1 Mestranda em Agronomia, Instituto de Ciências Agrárias e Ambientais (ICAA), Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (UFMT), Sinop, MT, Brasil. E-mail: [email protected].
2 Professora do Instituto de Ciências Naturais Humanas e Sociais 4 Acadêmica do Curso de Agronomia, ICAA, UFMT, Sinop, MT, Brasil. 5 Professores do ICAA, UFMT, Sinop, MT, Brasil.
Endereço para correspondência: Carmen WOBETO, UFMT. Av. Alexandre Ferronato, 1200, Setor Industrial, 78.557-267, Sinop, MT, Brasil. E-mail:
[email protected]. Fone/Fax: (66) 3531-1663.
Influence of processing in the physicochemical quality of
Apis mellifera honey from Mato Grosso State, Brazil
Abstract
Objective: In this study, the quality of the Apis
mellifera honey produced by 12 beekeepers from
four associations in the north of Mato Grosso state was investigated during processing. Materials and Methods: The samples were collected at three different stages of processing: a) in the honeycomb at the honey house reception (S1), b) after centrifugation (S2). c) after packaging (S3). The levels of free acidity, moisture, ash, insoluble solids, diastase activity, hydroxymethylfurfural, reducing sugars, and apparent sucrose were measured. Results: It was observed that all the samples analyzed were within the standards required for marketing with regard to levels of moisture, insoluble solids, hydroxymethylfurfural, diastase activity, and total reducing sugars. Whereas for free acidity (40.81−193.09 g/100 g-1), ash (0.18−2.38
g/100 g-1), and sucrose (3.2−7.2 g/100 g-1), 33%, 17%,
and 17% of the samples, respectively, were not within the approved limits. Conclusion: In this study, ash contamination in the analyzed honey occurred during the decantation and packaging stages, whereas high levels of acidity and sucrose were elevated in the first extraction stage, and this occurred due to inappropriate hive management or during honey harvest or transportation.
Keywords: Processing stages, Honey house, Apiary.
Resumo
Objetivo: Neste estudo foi investigada ao longo do processamento a qualidade dos méis de Apis mellifera do norte do estado de Mato Grosso, produzidos por doze apicultores, distribuídos em quatro associações. Materiais e Métodos: As coletas foram realizadas em três etapas do processamento: a) no favo, na entrada da casa de mel (E1); b) após a centrifugação (E2) e c) após o envase do produto (E3). Foram mensurados os teores de acidez livre, umidade, cinzas, sólidos insolúveis, índice de diastase, hidroximetilfurfural, açúcares redutores e sacarose aparente. Resultados: Observou-se que para os teores de umidade, sólidos insolúveis, hidroximetilfurfural, índice de diastase e açúcares redutores totais todos os méis analisados encontraram-se dentro dos padrões exigidos. Enquanto que, para acidez livre (40,81 – 193,09 g.100g-1), cinzas (0,18 – 2,38
g.100g-1), e sacarose (3,2 – 7,2 g.100g-1), respectivamente
33%, 17% e 17% dos méis foram reprovados. Conclusão: Nos méis investigados a contaminação por cinzas ocorreu nos estágios de decantação ou envase do produto, enquanto que, os níveis de acidez e sacarose foram elevados desde o primeiro estágio da extração demonstrando inadequações no manejo das colmeias, na colheita do mel ou em seu transporte.
Palavras-chave: Estágios de processamento. Casa do mel. Apiário.
Karina Renostro DUCATTI 1
Carmen WOBETO 2*
Juliana Aparecida da SILVA 3
Claudineli Cássia Bueno da ROSA 4
Márcio Roggia ZANUZO 4
Angelo POLIZEL NETO 4
Qualidade físico-química de méis de Apis mellifera
Introduction
Apicultural practice is based on a tripod of sustainability encompassing ecological, social, and economic aspects, being one of the few agricultural activities to feature these characteristics (1).
