyl cyclohexadien-1-yl)-
71 42.671 0,789 0,101 0,154 0,348 0,022
(E)- 2-Buten-1-one
72 43.260 Tetradecane 0,024 0,008
73 43.522 Dodecanal Tridecanal 0,109 0,029 0,136 0,091 0,016

-86-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Kalimno
/ RT Compounds Kithira Galaxidi Rodos Crete
s
74 43.682 Caryophyllene 0,094 0,063 0,028 0,061 0,090
75 44.020 1-phenylbutane-2,3-dione 0,049 0,083 0,047 0,059 0,040
76 44.654 (E) 5,9-Undecadien-2-one,6,0 dimethyl 0,064 0,010 0,025 0,055
77 44.871 Unknown hydrocarbon 0,803 0,086 0,360 0,416 0,192

2:

.

-
(%)
(%) (%)
78 67 11,7
65 41 5,2
28 58 1,2
24 30 0,4
13 27 3,5
13 27 3,5

3:

RT Compounds Kithira Kalimnos Galaxidi Rodos Crete

5.250 Octene 0,807

20,519 2,4-Octadiene 0,166

24,942 1-chloro-octane 0,204

1,6-Octadien-3-ol
27.944 1,314
3,7-dimethyl
1-(1,4-dimethyl-
30.750 3-cyclohexen-1- 0,432
yl) ethanone
33.338 Methyl Salicate 0,199

-87-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, .


, .


,
.

.

DETERMINATION OF GEOGRAPHICAL ORIGIN OF THYME HONEY

BASED ON VOLATILE COMPONENTS

Tananaki Ch., Dimou M., Thrasyvoulou A.

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, School of Agriculture, Laboratory of
apiculture-Sericulture, txrysa@yahoo.com

The type and concentration of the volatile components of honey are very
important for the determination of its botanical and geographical origin. The
aromatic profile of honey differs according to its floral origin, but there can also
be variation in honeys from the same flowers but with a different geographical
origin. It is important to be able to determine the country where honey has been
produced, and the new European Community Directive for honey (2001/110/EEC)
requires that the country of origin is recorded on the product label.
The constituents of honey, such as amino acids, flavonoids, pollen spectrum and
volatile components have been used to determine the geographical origin. In this
work samples of thyme honey from five different regions of Greece have been
analyzed to identify differences between them. The results indicate that differences
exist which are due to the unique flora of each region. The research is continuing
with more samples, so that the characteristic compound-markers for the geographic
origin of Greek thyme honey can be established.

Bouseta A., Collin S., Dufour JP. (1992) Characteristic aroma profiles of
unifloral honey obtained with a dynamic headspace GCMS system. J. Apic.
Res. 31(2):96109.
Delgado C., Tomas-Barberan F., Talou T., Gaset A. (1994) Capillary
electrophoresis as an alternative to HPLC for determination of honey
flavonoids. Chromatographia (38) 71-78.

-88-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Ferreres F., GarciaViguera C., Francisco TomasLorente, Francisco A

TomasBardena, Hesperetin. A (1993) Marker of the floral origin of Citrus
honey. J. Sci. Food Agric 61, 121123.
Guyot C., Bouseta A., Scheirman V., Collin S., (1998) Floral origin markers of
chestnut and lime tree honeys. J. Agric. Food Chem. 46,625633.
Guyot C., Scheirman V., Collin S. (1999) Floral origin markers of heather
honeys: Calluna Vulgaris and Erica Arborea. Food Chemistry 64, 311.
Gibert J., Shephard M. J., Wallwork M. A. and Harris R. G. (1998)
Determination of the geographical origin of honeys by multivariate analysis of
gas chromatographic data on their free amino acid content, Journal of
Apicultural Research 20, 125-135.
Pawlowska M. and Armstrong D. W. (1994) Evaluation of enantiometric purity
of selected amino acids in honey. Chirality 6, 270-276.
Pena Crecente R., Herrero Latorre C. (1993), Pattern recognition analysis
applied to classification of honey from two geographic origins. Journal of
Agriculture and Food Chemistry (41) 560-564.
Radovic B., Alkman E. (1999), Possibilities and limits to determine the botanical
and geographical origin of European honeys-devising analytical methods with
the aim of checking compliance with existing Community Labelling. EU-
Report 19001 EN.
Radovic B. S, Careri M., Mangia A., Musci M., Gerboles M., Anklam. E.
(2001) Contribution of dynamic headspace GCMS analysis of aroma
compounds to authenticity testing of honey. Food Chemistry 72, 511-520.
Rowland C. Y., Blackman A. J., Arcy B. R. D., Gavin B. R. (1995) Comparison
of organic extractives found in Leatherwood (Eucyphia lucida) honey and
Leatherwood flowers and leaves. J. Agric. Food Chem. 43, 753763.
Shimoda M., Wu Y., Osajima Y. (1996) Aroma compounds from aqueous
solution of Haze (Rhus succedanea) honey determined by adsorptive column
chromatography. J. Agric. Food Chem. 44, 39133918.
Sporns P., Pilhak L., Friedrich J. (1992), Alberta honey composition, Food
Research International (25) 93-100.
Tan ST, Wilkins A. L., Holland P. T. McChie T. K. (1990) Extractives from
New Zealand Honeys. 3. Unifloral Thyme and Willow honey constituents, J.
Agric. Food Chem. 38, 1833-1838.
Tan ST., Holland P. T., Wilkins A. L., Molan, P. C. (1988) Extractives from
New Zealand Honeys. 1. White Clover, Manuka, and Kanuka Unifloral Honeys,
J. Agric. Food Chem. 36, 453460
Tan ST., Wilkins A. L., Holland P. T., McChie T. K. (1989) Extractives from
New Zealand Unifloral Honeys. 2. Degraded Carotenoids and other Substances
from Heather Honey, J. Agric. Food Chem. 37, 12171221.

