期刊名称：Potravinarstvo : Scientific Journal for Food Industry
印刷版ISSN：1338-0230
电子版ISSN：1337-0960
出版年度：2018
卷号：12
期号：1
页码：364-371
DOI：10.5219/909
语种：English
出版社：Association HACCP Consulting
摘要：Honey is a valuable food for its beneficial nutritional and dietetic effects. The quality of honey fluctuates considerably according to various criteria, the adulteration of honey with cheaper substitutes is not negligible. The quality of honey in the market chain with honey taken from beekeepers was compared in this study. A total of 10 samples from each group were tested for basic qualitative markers and compared with legislative criteria. The samples were analysed for fructose and glucose content, water content, titratable acidity and two tests for illegal sugar additions. The results revealed the addition of 25% of the technical syrup in one sample of honey from the market chain, one sample had the sum of fructose and glucose 56,3%, it is below the required limit 60% (differed by 6,3%). In other parameters the samples complied with the valid legislation. All tested parameters in honey from beekeepers met the criteria of the legislation, only 1 sample of blossom honey had the sum of fructose and glucose just below the required limit. The sum of fructose and glucose in this sample was 58.3 %, it differed by 2.9% from the required content of 60%. Sensory analysis was used to assess four samples of honey from beekeepers collected by different techniques. Results have not shown significant difference in sensory properties between manually pressed honey and honey obtained after whirling. The responses characterizing the favourable sensory properties of the examined honey samples were prevailing. The difference between the perception of honey after whirling and honey harvested by press manually was not demonstrated in sensory properties.
其他摘要：Honey is a valuable food for its beneficial nutritional and dietetic effects. The quality of honey fluctuates considerably according to various criteria, the adulteration of honey with cheaper substitutes is not negligible. The quality of honey in the market chain with honey taken from beekeepers was compared in this study. A total of 10 samples from each group were tested for basic qualitative markers and compared with legislative criteria. The samples were analysed for fructose and glucose content, water content, titratable acidity and two tests for illegal sugar additions. The results revealed the addition of 25% of the technical syrup in one sample of honey from the market chain, one sample had the sum of fructose and glucose 56,3%, it is below the required limit 60% (differed by 6,3%). In other parameters the samples complied with the valid legislation. All tested parameters in honey from beekeepers met the criteria of the legislation, only 1 sample of blossom honey had the sum of fructose and glucose just below the required limit. The sum of fructose and glucose in this sample was 58.3 %, it differed by 2.9% from the required content of 60%. Sensory analysis was used to assess four samples of honey from beekeepers collected by different techniques. Results have not shown significant difference in sensory properties between manually pressed honey and honey obtained after whirling. The responses characterizing the favourable sensory properties of the examined honey samples were prevailing. The difference between the perception of honey after whirling and honey harvested by press manually was not demonstrated in sensory properties.
