See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324735540

Quality Evaluation of Omani Honey

Article  in  Food Chemistry · April 2018

DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.04.104

CITATION READS

1 509

6 authors, including:

Mohamed Al-Farsi
Food and Water Laboratories Center (FWLC)
26 PUBLICATIONS   1,662 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Chapter in of Date (Phoenix dactylifera L.) Seeds in Human Health and Animal Feed View project

Dates Antioxidants View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Al-Farsi on 27 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Food Chemistry 262 (2018) 162–167

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Food Chemistry
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodchem

Quality evaluation of Omani honey T

⁎
Mohamed Al-Farsi , Sharifa Al-Belushi, Abeer Al-Amri, Ahlam Al-Hadhrami,
Mahfoodha Al-Rusheidi, Amani Al-Alawi
Food & Water Lab. Center, Ministry of Regional Municipalities & Water Resources, P O Box 323, P C 100, Muscat, Oman

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study was intended to evaluate the quality parameters of 58 Apis mellifera honey samples, from different
Standards regions in the Sultanate of Oman. Physicochemical analyses were carried out and examined according to the Gulf
Moisture Standardization Organization (GSO).
Acidity The results revealed that 64.4% of the samples were failing to meet the GSO standards due to acidity, hy-
Diastase
droxyl methyl furfural (HMF), diastase, sucrose, and glucose & fructose. Acidity and HMF were above the limits
Sugars
in 30% and 29% of the failed samples respectively, where diastase and total glucose & fructose were below the
HMF
limits in 25% and 5% respectively. Sucrose was above the limits in 11% of the failed samples.
The unconformity of the analyzed honey samples to GSO standards could be due to stage of harvesting,
process and storage conditions. Therefore, it’s important to reconsider the whole process of honey production in
Oman in order to improve the technology and honey quality.

1. Introduction components such as proteins, minerals, enzymes, vitamins, organic

Oman is an important honey-producing contrary in the Arabian
Peninsula, with production reached 600 metric tons in the year 2016
(Annual Report, 2017). Honey is a natural product produced by honey
bees, being part of the human diet since ancient times. The Omani
honey is produced mostly by two species of bees, Apis florea and Apis
mellifera (Sajwani, Eltayeb, Farook, & Patzelt, 2007). It is produced
from the nectar or secretions of living parts of plants, collected and
transformed by bees, deposited, dehydrated and stored in honeycombs.
Honey regards as the most important product of beekeeping both from
quantitative and economic points of view (Krell, 1996). The composi-
tion of honey can vary widely depending on the region, season, bee
variety, plant source of nectar and storage time in the honeycomb as
well as the mode of harvesting and post-harvest storage (Singhal,
Kulkarni & Rege, 1997).
Honey is mainly composed of sugars (70–85%), the majority of
these (85–95%) are simple sugars, namely, fructose and glucose. Water
is the second largest component in honey (15–20%) and its content can
be influenced by the botanical origin of the nectar, climatic conditions
and the handling during the harvesting of honey (Krell, 1996). The
water content is considered one of the most important features as it
affects several characteristics of honey, such as viscosity, specific
weight, maturity, flavor and crystallization (Silva, Santos, Silva,
Queiroz, & Lima, 2010). In addition, honey contains several minor
acids and phenolic compounds (Roshan et al., 2017). Organic acids are
the most important minor constituents of honey, among which gluconic
acid, a by-product of enzymatic digestion of glucose, predominates.
Organic acids are responsible for the acidity of honey and contribute
largely to its characteristic taste (Krell, 1996).
Proteins, enzymes and water-soluble vitamins are thought to result
from pollen contents and from honeybee secretions in honey (Krell,
1996). Draiaia, Rezki, Ben nacer, and Chefrour, (2014) reported the
protein content in Algerian honey which ranged between 0.09% and
0.81%. Honey contains a few amounts of amino acids and proline is the
most important. It represents 50–85% with respect to other amino acids
in honey (Bonvehi & Jorda, 1997). The analysis of proline in honey
should indicate the determination of ripeness and originality. The main
enzymes in honey are invertase, diastase (amylase) and glucose oxidase
(Krell, 1996). These enzymes secreted from the salivary of worker
honeybees and play an important role in converting the nectar to
honey.
Hydroxy Methyl Furfural (HMF) is the most consistent indicator of
honey freshness as it's practically absent in freshly harvested honey. It's
formed from degradation of sugars, mainly from fructose, which is
thermally more labile than sucrose and glucose (Belitz & Grosch, 1992).
However, it increases during handling, extraction, conditioning, or
storage operations and also as a consequence of the liquefaction and
pasteurization carried out to improve manageability and destroy the