-89-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1 & 2
1
, .....
2
, ...

.
80.000 200.000 , 2,5
. , 150.000
, , ,

.
..
. ,

.
,
,
.
,
, .

(>150 ),
/2 .. . 3
. . , 20
128 .


.
.

.

,
.
-
E


,

.

-90-
1o
, 29 1 2002

,


.

) ,
, , ,
)
.
.
,

.

-
,

A .

:
) (
) )
,

,
( ),
, ,
(, , , , ,
).
,
,
.
,


.
1,
. ,
.. 498. , ,

.

-91-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1.
.
%
.
(..498)
% <21 (10)
% <0.6, <1.0% (6), (12),
(100)
A <0.9 M>1.0 *
mS.cm-1
meq/kg < 40
DN >8 (6)
H.M.F. mg/kg <40
% -
% -
% > 5 >10 (4), (30)
% >65 .>60 (29), (56), (23)
Fiche - +/-
mg/Kg >200*
-+

/
: 48, 16, 13, 20,
20, 20, 20, 17.
. *
..

, , ,
, , ,
, ..



,

.


.
, ,
..

-92-
1o
, 29 1 2002

..
.
, ,

,
.


.

:
)

) (
), .
,
, ,

2 .

. 2 :

2. .
% Na/K
D mg/kg 4 60 . Mg/kg
11 210 15 6.0 11,4
13 180 2 2.4 17,0
19 940 6 5.2 0,6
+25% 14 380 8 3.5 8,3
+50% 21 460 9 3.7 9,8
.+50% 19 580 3 2.0 12,5
() 30 990 1.6 0.2 0.3

1. .
2. 4
, ,
.
3. Na/K ,
.
4.
.
3 ,
Na/K
Fiche.

-93-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.
.

:
) 5
)
100 mg/kg
, ) Na/K 8 )
Fieche.

. 4

.

3.
Fieche Na/K
D mg/kg mg/kg
15-37 324-769 +/- 0,2
10-30 300-726 +/- 0,7
24-51 432-734 +/- 0,8
15-48 516-1205 - 1,9
9-23 298-1199 - 0,2
10-27 305-650 - 0,3
18-32 329-931 - 0,8
8-16 264-636 - 0.4

.



.

.

.
4 6
.
6
.
, .
,
.

, .

-94-
1o
, 29 1 2002

T
5. ,
, , .


. 1 3 3.

4. ( ).
/ Fieche
- -
58 - - - -
56 - - - -
22 - - - -
83 19(23%) 10(12%) 9(11%) 1(1%)
41 - - - -
43 - - - -
40 - - - -
25 - - - -
45 - - - -
6 6(100%) 6(100%) 6(100%) -

5. Bonrehi Gomez (1988)

6
3
7
15

6. .
%
74,1
73,5
72,3
72,2
63,5
55,1
53,9
52,6
:732

,
. 6

-95-
1o
, 29 1 2002

732
. :
, ,


,


( 25%).

T

. , ,
(, , )

.


.
.
, ,
. , ,
.
.

. ,
, .

.
23 137 7
( 17%) .
,
.



.

.

. ,
,
.

. 7

-96-
1o
, 29 1 2002

8 , 16%
.

. T (, )
. 60-65%
10%
.
.

( 9). ,
.

25% .
9 36
. 67%
15%.



.
.

.
,
,
,
, .

.


,
,
.

,
.
1979,
.
.
10
, ,
,

-97-
1o
, 29 1 2002

7. .

HMF>40 mg/kg
1990 18 8(44%) 0
1991 15 1(7%) 0
1992 15 2(13%) 0
1993 17 2(12%) 0
1994 27 4(15%) 0
1995 21 4(19%) 1(5%)
1996 24 2(8%) 0
137 23(17%) 1

8.



73 12(16%)
137 23 (17%)
36 36 (100%)

9.
%
1-5 6 (16.6%)
6-10 11 (30.5)
11-15 7 (19.4)
16-20 4 (11.1)
21-25 4 (11.1)
26-30 2 (5.5)
31-35 2 (5.5)
>36 0
36 (100%)
10.


