Chemical and Functional Properties of Food Saccharides

© 2004 by CRC Press LLC
detection is only if the sucrose originates from cane, because the sugar beet sucrose
has a 13 C/ 12 C ratio similar to that for sugars from honey plants. 14 There is still no
simple method to detect adulteration of honey with bee-inverted sucrose, especially
after storage. The sucrose-adulterated fresh honey contains a detectable excess of
sucrose. However, because sucrose content decreases on storage, other indicators of
honey quality are necessary (see Section 6.3.2.1). Specifically, high proline content
in honey (usually 10 orders higher) 6 appeared promising in this respect. A study
showed fresh honey samples from the U.S. to contain, on average, 48.3 mg proline/100
g of honey. 15 After a 20-year storage at 4°C, this value changed to 51.5 mg
proline/100 g of honey, with 14.8 mg proline/100 g of honey being the lowest value
ever recorded. Assays based on proline content can therefore be helpful to assess
the degree of honey adulteration with bee-inverted sucrose. 16 The erlose assay is
also helpful to assess honey integrity. 16 Erlose is detected even when the concentration
of bee-inverted sucrose is as low as a few percent. However, erlose occurs in
honey from the nectars with a high natural sucrose content.
REFERENCES
1. Rybak-Chmielewska, H., and Szcze,sna, T., Viscosity of honey, Pszczeln. Zesz. Nauk.,
43, 209, 1999.
2. Maurizio, A., Das Zuckerbild Blütenreiner Sortenhonige, Ann. Abeille, 7, 289, 1964.
3. Bosi, G., and Battaglini, M., Gas-chromatographic analysis of free and protein amino
acids in some unifloral honeys, J. Apic. Res., 17, 152, 1978.
4. Takenaka, T., An α-glucosidase from honey, Honeybee Sci., 1, 13, 1980.
5. White, J. W., Jr., Hydroxymethylfurfural content of honey as an indicator of its
adulteration with invert sugars, Bee World, 61, 29, 1980.
6. Rybak, H., and Achremowicz, B., Changes in chemical composition of natural and
adulterated with inverted by bees sucrose honeys, during storage (in Polish), Pszczeln.
Zesz. Nauk., 30, 19, 1986.
7. Simpson, J., Maxley, E., and Greenwood, S. P., Can honey from sugar-fed bees be
distinguished from natural honey by its flavour? Bee World, 55, 10, 1975.
8. White, J. W., Jr., Subers, M. H., and Schepartz, A. J., The identification of inhibine,
the antibacterial factor in honey, as hydrogen peroxide and its origin in a honey
glucose-oxidase system, Biochem. Biophys. Acta, 73, 57, 1963.
9. McLellan, A. R., Calcium, magnesium, potasium and sodium in honey and in nectar
secretion, J. Apic. Res., 14, 57, 1975.
10. Council Directive 2001/110/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to honey, Off. J. Eur.
Commun., L 10, 47, 2002.
11. Codex Alimentarius Commission, 24th Session, July 2001, adopting the draft revised
standard for honey. Alinorm 01/25, Appendix II, pp. 22-24.
12. Bogdanov, S., Honey quality, methods of analysis and international regulatory standards:
review of the work of the International Honey Commission, Mitt. Gebiete
Lebensm. Hyg., 90, 108, 1999.
13. Steeg, E., and Montag, A., Minorbestandteile des Honigs mit Aroma-Relevanz, Dtsch.
Lebensm. Rund., 84, 147, 1988.
14. White, J. W., Jr., and Doner, L.W., The 13 C/ 12 C ratio in honey, J. Apic. Res., 17, 94,
1978.