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: malfarsi61@gmail.com (M. Al-Farsi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.04.104
Received 1 February 2018; Received in revised form 21 April 2018; Accepted 23 April 2018
Available online 24 April 2018
0308-8146/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Al-Farsi et al. Food Chemistry 262 (2018) 162–167

crystallization nuclei (Visquert, Vargas, & Escriche, 2014). Table 1

Antimicrobial effects of honey against disease or infection have Location, type and numbers of honey samples.
been reported and honey biological activity has been attributed not Location Type Number of samples
only to the high sugar concentration but also to different compounds
such as acids, phenolics, proteins, vitamins and mineral (Rodriguez, Dema w Thaieen/Northeastern Sumer, Sidr 2
Al Awabi/Batinah South Sumer, Sidr 3
Mendoza, Iturriga, & Castano-Tostado, 2012). Although honey is con-
Al Hawqayn/Batinah South Sumer, Sidr 2
sidered a natural and health beneficial product with a high economic Rustaq/Batinah South Sumer, Sidr, multiflora 5
value, it can have different commercial value depending on it’s bota- Sohar/Batinah North Sumer, Sidr, multiflora 4
nical and geographical origins. The monofloral honey, which arises Shinas/Batinah North Sumer, Sidr, multiflora 3
from a single botanical origin, being perceived as a high qualitative Khaboura/Batinah North Sumer, Sidr, multiflora 4
Nizwa/Interior Sidr 2
honey with distinct characteristics (Soares, Amaral, Oliveira, & Mafra,
Samail/Interior Sumer, Sidr, multiflora 7
2015). In Oman, there are two main florals for honey, the summer floral Al Hamra/Interior Sumer, Sidr 2
Acacia tortilis (Forssk) belong to the family Fabaceae, which called Izki/Interior Sumer, Sidr, multiflora 4
Sumer in Oman, and the winter Ziziphus spina-Christi (L) belong to the Ibri/Dhahirah Sumer, Sidr 5
Ibra/Northeastern Sumer, sidr, multiflora 5
family Rhamnaceae, called Sidr (Sajwani et al., 2007). However, pre-
Al-Mudhaibi/Northeastern Sidr 1
vious studies have shown that quality and biochemical properties of Bidiya/Northeastern Sumer, Sidr, 3
honey are related not only with the botanical and geographical origin Bani Khalid/Northeastern Sumer, Sidr, multiflora 3
but also with honey maturity, climatic conditions, processing and sto- Al Seeb/Muscat Sidr, 1
rage conditions (Da Silva, Gauche, Gonzaga, Costa, & Fett, 2016). Mahdah/Buraimi Sumer, Sidr 2