. . g/kg
malathion 61 7 5 Thras.et al 85
" 38 8 40 Thras.et al 88
" 70 6 M. & .,89
" 24 0 <5 Thras & Flamini, 97
coumaphos 21 2 6 Thras.et al 88
fluvalinate 62 4 15 M. & .,89
" 24 1 2 Thras & Flamini, 97

4 . 1985 1988
, 1989

-98-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1997 Flamini.

. 196 21
( 10.7%). 40
g/kg (ppb).
,
.
6 21 1988
6 g/kg (ppb).

7 (M, ).
62 1989 (12 50
) 24 1997 ( 1996).
15 g/kg.
,

. ,
11.

11.

ADI ADI kg
mg/kg 20 kg .
. . . . mg/kg ADI
malathion 0.02 0.40 0,04 10
coumaphos 0.0005 0.01 0,006 1,6
fluvalinate 0.01 0.20 0,015 13,3

) (Acceptable Daily Intake)

.

( 2).
) 20 ( 3).)

20 ( 5).
( 4).
,

10, 1,6 13,3 ,
20 ,
100 .

.
..

-99-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.
.
, ,
,

. :
1. ,
,
.
2. .

,
... .
3.
.


.
4. , ,

.
5.
.
.

.
6.
.
7. ,

,

.

-100-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.



.

. 68 , ,
, ,
, .
.

.

.
Citrus(>10%)

.

.

.
.

.
, ,
, .

1.

-101-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1: 2000 2001

2000 2001


887.176 661.899
822.013 1.201.056
169.490 214.014
88.000 337.579
40.959 41.810

44.000 18.440
19.800 3.088
6.350 19.000
2.900 4.700
1.040 7850
1.600 1626
80
:
.

,
.
,
.

, , ,
, , ,
(Forest honey)
.


.

68

.
, ,
.
.
1,0
Lamiaceae
15 % 10%.

-102-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Louveaux et al (1978)
Olympus CH-2. .

1.
, ,
.
,
.

Rutaceae, Boraginaceae Lamiaceae.
Rutaceae Cistaceae
Boraginaceae Rutaceae.
Rutaceae Leguminocae.
(Thrasyvoulou &
Manikis 1995, Karabournioti 2000)
.

2.

.


(Kadriye and Aygun,2000).
Leguminocae, Compositae
Umbeliferae


Fagaceae
Compositae Fagaceae
Cistaceae.

3.
, .

.
Thymus vulgaris(Ricciardelli D Aldore 1998),
Corydothymus capitatus, Thymus serpiylum
Satureja sp
.

-103-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Lamiaceae Leguminocae
Leguminosae, Compositae Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae Myrtaceae.
Thrasyvoulou and Manikis 1995, Karabournioti
2000 Tsigouri and Passaloglou-Katrali 2000

.

.
,

.

.

DETERMINATION OF ADULTERATION WITH IMPORTED HONEYS

THROUGH POLLEN ANALYSIS

Karabournioti S.
Beekeeping Company ATTIKH, atikibee@otenet.gr

It is very difficult to detect if Greek honey has been adulterated with imported
honey by classical chemical analytical methods. However, The country of origin
can be found out by the use of melissopalynological analysis. Pollen analysis can
be used in order to determine not only the country of origin but also mixtures of
honeys from different countries. In this study we have tried to separate categories
of honey with the same botanical origin from different countries. We have
analyzed 68 samples of imported honey. Orange honey from Spain, Turkey, Italy
and Argentina, pine honey from Turkey, forest honey from Spain and Italy and
finally thyme honey from Spain, Italy and Turkey. The results of the pollen
analysis were compared with Greek samples. We tried to detect specific
combinations of pollen grains or other characteristics, which could separate the
Greek from imported honeys.
The imported honeys have different percentages of the predominant pollen as
well as of the secondary pollen grains. Imported Citrus honey shows higher
percentages of Citrus type pollen(>10%) in comparison with Greek honeys and
also has secondary pollen grain which does not appear in Greek orange honeys.
Thyme honeys from Italy and Spain appear to be from a different botanical type of
Thyme than the Greek ones while Turkish thyme honey has characteristic
combinations of secondary pollen grains. The Turkish pine honey can be separated
from Greek because of certain pollen grains while the forest honey from Italy and
Spain can be identified by their honeydew elements. In each case the pollen
analysis must be performed in combination with sensory analysis. The enforcement
of new honey directive of E.E. (2001/110EC) and its implications for Greek honey
production and trading was discussed.

-104-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Amiot MJ, Aubert S, Gonnet M, Tacchini M Les composes phenoliquesdes