Apiculture is a recently introduced activity in the state of Mato Grosso, Brazil, and it has great potential for growth due to the state’s three biomes (Pantanal (wetland), Cerrado (savanna), and Amazon (rainforest)) with flower availability and diversity, together with the capacity to increase honey production without sparing product quality (2).
The manufacture of a contaminant-free product is the main focus of world apiculture, requiring great attention to detail during all stages, from collection to extraction. However, there are many opportunities for contamination to occur during this process, and the stages of manufacturing may, for example, involve inadequate processing and handling as well as inappropriate storage and packaging. In the pursuit of high quality honey, the main objective is to ensure the manufacture of a safe product with all of its original features preserved (3).
The quality standard of honey is described by levels of physicochemical parameters in Normative Instruction 11 of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (MAPA) (4). These parameters are classified into the categories: purity markers (ash, water-insoluble solids), maturity (moisture, reducing sugars, and apparent sucrose), and deterioration (acidity, hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), and diastase activity). Measuring these parameters during honey processing would be useful for the detection of inappropriate apiculture practices, thus contributing to the consolidation of the recently established practice of apiculture in the north of Mato Grosso state.
Researchers have previously investigated the quality of honey commercially available in several Brazilian regions and in other countries (3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 e 11) and have even analyzed the quality of organic honey (12) and honey from different floral origins (11, 13 e 14). Additionally, researchers have studied the chemical changes that occur during product storage (15). However, there are no reports on the investigation of product quality throughout the stages of processing, i.e. from harvesting in the apiary up to packaging for marketing.
Hence, the objective of this study was to investigate the quality of the honey produced in the northern region of Mato Grosso state in different processing stages in order to verify any possible contamination of the product and to elucidate in which processing stages this contamination occurred.
Materials and Methods
Sample collection
Honey samples from four beekeeper associations from northern Mato Grosso were collected. For the purpose of this paper, these associations are identified as
A, B, C. and D, encompassing the cities of Sorriso, Feliz Natal, and Vera; Ipiranga do Norte and Porto dos Gauchos; Nova Ubiratã; and Sinop, Santa Carmen, and Cláudia, respectively. From each of these associations, honey samples from three different, randomly chosen producers (P1, P2, and P3) were collected.
Five-hundred grams of honey were collected from each beekeeper at three different stages of honey extraction and processing, named S1, S2, and S3. As described in the flowchart shown in Figure 1, in stage 1 (S1), the honey was collected upon receipt at the honey house, in S2 it was collected after uncapping and centrifugation, and in S3 after packaging for marketing.
Figure 1. Flowchart showing the stages of honey processing and the points at which honey samples were collected: S1, at reception; S2, after uncapping and spinning; S3, after packaging.
The collected honey was placed into sterilized glass jars and stored at room temperature until analysis. Physicochemical tests were performed at the Laboratory of Food Technology of the Federal University of Mato Grosso, Campus Sinop, between June and August 2011.
Physicochemical analysis
The samples were analyzed according to the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (AOAC) methodology (16) for moisture, free acidity, and HMF, and the levels of water-insoluble solids, ash, reducing sugars, and apparent sucrose were determined according to the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) guidelines (17).
Statistical analysis
The experimental design was completely randomized in a factorial scheme of 3 × 3, (3 beekeepers × 3 stages of extraction), with three replications, considering the four associations (A, B, C, D) as experimental units. The data were subjected to analysis of variance and the results were
compared using the Tukey’s test (the level of significance was set as p < 0.05). The honey samples obtained from beekeepers from the same association were statistically compared, as were the samples produced at different stages of extraction from the same beekeepers. Furthermore, the levels of the physicochemical parameters were compared to the limits set by the Normative Instruction 11 of MAPA (4).