To preserve the safety and health effects of honey to consumers, it is
important to ensure the quality and authenticity of honey. Therefore,
certain quality criteria for honey been proposed by the International
Honey Commission includes moisture content, reducing sugars, sucrose
content, electrical conductivity, minerals, free acidity and HMF (IHC,
2009). According to the Gulf Standardization Organization (GSO),
honey products in the Gulf countries should comply with the mandatory
specification GSO 147 (GSO, 2008). Honey adulteration is an illegal
practice which incorporates sugar syrups such as sucrose, corn syrup
and molasses into the genuine honey. It's also caused by incorporation
of sugars into honey via feeding of bees as well as selling honey under a
fraudulent origin name (Cordella, Militão, Clément, Drajnudel, &
Cabrol-Bass, 2005). The honey adulteration is causing serious impact on
the local and international market opportunities of the product and
results in nutritional and health difficulties on consumers (Ayansola &
Banjo, 2011).
In the last few years, the exportation and importation of honey have
been growing in Oman, it's valued 0.61 and 6.34 million US dollars
respectively in the year 2015 (Year Book, 2016). Although several
studies worldwide were performed on physicochemical parameters and
biological compounds of honey (Sajwani et al., 2007; Karimov,
Xalilzad, Hobbi, & Alekperov, 2014; Soares, Pinto, Rodrigues, Alves, &
Oliveira, 2017), no studies evaluated the quality of Omani honey to the
GSO standard. The GSO standard for honey is a mandatory specification
and all honey either imported or exported from Oman has to comply
with this standard, which has similar specification to the international
legislation.
The main objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality
parameters of Omani honey and verifying their compliance with GSO
standard. In this work, 58 Omani honey samples from 18 different
geographical origins, produced in 2016, were evaluated regarding dif-
ferent quality parameters such as moisture, acidity, sugars, insoluble
matter, diastase and HMF.
2. Materials & methods
2.1. Honey samples
Total Samples 58
2.2. Moisture and total soluble solids (Brix)
Moisture and total soluble solids parameters (°Brix) were measured
according to the International Honey Commission (IHC), 2009.
Refractometer (Abbe 60 Refractometer, Bellingham Stanley, Kent, UK)
was used to measure directly the refractive index and °Brix at 20 °C.
2.3. Acidity and pH
The acidity and pH of samples were determined according to the
IHC (2009), 10 g sample was dissolved in 75 ml of carbon dioxide free
water in 250 ml beaker. The pH measured by pH meter (Mettler Toledo)
and the solution titrated with 0.1 N sodium hydroxide solution to pH
8.3. The acidity of honey represents the content of all free acids and
expressed in meq/kg honey.
2.4. Sugar contents
Ion Chromatography (IC) method was used to determine the sugar
contents (glucose, fructose and sucrose) of honey according to
Hostettler, Brogioli, Arpagaus, Müller-Werner, and Jensen (2016). After
dilution of sample and filtration, the sugar content was determined by
Dionex IC 3000 and electrochemical detector using Dionex Carbopac
PA20 (3× 150 mm) as a separation column. Peaks were identified on
the basis of their retention times. Quantitation was performed ac-
cording to an external standard method on peak areas.
2.5. Insoluble matter
The insoluble matter was determined according to the IHC (2009);
accurately 20 g of honey dissolved in 200 ml of water at about 80 °C and
mixed well. The honey solution was filtered through the weighed cru-
cible and washed carefully and extensively with warm water until free
from sugars. The crucible dried at 135°C for an hour, cooled in a de-
siccator and weighed.

Honey of Apis mellifera honeybee used in this study was from 18
honey producing regions in the Sultanate of Oman. The 58 samples (29
Sidr, 21 Sumer and 8 multiflora) were collected from Honey exhibition
which organized by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries in
December 2016. Table 1 shows the locations, types and numbers of
these samples. The samples were stored at room temperature in a dark
place until analyses, which took 6 months to finish.
2.6. Diastase activity
Diastase refers to any α-, β-, or γ-amylase that can break down su-
gars. It’s measured by a photometric method according to IHC (2009),
in which an insoluble blue dyed cross-linked type of starch (Phadebas,
Magle Life Sci., USA) is used as the substrate. This is hydrolyzed by the
enzyme in honey, yielding blue water-soluble fragments which de-
termined by spectrophotometer at 620 nm. The absorbance of the

163
M. Al-Farsi et al. Food Chemistry 262 (2018) 162–167

solution is directly proportional to the diastase activity of the sample. Table 3

The physicochemical parameters of Omani Sumer honey (number of analyzed
samples = 21).
2.7. HMF
Parameters Min.-Max. Average Limits of GSO Samples
values standards exceeding limits
HMF in honey was determined by HPLC method according to IHC
(2009). Five grams of honey samples were diluted up to 50 ml with Moisture % 14.9–18.3 16.3 max. 20 0
°Brix 80.1–83.5 82.0 – 0
distilled water, filtered by 0.45 µm filters and immediately injected in
pH 4.12–4.90 4.58 – 0
the HPLC (Agilent 1290 Infinity II, Santa Clara, USA) equipped with a Acidity meq/kg 38.5–126 84.9 max. 50 18
UV detector. The HPLC column was ODS-2 Hypersil (125 mmX4.6 µs, Glucose % 20.9–31.7 25.3 – 0
Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc, Grand Island, NY, USA), fitted with a Fructose % 26.7–38.3 34.9 – 0
guard cartridge. The HPLC condition was the following: mobile phase, Total (Glu. & 50.0–68.1 60.3 min. 45 0
Fru.) %
90% water and 10% acetonitrile; flow rate 1 ml/min; injection volume Sucrose % 0–2.77 0.46 max. 10 0
20 µl. The wavelength range was 220–660 nm and the chromatograms Insoluble matter 0.02–0.311 0.11 max. 0.5 0
were monitored at 285 nm. %
Diastase 1.22–27.1 8.54 min. 3 3
(Schade)
HMF (mg/kg) 4.49–280 116.1 max. 80 12
2.8. Proline content
Proline (mg/kg) 539–1168 877 – 0