miel: etude prelimiminair sur I identification et la quantification par families
Apidologie 20 1989 115-125.
Anklam Elke A review of the analytical methods to determine the geographical
and botanical origin of honey Food Chemistry 63 (4) 549-562.
Battaglini and Ricciardelli D Aldore Melissopalynological research in Italy IV
Int. Palynol. Conf. Lucknow. 3 1973 483-484
Bouseta A and Collins S (1995) Optimized Likens-Nickerson methodology for
quantification honey flavors Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 43
1995 1890-1897.
Cahit Dogan, Kardriye Sorkun Pollen analyses of honeys from Aegean,
Marmara, Mediterranean and black sea regions in Turkey Mellifera 1-1 (2001)
34-44.
Gilbert J, Shephard MJ, Wallwork MA, Harris RG Determination of the
geographical origin of honeys by multivariate of gas chromatographic data on
their free amino acid content Journal of Apicultural Research 20 (1) 1981, 125-
135.
Goodall I, Dennis JJ, Parker I, Sharman M Contribution of high performance
liquid chromatographic analysis of carbohydrates to authenticity testing honey
Journal of Chromatography A706 1995 353-359.
Feller-Demalsy MJ, Perent J, Strachan AA Microscopic analysis of honeys from
Manitoba, Canada Journal of Apicultural Research 28 (1) 1989, 41-49.
Feller-Demalsy MJ A method for determination the geographic origin of honeys:
mineral content Abeille 1 (2) (1990/1991) 11-15.
Kadriye Sorkun, Aygun Sahin The source of starch grains from Turkish pine
honey Journal of Apicultural Research 39 (1-2) (2000) 85-86
Karabournioti S Detection of flora spectrum through honey microscopic
analysis35 (2) 77-84.
Louveaux J, Maurizio A, Vorwhl G Methods of mellissopalynology Bee World
59 (4) 1987 139-151
Maurizio A Zur frage mokroskopie von Honigtau-Honog Annls Abeille 2 (2)
(1959) 145-157
Pirini A,Cinte LS, Francioso O, Lercker G Capillary gas chromatographic
determination of free amino acids in honey as a means of discrimination
between different botanical sources Journal of High Resolution
Chromatography 15 1992 165-170.
Ricciardelli D Aldore Mediterranean Melissopalynology 1998 11 pp466.
Rodriguez-Otero JL, Paseiro P, Simal J Intento de caracterization de las mieles
naturales de galicia mediante las fracciones proteicas spradas por electroforesis
Anales Bromatologia 42 1990 83-98.

-105-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Sabatier S, Amiot MJ, Tacchini M, Aubert TS. Identification of flavonoids in

sunflower honey Journal of food science 57 (3) (1992, 773-774, 777.
Thrasyvoulou and Manikis J Some physicochemical and microscopical
characteristics of Greek unifloral honeys Apidologie 26 (2) 1995 441-452.
Tomas-Bereran FA, Ferreres F, Garcia-Viguera C, Tomas-Lorete F
Flavonoids in honey of different geographical origin Zeitschrift fur
Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und forschung 196 (1) 1993 38-44.
Tsigouri A, Passaloglou-Kartali M A scientific note on the characteristics of
thyme honey from the Greek island of Kithira Apidologie 31 (2000) 457-458.
Vit P, Tomas-Bereran FA Flavonoids in Meliponinae honeys from Venezuela
related to their botanical, geographical and entomological origin to access their
puretive antiracist activity origin Zeitschrift fur Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und
forschung 206 (4) 1998 288-293.

-106-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2001/110EC

., 1 ., 2 .,
1
2
., 3 ., 3 .
1
-, ...
2

3

.. (2001/110EC)

.
(>60% , >45% )
(>0.8 mS/cm
)
.
.

..,
,
,
, 2001/110 .


.

-
.
-,
.



.
. ,
.

Chataway,
.
Schade.
(F)

-107-
1o
, 29 1 2002

White. -
.
.

4-5 .
.
- .

.

-
: .
, .

.. Apis
mellifera.
.
,
. Apis
mellifera ,
,
.
. (498/1983)
.

.
,
.
:
:
:
, , , ,
, ,

: ,

, ,
,
,
.
,
, .

.

-108-
1o
, 29 1 2002

-
.
:
.


, , , ,
, ,
, ,
.

.


. ,

.
,
.

.
2003,
(. 1),

(. 2).

1:
( , 2002)

-109-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2:
( , 2002)

,

.
:
.
, . ,
,


. ,
.
.
, ,
. ,

- -
, .
: ,

. 277 ,
, (1995)
28%
.

-110-
1o
, 29 1 2002

.

.

1:
. %
1990 18 8 44
1991 15 1 7
1992 15 2 13
1993 17 2 12
1994 27 4 15
1995 21 4 19
1996 20 4 25
1997 26 5 24
1998 10 8 80
1999 59 27 46
2000 32 13 41
277 78 28

: , -
. ,
, . -

, .

, Fiche,

.
: 2,
,
.. ,
.

..
-

. ,
, (GC) (HLPC)
HLPC. ( 3).

-111-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2:
(
)
.+.
HMF .
A>60%,
<20% <50meq/Kg <40ppm >8DN <5% <0.8
M>45%
>0.8

18.9 31.2 8,9 15,1 48,6 1,9 1,00

18.5 29,6 5,9 10,4 36,2 0,6 1,00

17.6 32.8 8,2 16,5 53,7 0,9 1,11

20,3 29,8 15,1 15,1 52,6 0,7 0,60

. 18,5 28,9 10,7 8,6 57,1 0,6 0,31

23.0 37,8 11,9 15,9 61,2 0,5 0,89

19,8 31.8 9,2 10,2 53,0 0,6 0,76

20,6 29,9 8.2 12,3 59,9 0,9 0,57

GC-HPLC

90
+

80

70

60

50 GC
40
HPLC

30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

3: GC-HPLC

..