Results
Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 show the average levels of the physicochemical parameters measured in the honey samples from northern Mato Grosso producers at three different stages of honey extraction and processing. Regarding the free acidity and ash levels, 33.3% and 16.7%, respectively, of the analyzed honey samples were not within the limits established by Brazilian legislation (4). As for the levels of insoluble solids, 41.7% of the honey samples showed levels above those permitted, but this was only seen in the first collection stage (S1). As for the levels of moisture, HMF, diastase activity, and total reducing sugars, honey samples for all beekeepers analyzed were in accordance with the legislation.
The concentration of free acidity in the analyzed honey samples ranged from 35.30 to 204.33 mEq/kg-1
(Table 1). While in at least one of the stages of extraction, honey samples from CP2 (association C, producer 2), CP3, and beekeepers from associations A and D displayed average free acidity concentrations higher than the maximum levels allowed by Brazilian legislation, i.e. above 50 mEq/kg-1 (4).
Regarding the moisture parameter, the honey samples from all beekeepers were in compliance with the Brazilian legislation, with levels ranging from 16.47 to 19.87 g/100 g-1 (Table 1).
As shown in Table 2, regarding the ash in the honey, these levels ranged from 0.09 to 4.62 g/100 g-1. The AP2
and BP3 honey samples showed an increase in these levels from S1 to S3 to such an extent that they exceeded the maximum acceptable levels even for honeydew honey, i.e. 1.2 g/100 g-1 (4). These results for the ash levels showed
contamination in the filtration, decanting, or bottling processes, possibly due to failures of the facilities, handler, or equipment hygiene (7, 18).
For the levels of water-insoluble solids, these ranged from 0.01 to 0.56 g/100 g-1 (Table 2) and after that
the packaging (S3) all samples analyzed met this criterion of quality control (4).
As shown in Table 3, the levels of HMF in the samples were within the limits accepted by the legislation, ranging from 0.15 to 26.03 mg/kg-1. HMF is the result of
the breakdown of monosaccharides (glucose and fructose) in the presence of an acid, and the younger the honey the smaller the amount of HMF. When found at higher levels than those determined to be acceptable by the legislation, the honey may have undergone overheating, deterioration,
or prolonged storage (19). Therefore, the results found for the analyzed samples indicate that this honey was not subjected to overheating or tampering. Furthermore, the honey was freshly harvested, which contributed to the low levels found in the samples.
Regarding the diastase activity levels, for all honey samples analyzed these levels were in accordance with the legislation, with averages ranging from 10.02 to 32.90 on the Göthe scale (Table 3). This ratio is important in order to demonstrate the degree of freshness of the honey, since it refers to the enzyme responsible for the hydrolysis of starch. The ratio becomes smaller the older the honey is and also indicates whether the honey has been through overheating, due to the enzyme’s heat sensitivity (15).
As shown in Table 4, the levels of total reducing sugars in all of the honey samples analyzed were in accordance with those recommended by the Brazilian legislation, i.e. a minimum of 65 g/100 g-1 (4).
Discussion
The quality of the honey produced in northern Mato Grosso was investigated at different stages of processing, i.e, at reception at the honey house (S1), after uncapping and centrifugation (S2), and after packaging for marketing (S3), to identify possible failures at each stage of the production process in order to enhance the consolidation of regional beekeeping practices.
By comparing the levels of acidity in the same sample at stages S1, S2, and S3, it was verified that in samples from AP2 and DP2, at S1 these levels were above those permitted by legislation, while levels only exceeded those permitted at S3 in the honey from DP1 (Table 1). These observations indicate that honey contamination already occurred in the apiaries of AP2 and DP2. It is possible that honey samples with moisture levels above 18% suffered fermentation in the comb, raising the levels of free acidity (18, 20). For DP1, however, the contamination occurred after centrifugation of the product or after packaging, possibly due to failures in the handling and sanitization of the equipment and installations. This way it has also been observed the correlation with moisture levels, once these have also significantly increased up to S3.