The proline content of honey measured by the AOAC Official

method 979.20 (2006). Honey 2.5 g was weighted into a baker and Table 4
dissolved in about 25 ml distilled water. Then the solution was trans- The physicochemical parameters of Omani Multiflora honey (number of ana-
ferred quantitatively to 50 ml. volumetric flask, diluted to volume with lyzed samples = 8).
distilled water and was very well shaken. The sample solution (0.5 ml)
Parameters Min.–Max. Average Limits of GSO Samples
was put in each of the two tubes, 0.25 ml of formic acid (98%) and 1 ml values standards exceeding limits
of ninhydrin solution (3% in ethylene glycol monomethylether) were
added to each tube. The tubes were capped and shaken vigorously then Moisture % 14.0–17.2 15.8 max. 20 0
placed in a boiling water bath for 15 min and were transferred to a °Brix 80.8–83.6 82.2 – 0
pH 3.46–4.79 4.17 – 0
water bath at 22 °C for 5 min. 5 ml of propanol-water solution (1:1) Acidity meq/kg 21.5–54.0 35.8 max. 50 1
were added to each tube at regular intervals of time and the absorbance Glucose % 25.0–30.5 28.0 – 0
at 520 nm was determined. Fructose % 29.9–40.8 35.6 – 0
Total (Glu. & 59.3–71.3 63.6 min. 45 0
Fru.) %
Sucrose % 0–2.84 0.44 max. 10 0
2.9. Statistical analysis
Insoluble 0.01–0.251 0.10 max. 0.5 0
matter %
The statistical analyses were carried out by the use of Microsoft Diastase 0.78–5.55 2.49 min. 3 6
Excel Statistical Packages to calculate the average, percentage and (Schade)
range values. The results represent the average of triplicate laboratory HMF (mg/kg) 16.2–1062 253 max. 80 6
Proline (mg/kg) 166.8–636.7 487 – 0
analysis.

3.1. Moisture & °brix

3. Results and discussion

The determination of moisture is related to honey preservation and

The Tables 2–4 presented the quality parameters of 29 Sidr samples,
storage, as high water content can lead to a growth of yeast and molds,
21 Sumer samples and 8 multiflora samples respectively. As well as the
causing fermentation, flavour loss and low shelf life. The moisture
GSO limits for these parameters and the number of samples exceeding
content ranged between 13.7 and 18.8% for Sidr, 14.9–18.3% for
these limits.
Sumer and 14.0–17.2% for multiflora honey. Their averages were si-
milar except higher value moisture content in Sumer honey (16.3%).
Table 2
The Physicochemical parameters of Omani Sidr honey (number of analyzed All the samples evaluated were in compliance with the limits of
samples = 29). moisture content of the GSO in honey that established maximum of
20%. The average of °Brix values, which represent the total soluble
Parameters Min.–Max. Average Limits of GSO Samples
solids, were between 82.0 and 82.5 for all samples. The values of
values standards exceeding limits
moisture were in accordance with previous studies done in Azerbaijan,
Moisture % 13.7–18.8 15.7 max. 20 0 Ethiopia and Portuguese which ranged moisture content between 13.1
°Brix 79.8–84.3 82.5 – 0 and 19.3% (Karimov et al., 2014; Getu & Birhan, 2014; Soares et al.,
pH 4.71–7.51 6.83 – 0
2017). Honey moisture is the quality criterion that determines the
Acidity meq/kg 1.99–20.5 9.1 max. 50 0
Glucose % 17.0–27.5 22.7 – 0 capability of honey to remain stable and to resist spoilage by yeast
Fructose % 23.9–38.9 31.6 – 0 fermentation: the higher the moisture, the higher the probability of
Total (Glu. & 42.1–64.3 54.3 min. 45 3 fermentation and granulation during storage (IHC, 2009). However,
Fru.) % slight differences observed between samples may be due to several
Sucrose % 0.1–17.5 6.76 max. 10 7
Insoluble 0.019–0.337 0.15 max. 0.5 0
factors, such as environmental conditions, harvest period, degree of
matter % maturity reached in the hive, moisture content of original plant and
Diastase 1.46–18.4 5.57 min. 3 7 treatment of honey during extraction and storage (Singh & Bath, 1997).
(Schade)
HMF (mg/kg) 0–3.97 0.74 max. 80 0
Proline (mg/kg) 299–683 449 – 0