( -
)

-112-
1o
, 29 1 2002

12
.
3,

40%, 5 50%, 4 60% 2
70%
..

3.
.


(+>60%, <0.8 mS.cm-1
40% 1
50% 5
60% 4
70% 2

HPLC


.

4. 70%
.
60% +.40% . 50% +.50%

.

.

.
.

-113-
1o
, 29 1 2002

4 -
(
)

. 2
1 / / .+.(%)
+.(%)
. 100%
1,33 59,2 1,13 51,2
100%
. 90%
. 90% +.10% 1,25 60,4 1,05 52,9
+.10%
. 80%
. 80% +.20% 1,19 61,5 0,96 54,8
+.20%
. 70%
. 70% +.30% 1,12 62,8 0,89 56,8
+.30%
. 60% ?????????
. 60% +.40% 1,05 64,3 0,77 58,2
+.40%
. 50% ?????????
. 50% +.50% 0,92 65,2 0,68 59,7
+.50%
. 40%
. 40% +.60% 0,81 66,4 0,61 61,3
+.60%
. 30%
. 30% +.70% 0,73 67,5 0,54 62,9
+.70%
. 20%
. 20% +.80% 0,62 69,1 0,43 64,8
+.80%
. 10%
. 10% +.90% 0,54 70,6 0,36 67,1
+.90%

0,43 71,9 0,28 68,6
100% 100%

.

.
. 110/2001 ..
.

.
,
-.

1221/97,
50% 50%

-114-
1o
, 29 1 2002

THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE COUNCIL DIRECTIVE (20001/110EC)

RELATING TO HONEY, AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR GREEK
HONEY PRODUCTION

Thrasyvoulou A.1, Palassopoulou M. 2, Kostarelou M. 2, Karazaphiris E. 1,

Manikis I. 3, Bartani S. 3
1
Lab. of Apiculture-Sericulture, Aristotle University of Thessalonica,
thrasia@agro.auth.gr
2
Hellenic Institute of Apiculture (N.AG.RE.F.)
3
Union of Beekeeping Associations of Greece

The enforcement of new honey directive of E.E. (2001/110EC) and its

implications for Greek honey production and trading are discussed. Beekeepers and
distributors should be made acquainted with problems that they may face with the
new composition criteria, especially with the amount of glucose and fructose in
combination with the electrical conductivity.
Is not unusual for Greek blossom honeys to contain a proportion of honeydew
honeys (pine and fir honeys) or chestnut honey. This might happen naturally when
the bees are collecting nectar, or technically when beekeepers and distributors
blend the honeys in order to slow down the speed of crystallization. This means
that the honey may not be pure by the EEC criteria, and care must be taken to label
the final product according to the EEC regulations.

2001/110/ 20 2001 ,
2002. , L 10/47-51
2000/113/ 20 2000
,
, 2000.
, L 109/29-42
74/409/ 22 1974
, 1974.
, L 221/10-14
, . (1994)
, 1995. . 3-6
Surendra Rai JOSHI, Hermann PECHHACKER, Alfons WILLAM, Werner
von der OHE (2000). Physico-chemical characteristics of Apis dorsata, Apis
cerana and Apis mellifera honey from Chitwan district, central Nepal.
Apidologie 31 pp 367-375

-115-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1, -2, 1
1
(....), 25,
, 153 10 ,
2
-, 7, ,

(. 1221/97).

.
,
,
, .
.
T , ,

, %
(HDE/P),
10g,
.

,
.

: , , ,
,

( 74/409/, 498/1983)

,
, ,
.
( 2001/110/),
1 2003.
, ,

.
,
,
.

-116-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, , ,
,
(Bogdanov and Martin, 2002).


( ) .
Louveaux (1970)
.
(
, ).
,

.
, .
,

.
,

.
. , ,
,
45% ,
.
Louveaux et al. (1978),
> 90%.
10-20%,
, 20-30%
.



. To
(Maurizio, 1975).
Louveaux et al. (1978) HDE/P*
( / ) >3.
Louveaux et al. (1978), -
,
(Bogdanov and Martin, 2002).

,
.

*
HDE/P: Honeydew Elements / Pollen

-117-
1o
, 29 1 2002

1999-2002 329 .
(
)
. < 2
.
(Serra Bonvehi and
Gomez Pajuelo, 1988), (Bogdanov et al.,
1997) (Cox and Huser, 1996)
(Louveaux et al., 1978).
K , ,

. ,

, 5 ,
100 ,
1 (IHC, 1999).
>500/, >1000/,
.
HDE/P ,
.
,
( )
.
: Anemone spp., Artemisia spp.,
Buxus spp., Cyperaceae (Carex spp.), Gramineae, Kochia spp., Quercus coccifera,
(Abies spp., Pinus spp., Picea spp.), Olea europea, Papaver spp.,
Pistacia lentiscus, Plantago spp., Populus spp., Ulmus spp., Vitis vinifera, Zea
mays (Louveaux et al., 1978 Ricciardelli D Albore and Persano Oddo, 1981
Ricciardelli D Albore, 1997 1998). Cistus spp.,
(Louveaux et al., 1978 Ricciardelli D Albore, 1998),
. Hypericum
spp. .
(Ricciardelli
D Albore and Persano Oddo, 1981 Ricciardelli D Albore, 1997),
(Ricciardelli D Albore, 1998) (Al-
Khalifa and Al-Arify, 1999).
,
(Sawyer, 1988).
, 2 :
Louveaux, Louveaux et al. (1978),



(C, 1999). Louveaux

-118-
1o
, 29 1 2002

. ,
:
= (n x F) / (f x a),
: n = , F =
mm2, f =
mm2, a = .