The honey samples from AP3, CP3, and DP3 also showed acidity levels above 50 mEq/kg-1 in the first stage
of processing; however, significant reductions in these levels were observed from S1 to S3. This occurred because the mixture of honey samples from different beehives in the decanter may have influenced the reduction of the acidity in the product since variability in levels of this parameter, among other factors, occurs depending on the different flowers used as a source of nectar (9, 13).
It appears that the moisture levels found in this study corroborate the findings of the existing literature; Mendonça
et al. (8) and Silva (21) also analyzed floral honey and
found moisture levels of 15.8 to 19.5 g/100 g-1 and of 17.2
Table 1. Average levels (±standard deviation) of acidity and moisture of the honey from northern Mato Grosso regarding three stages of extraction: the reception at the honey house (S1), after spinning (S2) and after packaging (S3).
Honey Sample
Free acidity (meq.kg-1) Moisture (g.100g-1)
Stages of extraction Stages of extraction
S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3
AP11 49.53 ±1.1aA 52.44 ±1.4aA 46.60±0.3aB 16.47±0.5aA 16.87±0.1aA 17.33±0.1aA
AP2 183.88 ±5.5aC 191.08±15.7bB 204.33±0,4cC 19.07±0.4aB 19.20±0.2aB 19.80±0.1aB
AP3 62.10± 4.4 bB 61.42±2.2bA 28.87±1.0aA 19.87±0.7bC 19.87±0.3 bB 17.60±0,2aA
BP1 54.78±6.1aA 49.50±3.0aA 49.50±2.8aB 18.13±0.1aB 18.13±0.1aB 18.13±0.1aA
BP2 49.82±1.8cA 41.80±1,7bA 35.30±2.3aA 19.67±1.0aC 18.73±0.2aB 19.00±0.0aB
BP3 47.52±4.0bA 47.09±5,2bA 35.26±1,0aA 16.73±0.6aA 16.27±0.1aA 17.73±0.1bA
CP1 42.27±4.5aA 43.50±3,5aA 39.20±2.8aA 17.33±0.5aA 18.13±0.1aB 17.33±0.5aA
CP2 46.18±2.5aAB 49.44±2.1aA 51.40±1.8aA 18.53±0.5bB 16.87±0.2aA 17.20±0,2aA
CP3 50.73±3.0bB 47.15±1.5abA 42.72±1.1aA 16.87±0.9aA 17.73±0.1abAB 18.00± 0,1bA
DP1 44.46±3.9aA 43.90±2.2aA 58.59±5.3bAB 17.87±0.8aA 18.73±0.1abAB 19.13±1.5bA
DP2 59.76±0.5aB 58.50±6. aB 65.57±8.6aB 17.47±0.2aA 17.60±0.0abA 18.87±0.2bA
DP3 62.04±2.6aB 60.14±3.1aB 54.01±1.7aA 19.53±0.5bB 19.10±0.2bB 17.93±0.1aA
Norm law2 maximum 50 meq.kg-1 maximum 20 g.100g-1
1Origin of the sample, e.g. AP1: sample from beekeepers association A, producer 1.
For each parameter (lower case letter- rows) and beekeepers association (upper case letter- columns), rows/columns with different letters are significantly different from each other (Tukey’s test, p ≤ 0.05).
2Standard defined by Brazilian law.
Table 2. Average levels (± standard deviation) of ash and insoluble solids in honey from northern Mato Grosso at three stages of extraction and processing: upon receipt at the honey house (S1), after spinning (S2), and after packaging (S3).