164
M. Al-Farsi et al.
3.2. pH & acidity
The pH ranges were 4.71–7.51 for Sidr, 4.12–4.90 for Sumer and
3.46–4.79 for multiflora honey. All of the investigated Omani honey
samples were acidic and were similar to those previously reported for
honey samples from Brazil, India and Algeria, which were between 3.49
and 4.70 (Draiaia et al., 2014; Saxena, Gautam, & Sharma, 2010;
Moniruzzaman, Ibrahim, Siti, & Siew, 2013). Although limits for pH
value is not defined in the GSO standard, the determination of this
parameter is important during extraction and storage as it influences
honey texture, stability and shelf life (Terrab, Recamales, Hernanz, &
Heredia, 2004).
The average acidity of Sidr, Sumer and multiflora honey were 9.1,
84.9 and 35.8 meq/kg respectively. According to the GSO standard,
honey acidity should not exceed 50 meq/kg, 18 samples of Sumer and 1
sample of multiflora exceeded that limit. Lower honey acidity was re-
ported by other studies in Argentina and Ethiopia ranged between 11
and 45 meq/kg (Aloisi 2010; Gebremariam & Brhane, 2014). Also, Al-
gerian study reported honey acidity between 7 and 59 meq/kg (Draiaia
et al., 2014). The acidity of honey is due to the presence of organic
acids, particularly the gluconic acid, which is a product of glucose
oxidation by glucose oxidase, and inorganic ions such as phosphate and
chloride (Nanda, Sarkara, Sharma, & Bawa, 2003. Variations observed
between honey samples may be attributed to the presence of different
acids found in different floral types (Gebreegziabher, Gebrehiwot, &
Etsay, 2013). However, the high acidity in Sumer samples can be due to
fermentation of sugars into organic acids (Moniruzzaman et al., 2013).
This acidity can be reduced if beekeepers use the modern techniques of
honey production such as dehumidifier to reduce moisture and pas-
teurization to inactivate microorganisms in honey.
3.3. Glucose & fructose
The average content of glucose was 22.7% in Sidr, 25.3% in Sumer
and 28% in multiflora samples, while the fructose was 31.6% in Sidr,
34.9% in Sumer and 35.6% in multiflora samples. Fructose was the
dominant sugar in all samples, this could be due to partial oxidation of
glucose by the enzyme glucose oxidase to gluconic acid and hydrogen
peroxide (Crane, 1990).
The average total value of glucose and fructose were 54.3% in Sidr,
60.3% in Sumer and 63.6% in multiflora honey. According to the GSO
honey standards, total glucose and fructose should be above 45%,
therefore 3 samples of Sidr were below that limit. Sajwani et al. (2007)
reported similar values for total glucose and fructose in Omani honey,
ranged between 40.2 and 78.5%. However, our results were slightly
lower than Algerian honey 72.6% (Ouchemoukh, Louaileche, &
Schweitzer, 2007) and Argentinean honey 68.1% (Cantarelli, Pellerano,
Marchevsky, & Camina, 2008).
3.4. Sucrose
The range of sucrose content was 0.1–17.5% for Sidr, 0–2.77% for
Sumer and 0–2.84% for multiflora samples. Seven Sidr samples out of
29 samples were above the 10% GSO maximum limit for sucrose. Lower
values of sucrose reported for Omani honey 12.3% (Sajwani et al.,
2007), in Argentina 4.1% (Cantarelli et al., 2008), and in Italy 1.09%
(Esti, Panfili, Marconi, & Trivisonno, 1997). The variation of sucrose
content between samples is result of the enzyme invertase action, which
breaks down the disaccharide molecule of sucrose in the nectar into
glucose and fructose during the process of ripening of honey (Crane,
1990). Although sucrose in honey has minor importance, it’s presence
can provide information about adulteration and botanical origin of the
honey (Krell, 1996). The high amount of sucrose in Sidr samples could
indicate an adulterated state of the samples due to feeding of bees with
concentrated sucrose solution in the beehives. Feeding with a high