,
22 22 mm
.
, F .

329 , 208,
:
(Abies cephalonica Loudon) n=50
(Pinus brutia Ten & P. halepensis Miller) [
] n=26
(Gossypium hirsutum L.) n=20
(Citrus spp.) n=11
(Thymus capitatus) n=61
(Castanea sativa) n=10
(Phlomis frutinosa) n=1
(Pimpinella anisum L.) n=2
(Erica verticillata) [ ] n=4
(Eucalyptus spp.) n=6
(Helianthus annus) n=6
(Heliotropium europaeum L.) n=3
(Origanum spp.) n=1
(Brassicaceae) n=2
(Trifolium spp.) n=5

, -, --, -
,
.
( )

.

(IHC, 1999)
.
,

.

-119-
1o
, 29 1 2002

>10,

1.
.
2-7
, , , , ,
. O ,
, .
1,
HDE/P <3 .
Thrasyvoulou and Manikis (1995)
(Persano Oddo et al., 1995 Accorti et
al., 2000). O
Louveaux et al.
(1978)*. -
(Persano Oddo et al., 1995) - (Accorti et al., 2000).

, .
37 .
,
>80% , ,
. ,

, .
( . ) .
>43
.
, (Heliotropium europaeum, )
(Smilax aspera), >60%
, . Thrasyvoulou and
Manikis (1995)
(Sawyer, 1988)
.
.

1,2-16,5%.
(Ricciardelli D Albore, 1998),
.

. Ricciardelli D Albore (1998)
<10.000/10g.

,
*
O : < 20.000, I: 20.000100.000, II: 100.000-500.000, V:
500.000-1.000.000 V: > 1.000.000 /10g.

-120-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, Carex spp.
Quercus coccifera (. 7). (>80%)
, .
.

2,9 26,5%, (7,6-14,1%)
Thrasyvoulou and Manikis (1995).
Citrus
(, , ).
.
20.000-71.000/10g.
, >5% (Ricciardelli D
Albore, 1997) >10% (Persano Oddo et al., 1995 Accorti et al., 2000),
. O
<20.000/10g. (<20.000/10g)

8-25% Serra
Bonvehi and Ventura Coll (1995) 10-46% Mateo and Bosch-Reig
(1998). ,
,
(7-45%),
(1,5-19%).

1.

H

% HDE/P
10g (mS/cm)
(X1000)
ean (S.D.) * 0,82 (0,64) 105 (72) 1,44 (0,12)
MIN. MAX. 0,3 - 3,5 35 350 1,14 1,66
ean (S.D.) 1,42 (0,69) 233 (122) 1,24 (0,13)
MIN. MAX. 0,43 - 2,64 44 530 1,01 1,47
ean (S.D.) 6,7 (4,5) 70 (19) 0,63 (0,09)
MIN. MAX. 1,2 - 16,5 34,5 89 0,49 0,80
ean (S.D.) 12,6 (6,6) 33 (16) 0,23 (0,05)
MIN. MAX. 2,9 26,5 20 71 0,16 0,32
ean (S.D.) 32,4 (14) 41 (16) 0,42 (0,08)
MIN. MAX. 18,3 - 69,3 5 89 0,24 0,54
ean (S.D.) 94,6 (1,5) 608,5 (290) 1,50 (0,19)
MIN. MAX. 92,6 - 97,5 245 - 1.100 1,15 1,71
* M , , .

-121-
1o
, 29 1 2002

2
(Weber, 1982 Serra
Bonvehi and Ventura Coll, 1995 Mateo and Bosch-Reig, 1998).
,
, >80% (
) , , , , ,
.
(66%)
Hypecoum spp. (Papaveraceae),
(Serra Bonvehi and Ventura Coll, 1995). E Hypecoum
(Polunin, 1997). 61

18,3-69,3% 5.000-89.000/10g.

. -
25,1-92,3%, 44,4%
21.
()
*.
(Tsigouri and
Passaloglou-Katrali, 2000).
18-80%, 5.000-
85.000/10g.
>38 . 60%
, Hypericum spp.,
. Drimjias and Karabournioti (1995)

>35%. Thrasyvoulou and Manikis (1995)
,
<35%, .
, >15%,
<20.000/10g (Accorti et al., 2000).
(n=61) 5 <20.000/10g.

*

( outliers),
.
138.000 105.700/10g, ,
: 37,8 - 23,5% 54,4 - 30,3%, .