Honey Sample
Ash (g.100g-1) Insoluble solids (g.100g-1)
Stages of extraction Stages of extraction
S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3
AP11 0.63±0.2aAB2 0.57±0.1aAB 0.43±0.1 aA 0.28±0,09bB 0.07±0.02aA 0.03±0.01aA
AP2 1.00±0.05aB 1.06±0.03aB 4.62±0.9bB 0.11±0.04bA 0.02±0.00aA 0.01±0.01aA
AP3 0.36±0.03aA 0.32±0.02aA 0.19±0.02aA 0.15±0.06bA 0.04±0.01aA 0.04±0.02aA
BP1 0.60±0.02aB 0.33±0.02aB 0.33±0.02aA 0.18±0.02aC 0.07±0.01aB 0.07±0.01aB
BP2 0.28±0.07aB 0.18±0.02aA 0.36±0.1aA 0.06±0.01aA 0.03±0.01aA 0.02±0.01aA
BP3 0.27±0.05aA 0.41±0.02aB 1.67±0.03bB 0.11±0.04aB 0.05±0.00aAB 0.03±0.01aA
CP1 0.28±0.04aB 0.22±0.05aA 0.09±0.02aA 0.08±0.01aB 0.06±0.01aA 0.02±0.01aA
CP2 0.29±0.02aB 0.24±0.03aA 0.31±0.01aC 0.06±0.00aA 0.05±0.01aA 0.04±0.01aAB
CP3 0.15±0.01aA 0.19±0.03aA 0.21±0.02aB 0.09±0.02aB 0.05±0.01aA 0.06±0.01aB
DP1 0.39±0.01cB 0.18±0.02aA 0.23±0.01bA 0.21±0.03bB 0.05±0.01aA 0.02±0.00aA
DP2 0.18±0.03aA 0.18±0.02aA 0.21±0.02aA 0.39±0.00bC 0.05±0.01aA 0.02±0.00aA
DP3 0.15±0.03aA 0.20±0.01bA 0.20±0.03bA 010±0,05bA 0.08±0,02bB 0.03±0.02aA
Norm law2 Max. 0.6 for FH and 1.2 for HM Maximum 0.1 g.100g-1
1Origin of the sample, e.g. AP1: sample from beekeepers association A (A), producer 1 (P1).
2For each parameter (lower case letter- rows) and beekeepers association (upper case letter- columns), rows/columns with different letters are significantly different from each other (Tukey’s test, p ≤ 0.05).
3Standard defined by Brazilian law. FH, floral honey; H, honeydew
municipality of Pelotas/RS, higher moisture levels were found by Richer et al. (9), with averages ranging from 15.4 to 20.9 g/100 g-1.
In Table 2, it is shown that the ash levels in the honey from AP2 significantly increased at S3, reaching levels above those permitted for marketing. This observation indicates the occurrence of contamination in the honey house after centrifugation, possibly due to failures in hygiene or the need to use stainless-steel utensils, i.e. inert material.
However, for the other beekeepers (P1 and P3) in this same association, this problem was not observed, and the levels of ash were significantly lower than in AP2. These differences occurred because in the investigated associations (except association B), the honey houses were not used for collection, and each beekeeper improvised isolated rooms in their home to use for honey extraction. In the specific case of P2, the physical space used was not unique to honey extraction and the equipment was
Table 3. Average levels (± standard deviation) of hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) and diastase activity in honey from northern Mato Grosso at three different stages of extraction and processing: receipt at the honey house (S1), after spinning (S2), and after packaging (S3).