concentration of sugar diverts the bee foragers from collecting nectar
165
Food Chemistry 262 (2018) 162–167
and causes them to collect pollen instead (Crane, 1990). Also, higher
sucrose content of honey is an indication for the direct addition of
commercial sugar syrup to honey (Gebremariam & Brhane, 2014).
3.5. Insoluble matter
The average insoluble matter of honey was 0.15% for Sidr, 0.11%
for Sumer and 0.10% for multiflora honey, which was below the
maximum limits of GSO standards 0.5%. The measurement of insoluble
matter is important to detect honey impurities which includes wax,
pollen, honey-comb and particles of debris (IHC, 2009). This variation
between samples may be due to the difference in harvesting practices
and storage condition of honey (Getu & Birhan, 2014). Similar values
reported for Ethiopian honey, their insoluble solids ranged between
0.01 and 0.46% with a mean value of 0.09% (Getu & Birhan, 2014).
3.6. Diastase
The diastase content in our samples ranged between 1.46 and 18.4
Schade units for Sidr, 1.22–27.1 Schade units for Sumer and 0.78–5.55
Schade units for multiflora samples. According to the GSO standard,
diastase in honey should be more than 3 Schade units, therefore, 7
samples of Sidr, 3 samples of Sumer and 6 samples of multiflora were
unconfirmed to the standard. Similar values for diastase reported in
Ethiopian honey which averaged 13.5 Schade units (Getu & Birhan,
2014), while higher levels were reported in Argentina 19.7 (Cantarelli
et al., 2008) and in Italy 39.1 (Esti et al., 1997). Diastase activity is a
quality factor for determining honey freshness and influenced by bo-
tanical origin, the climate of the region, storage and heating (Singh &
Bath, 1997).
3.7. HMF
The content of HMF in our samples ranged between 0 and 3.97,
4.49–280 and 16.2–1062 mg/kg in Sidr, Sumer and Multiflora respec-
tively. Twelve samples of Sumer and 6 samples of multiflora were above
the GSO limit 80 mg/kg. We verified that 62% of Sidr samples pre-
sented no detectable HMF, suggesting freshness and good practices by
beekeepers (Marchini, Moreti, & Otsuk, 2007). Lower HMF reported for
Ethiopian honey ranged 0.5–3.2 mg/kg (Getu and Birhan, 2014) and
Portuguese honey ranged 0.3–17.4 mg/kg (Soares et al., 2017). These
differences could be attributed to the variation of several factors that
affect HMF formation, such as heating, storage conditions, pH and floral
source (Fallico, Zappala, Arena, & Verzera, 2004). HMF is a decom-
position of fructose, increases with storage and prolonged heating of
honey. However these high values in Sumer and multiflora samples
could be attributed to the climatic conditions in Oman, as Sumer honey
harvested in summer with temperature could reach up to 50 °C, unlike
Sidr honey which harvested in winter. The high values of HMF also
indicated that the honey samples had been heated and/or adulterated
with processed sugar (Gebremariam & Brhane, 2014). HMF and dia-
stase content are routinely used to evaluate honey freshness, providing
information about inadequate processing and/or inappropriate storage
conditions (Soares et al., 2017). Therefore high quality honey should
present high diastase and low HMF contents.
3.8. Proline
The amino acid proline content in our samples averaged 449 mg/kg
in Sidr, 877 mg/kg in Sumer and 487 mg/kg in multiflora samples.
Certain variability in the results, could be attributed to the different
floral origin. Gerónimo & Fritz (2001) reported comparable proline
content in Argentine honey ranged 73–577 mg/kg. The proline content
is used as a criterion of honey ripeness and, in some cases, sugar
adulteration. Although no limit for proline in the GSO standard, in
Germany a honey with less than 180 mg/kg is considered as either non-
M. Al-Farsi et al. Food Chemistry 262 (2018) 162–167