, .

-122-
1o
, 29 1 2002

. 100
. 100
. 100
. 100
. 100

1.
(0: )

>90%
245.000-1.100.000/10g.
>90% 100.000-
500.000/10g (Ricciardelli D Albore, 1997), 100.000-300.000/10g (Ricciardelli D
Albore, 1998), >100.000/10g (Accorti et al., 2000). O : >90%
100.000-500.000/10g
(ira et al., 1998). (60%)
( 0,1-3%) Cistus spp.,
.
.

Quercus
Pistacia lentiscus*
Papaver*
Olea europea*
Kochia*
Fraxinus ornus*
Cupressus*
Cistus*
Carex* .
Ulmus
Smilax
Salix
Rosaceae
Ranunculaceae <1
Polygonum
Phlomis 1,0 - 3,0
Paliurus
Oxalis 3,1 - 15
nosma
Myosotis
Leguminosae 15,1 - 45
Laurus nobilis
Lamiaceae > 45
Hypericum
Hedera
Gossypium
Eucalyptus
Erica
Echium
Cynoglossum
Citrus
Castanea sativa
Brassicaceae
Asteraceae
Asphodelus spp.
Arbutus
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
%

2. .
(*: )

-123-
1o
, 29 1 2002

, , , , .

Zea*
Vitis*
Quercus coccifera*
Pistacia lentiscus*
Papaver*
Olea europea*
Liliaceae (Tulipa)*
Kochia*
Cistus*
Carex*
Artemisia*
Anemone*
Vitex agnus-castus
Tilia
Smilax
Scabiosa
Rosaceae <1
Rhamnus
Paliurus
Oxalis 1,0 - 3,0
Myrtaceae
Leguminosae
Lamiaceae
3,1 - 15
Hypericum
Heliotropium 15,1 - 45
Helianthus
Hedera
Gossypium
> 45
Ericaceae
Echium
Clematis
Citrus
Chrozophora
Ceratonia
Centaurea
Castanea sativa
Capparis
Brassicaceae
Asteraceae
Asphodelus spp.
Apiaceae
Allium
Anthyllis

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

%

3. .
(*: )

-124-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Zea*
Ulmus*
Quercus
Pistacia lentiscus*
Olea europea*
Kochia*
Cistus*
Carex*
uxus*
Artemisia*
Smilax <1
Scabiosa
Salix 1,0 - 3,0
Rosaceae 3,1 - 15
Polygonum
Leguminosae 15,1 - 45
Lamiaceae
Hypericum > 45
Heliotropium
Eucalyptus
Erica
Citrus
Castanea sativa
Brassicaceae
Asteraceae
Apiaceae
Anthyllis
Gossypium
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
%

4. .
(*: )

Quercus coccifera*
Pistacia lentiscus*
Olea europea*
Cistus*
Vitex agnus-castus
Smilax aspera
Salix
Rosaceae
Ligustrum <1
Leguminosae
Lamiaceae 1,0 - 3,0
Hypericum
Heliotropium europaeum 3,1 - 15
Eucalyptus
Ericaceae 15,1 - 45
Echium
Cynoglosum > 45
Castanea sativa
Capparis
Brassicaceae
Borago
Asteraceae
Asphodelus
Apiaceae
Citrus
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
%

5. .
(*: )

-125-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Zea mays*
Ulmus*
Quercus
Pistacia
Olea europea*
Liliaceae
Kochia*
Cistus*
Vitex agnus-
Sophora
Smilax aspera
Salix
Rosaceae
Rhamnaceae <1
Ranunculace
Paliurus
Oxalis 1,0 - 3,0
nosma
Myrtaceae 3,1 - 15
Leguminosae

Hypericum 15,1 - 45
Hedera helix
Gossypium > 45
Eucalyptus
Ericaceae
Echium
Cynoglossum
Citrus
Castanea
Capparis
Brassicaceae
Borago
Asteraceae
Asphodelus
Apiaceae
Acer
Thymus
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
%

6. .
(*: , #: Mentha, Origanum, Phlomis, Prunella,
Salvia, Satureja, Teuctrium)

Kochia*
Cistus*
Carex*
Tilia
Rosaceae
Leguminosae
Lamiaceae (Phlomis) <0,1
Heliotropium 0,1-1
Gossypium hirsutum
Eucalyptus 1,1 - 3,0
Ericaceae > 45
Citrus
Brassicaceae
Asteraceae
Apiaceae
Anthyllis hermanniae
Castanea sativa
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
%

7. .
(*: )

-126-
1o
, 29 1 2002

A. , . , .
, . , . , . , . , E.
. , .
, ,
,

.

MELISSOPALYNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MAIN

TYPES OF GREEK UNIFLORAL HONEYS

Tsigouri A.1, Passaloglou-Katrali M.2, Sabatakou O.1

1
Institute of Veterinary Research of Athens, National Agricultural Research
Foundation, Neapoleos 25, Ag. Paraskevi, 153 10 Athens, Greece,
2
DVM, Private practitioner, Trion Ierarchon 7, Thisseio, Athens, Greece

The present study was carried out within the framework of the National
Programme for the Improvement of Honey Quality and Trade, based on EU
Regulation 1221/97. The objective of the study was to investigate the microscopical
characteristics of the main types of Greek unifloral honeys, so as to contribute to
their identification. The analyses performed involved organoleptic evaluation,
melissopalynological analysis (qualitative and quantitative), as well as measurement
of some physicochemical parameters of diagnostic value as electrical conductivity
and color. The analyses were carried out according to the official methodology.
Statistical analysis of the results showed the melissopalynological
characteristics of the main types of Greek unifloral honeys, that is, the percentage
of main pollen and the HDE/P ratio for nectar and honeydew honeys, respectively,
the total number of plant elements in 10g, and frequencies of all pollen grains
found in the sediment. It is expected that further study of the results obtained will
give tools useful towards the differentiation of Greek unifloral honeys according to
their geographical origin, and/or their differentiation from relative honeys produced
in other countries.

Accorti, M., R. Colombo, G. L. Marcazzan, L. Persano Oddo, M. L. Piana, M.

G. Piazza, P. Pulcini, A. G. Sabatini. 2000. Capitolo IV I principali mieli
uniflorali Italiani pp 29 65. I mieli uniflorali Italiani. Nuove schede di
caratterizzazione. Ministero delle Politiche Agricole e Forestali.
Aira, M. J., H. Horn, M. C. Seijo. 1998. Palynological analysis of honeys from
Portugal. J Apic Res 37: 247-254.
Al-Khalifa, A. S., and I. A. Al-Arify. 1999. Physicochemical characteristics and
pollen spectrum of some Saudi honeys. Food Chemistry 67: 21-25.

-127-
1o
, 29 1 2002

Bogdanov, S., and P. Martin. 2002. Honey authenticity. Mitt. Lebensm. Hyg. 93:
232-254.
Bgdanov, S., P. Martin, and C. Lullmann. 1997. Harmonized methods of the
European Honey Commission. Apidologie Extra Issue, 1-59.
Codex Alimentarius Commission, 1989. Codex Standard for sugars (honey).
Worldwide standard. FAO-WHO, CAC Vol 3, ed 1, suppl 2, Rome.
Cox, B., and B. Huser. 1996. Moisture level and color of honey. Am Bee J 253-
257.
Drimjias, N., and S. Karabournioti. 1995. Characteristics of Greek thymus
honey. Apiacta XXX: 33-39.
European Union, 2001. Council Directive 2001/110/EC of 20 December 2001
relating to honey. Off J Eur Comm No L10, 47-52.
IHC, 1999. International Honey Commission - Ring trial on honey pollen analysis.
Method of melissopalynology. Letter to the participants.
Louveaux, J. 1970. Atlas photographique d analyse pollinique des miels. Service
de la repression des fraudes et du controle de la qualite. Paris.
Louveaux, J., A. Maurizio, G. Vorwohl. 1978. Methods of melissopalynology.
Bee world 59: 139-157.
Mateo, R., and F. Bosch-Reig. 1998. Classification of Spanish unifloral honeys
by discriminant analysis of electrical conductivity, color, water content, sugars,
and pH. J Agric Food Chem 46: 393-400.
Maurizio, A., 1975. Microscopy of honey. In Honey: a comprehensive survey (ed.
E. Crane). Heinemann, London. pp. 240-257.
Persano Oddo, L., M. G. Piazza, A. G. Sabatini, M. Accorti. 1995.
Characterization of unifloral honeys. Apidologie 26: 453-465.
Polunin, O. 1997. Flowers of Greece and the Balkans. Oxford University Press.
Ricciardelli D Albore, G. 1997. Textbook of melissopalynology. Apimondia
Publishing House, Bucharest.
Ricciardelli D Albore, G. 1998. Mediterranean melissopalynology. Universita
degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia.
Ricciardelli D Albore, G., and L. Persano Oddo. 1981. Flora Apistica Italiana.
Istituto Sperimentale per la Zoologia Agraria. Ristampa a cura della
Federazione Apicoltori Italiani, Rome.
Sawyer, R. 1988. Honey Identification. Cardiff Academic Press, Cardiff.
Serra Bonvehi, J., and A. Gomez Pajuelo. 1988. Evaluation of honey quality by
organoleptical analysis. Apiacta XXIII: 103-108.
Serra Bonvehi, J., and F. Ventura Coll. 1995. Characterization of Citrus honey
(Citrus spp.) produced in Spain. J Agric Food Chem 43: 2053-2057.
Thrasyvoulou, A., and J. Manikis. 1995. Some physicochemical and microscopic
characteristics of Greek unifloral honeys. Apidologie 26: 441-452.
Tsigouri, A., and M. Passaloglou-Katrali. 2000. A scientific note on the
characteristics of thyme honey from the Greek island of Kithira. Apidologie 31:
457-458.
Weber, M. 1982. Die Identifizierung und Reprasentierung des Quercus-Pollen in
Einigen Spanischen Orangenhonigen. Apidologie 13: 369-381.

-128-