Fig. 1. The total, passed and failed honey samples to the GSO standards.

Fig. 2. The non-conformity to the GSO standards between honey samples.

ripe or adulterated (IHC, 2009).
3.9. The unconformity
Fig. 1 presented the total, passed and failed numbers of honey
samples according to the GSO standards. From the 29 Sidr samples, 10
samples were failed to the GSO standards due to diastase, sucrose and
total glucose and fructose. All 21 samples of Sumer were failed due to
high acidity and high HMF and to low diastase. Whereas 6 samples out
of 8 multiflora samples were failed due to high acidity, high HMF and
low diastase. Therefore, from the total 58 honey samples investigated in
this study, only 21 samples were confirmed to the GSO standards which

166
M. Al-Farsi et al.
represent 35.6%, leaving the rest of the samples which represent 64.4%
unconfirmed. Fig. 2 shows the contribution percentage of each para-
meter to the unconformity of all honey samples. Acidity was the highest
source of unconformity to honey samples by 30%, followed by HMF by
29%, diastase by 25%, sucrose by 11% and total glucose and fructose by
5%.
The high acidity and HMF and low diastase which affected all Sumer
samples it's mainly attributed to the improper practice of producing
honey such as, harvesting time, processing techniques and storage
condition. Which lead to increase acidity by fermentation and increase
HMF and decrees diastase due to high temperature treatment and sto-
rage. The high sucrose content in Sidr samples could be due to acci-
dental adulterated of the samples by feeding of bees with sucrose so-
lution in the beehives, mostly at low forage season.
4. Conclusions
From the 58 honey samples investigated in this study, which were
produced in 18 different regions of Sultanate of Oman, 37 samples were
failed to conform to the GSO standards which represent 64.4% of the
total samples. This high failure to standards required an effective ex-
tension service to improve beekeepers knowledge about honey quality
features and adequate production and storage technologies. Also, a
better quality control of the honey market is needed to maintain con-
sumer protection. The research on Omani honey should be further de-
veloped, in order to understand the honey composition and the effects
of environment, climate, bee forage and production technology on
quantity and quality of honey.
Acknowledgements
This study funded by our Center, which is part of our responsi-
bilities. Food & Water Lab. Center, Ministry of Regional Municipalities
& Water Resources, Muscat, Oman.
References
Aloisi, P. V. (2010). Determination of quality chemical parameters of honey from Chubut
(Argentinean patagonia). Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 70(4), 640–645.
Annual Report (2017). Ministry of agriculture and fisheries annual report 2016. Muscat,
Oman.
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC), (2006). Official method 979.20-2006,
Proline in honey. www.aoac.org/ (Accessed April 1, 2017).
Ayansola, A., & Banjo, A. D. (2011). Physico-chemical evaluation of the authenticity of
honey marketed in Southwestern Nigeria. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific
Research, 1(12), 3339–3344.
Belitz, H. D., & Grosch, W. (1992). Lehrbuch lebensmittelchemie (4th ed.). Berlin: Springer-
Verlag796–804.
Bonvehi, S., & Jorda, E. (1997). Nutrient composition and microbiological quality of
honeybee collected pollen. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 45, 725–732.
Cantarelli, M. A., Pellerano, R. G., Marchevsky, E. J., & Camina, J. M. (2008). Quality of
honey from Argentina: Study of chemical composition and trace elements. Journal of
the Argentine Chemical Society, 96(1–2), 33–41.
Cordella, C., Militão, J. S., Clément, M., Drajnudel, P., & Cabrol-Bass, D. (2005). Detection
and quantification of honey adulteration via direct incorporation of sugar syrups or
bee-feeding: Preliminary study using high-performance anion exchange chromato-
graphy with pulsed amperometric detection (HPAEC-PAD) and chemometrics.
Analytica Chimica Acta, 531, 239–248.
Crane, E. (1990). Bees and beekeeping science, practice and world resources. London:
Heinemann Newness.
Da Silva, P. M., Gauche, C., Gonzaga, L. V., Costa, A. C., & Fett, R. (2016). Honey
Chemical composition, stability and authenticity. Food Chemistry, 196, 309–323.
167
View publication stats
Food Chemistry 262 (2018) 162–167
Draiaia, R., Rezki, Abd Rezak, Ben nacer, Khalil, & Chefrour, E. (2014). Quality of some
Algerian honey: Study of botanical and some physicochemical parameters. Middle-
East Journal of Scientific Research, 22(9), 1363–1371.
Esti, M., Panfili, G., Marconi, E., & Trivisonno, M. C. (1997). Valorization of the honeys
from the Molise region through physico-chemical, organoleptic and nutritional as-
sessment. Food Chemistry, 58, 125–128.
Fallico, B., Zappala, M., Arena, E., & Verzera, A. (2004). Effects of conditioning on HMF
content in unifloral honeys. Food Chemistry, 85, 305–313.
Gebreegziabher, G., Gebrehiwot, T., & Etsay, K. (2013). Physiochemical characteristics of
honey obtained from traditional and modern hive production systems in Tigray re-
gion, northern Ethiopia. Momona Ethiopian Journal of Science (MEJS), 1, 115–128.
Gebremariam, T., & Brhane, G. (2014). Determination of quality and adulteration effects
of honey from Adigrat and its surrounding areas. International Journal of Emerging
Research in Management and Technology, 2(10), 71–76.
Gerónimo, J., & Fritz, R. (2001). Proline in Argentine Honeys. Proceedings of the 37th
International Apicultural Congress, 28 October-1 November 2001, Durban, South
Africa.
Getu, A., & Birhan, M. (2014). Chemical analysis of honey and major honey production
challenges in and around Gondar, Ethiopia. Academic Journal of Nutrition, 3(1),
06–14.
Gulf Cooperation Council Standardization Organization (GSO) (2008). Honey.
Standardization Organization for GCC. UAE S GSO147.
Hostettler, K., Brogioli, R., Arpagaus, S., Müller-Werner, B., & Jensen, D. (2016). Sugars in
honey using HPAE-PAD. Switzerland: Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
International Honey Commission (IHC), 2009. Harmonised Methods of the International
Honey Commission. http://www.bee-hexagon.net/en/network.htm.
Karimov, E., Xalilzad, Z., Hobbi, P., & Alekperov, J. (2014). Quality evaluation of honey
from the different region of Azerbaijan. Journal of Food Chemistry and Nutrition,
02(02), 71–79.
Krell, R. (1996). Value-added products from beekeeping. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin
No. 124. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Marchini, L. C., Moreti, A. C., & Otsuk, I. P. (2007). Physicochemical composition of Apis
mellifera honey samples from São Paulo State, Brasil. Química Nova, 30, 1653–1657.
Moniruzzaman, M., Ibrahim, K. Md., Siti, A. S., & Siew, H. G. (2013). Physicochemical
and antioxidant properties of Malaysian honeys produced by Apis cerana, Apis dorsata
and Apis mellifera. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 13(43), 1–12.
Nanda, V., Sarkara, B. C., Sharma, H. K., & Bawa, A. S. (2003). Physico-chemical prop-
erties and estimation of mineral content in honey produced from different plants in
Northern India. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 16, 613–619.
Ouchemoukh, S., Louaileche, H., & Schweitzer, P. (2007). Physicochemical characteristics
and pollen spectrum of some Algerian honeys. Food Control, 18, 52–58.
Rodriguez, B., Mendoza, S., Iturriga, M., & Castano-Tostado, E. (2012). Quality para-
meters and antioxidant and antibacterial properties of some Mexican Honeys. Journal
of Food Science, 71(1), 121–127.
Roshan, A., Gad, H. A., El-Ahmady, S. H., Abou-Shoer, M. I., Khanbash, M. S., & Al-Azizi,
M. M. (2017). Characterization and discrimination of the floral origin of Sidr honey
by physicochemical data combined with multivariate analysis. Food Analytical
Methods, 10, 137–146.
Sajwani, A., Eltayeb, E., Farook, S., & Patzelt, A. (2007). Sugar and protein profiles of
Omani honey from Muscat and Batinah regions of Oman. International Journal of Food
Properties, 10, 675–690.
Saxena, S., Gautam, S., & Sharma, A. (2010). Physical, biochemical and antioxidant
properties of some Indian honeys. Food Chemistry, 118, 391–397.
Silva, K. F. N. L., Santos, D. C., Silva, C. T. S., Queiroz, A. J. M., & Lima, A. O. N. (2010).
Honey rheological behavior of Apis mellifera in the city of Tabuleiro do Norte-CE.
Journal of Agroindustrial Technology, 4(1), 52–57.
Singh, N., & Bath, P. K. (1997). Quality evaluation of different types of Indian honey. Food
Chemistry, 58(1–2), 129–133.
Singhal, R. S., Kulkarni, P. R., & Rege, D. V. (1997). Honey: Quality criteria. In R. S.
Singhal, P. R. Kulkarni, & D. V. Rege (Eds.). Handbook of indices of food quality and
authenticity (pp. 358–385). Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing.
Soares, S., Amaral, J. S., Oliveira, M. B., & Mafra, I. (2015). Improving DNA isolation from
honey for the botanical origin identification. Food Control, 48, 130–136.
Soares, S., Pinto, D., Rodrigues, F., Alves, R. C., & Oliveira, B. (2017). Portuguese honeys
from different geographical and botanical origins: A 4-Year stability study regarding
quality parameters and antioxidant activity. Molecules, 2017(22), 1338–1339.
Terrab, A., Recamales, A. F., Hernanz, D., & Heredia, F. J. (2004). Characterisation of
Spanish thyme honeys by their physicochemical characteristics and mineral contents.
Food Chemistry, 88, 537–542.
Visquert, M., Vargas, M., & Escriche, I. (2014). Effect of postharvest storage conditions on
the colour and freshness parameters of raw honey. International Journal of Food
Science & Technology, 49, 181–187.
Year Book (2016). Arab agricultural statistics year book. Khartoum, Sudan: AOAD Vol. 36.