Honey Sample
HMF2(mg.kg-1) Diastase activity (Göthe)
Stages of extraction Stages of extraction
S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3
AP11 1.70±0.58aB3 2.47±1.07abA 3.49±0.22bA 32.48±1.82bC 32.90±3.55bB 25.66±5.00aA
AP2 7.76±0.62bC 3.90±0.55aB 8.04±0.94bB 18.87±0.88aA 24.59±6.3abA 27.87±4.00bB
AP3 0.15±0.26aA ND4 13.92±0.88bC 23.73±1.74aB 24.92±0.11aA 25.38±1.84aA
BP1 5.90±0.71aB 5.60±0.26aB 5.75±0.32aA 10.02±3.53aA 14.95±1.30aA 12.48±1.44aA
BP2 4.14±0.15aA 7.04±0.33bC 19.44±0.36cC 19.11±2.51aB 23.37±2.86aB 17.48±0.65aB
BP3 3.19±0.47aA 3.43±0.72aA 11.83±0.87bB 23.19±7.11bB 27.10±3.45bB 11.67±1.77aA
CP1 1.83±0.81aA 2.39±0.20aB 8.21±1.16bB 20.74±3.48aA 21.97±0.49aA 19.17±1.81aA
CP2 ND 0.44±0.15aA 1.04±0.26aA 19.67±2.45aA 22.35±0.6aAB 24.94±5.09aA
CP3 1.38±0.98aA 2.33±0.68aB 1.58±0.23aA 31.09±0.07aB 30.16±8.33aB 23.96±3.95aA
DP1 1.16±0.04aA 2.74±0.27aA 7.29±0.78bA 10.81±0.36aA 10.99±0.26aA 13.76±0.28aA
DP2 3.44±0.63aA 6.63±1.25bB 9.92±0.22cB 20.77±0.51aB 20.60±0.58aB 20.33±0.16aB
DP3 26.61±1.30cB 23.10±1.85bC 7.41±0.76aA 23.73±1.95aB 24.70±1.88aB 25.38±2.01aB
Norm law3 Max. 60 mg.kg-1 Minimum 8 1Origin of the sample, e.g. AP1: sample from beekeepers association A, producer 1. AP1, from Producer 1 and beekeepers Association A.
2For each parameter (lower case letter- rows) and beekeepers association (upper case letter- columns), rows/columns with different letters are significantly different from each other (Tukey’s test, p ≤ 0.05).
3Standard defined by Brazilian law.
Table 4. Average levels (± standard deviation) of total reducing sugars and apparent sucrose in honey from northern Mato Grosso at three different stages of extraction and processing: receipt at the honey house (S1), after spinning (S2), and after packaging (S3).
Honey Sample
Reducing sugars (g.100g-1) Sucrose (g.100g-1)
Stages of extraction Stages of extraction
S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3
AP11 68.33±3.5aA2 72.67±3.2aA 71.03±1.6aA 4.57±1.1aB 5.03±0.5aA 5.40±1.2aB
AP2 85.87±5.4bB 82.20±4.7bB 69.07±3.4aA 2.63±1.1aA 3.77±0.7aA 3.13±0.2aA
AP3 75.67±5.4aA 81.30±1.5aB 76.90±3.8aA 3.53±0.6abAB 4.67±1.3bA 2.37±1.1aA
BP1 85.50±2.5aB 79.77±5.0aAB 82.63±1.50aA 5.27±1.1aA 5.43±1.2aA 5.37±1.1aA
BP2 69.67±4.2aA 83.63±6.4bB 78.03±3.0abA 6.03±1.8aA 7.67±1.5aB 7.53±2.0aB
BP3 80.13±4.8aB 71.70±1.2aA 79.83±2,7aA 6.40±1.0aA 6.67±1.6aAB 6.30±1.1aAB
CP1 81.37±3.2aB 78.23±5.2aB 78.47±6.6aA 4.77±0.4aA 4.83±1,2aA 3.67±1.0aA
CP2 74.67±9.0aAB 76.63±8.9aAB 72.87±4.6aA 4.60±1.4aA 5.00±0.8aA 5.27±1.2aB
CP3 71.90±8.9aA 69.97±2.2aA 75.17±0.7aA 5.10±1.1aB 4.60±0.3aA 4.43±1.1aB
DP1 68.60±2.2aA 73.50±4.6aA 73.40±4.4aAB 4.07±0.5aA 3.37±1.1aA 4.27±1.1aA
DP2 75.57±5.6aA 84.83±2.1bB 68.67±6.3aA 4.00±0.9aA 6.17±0.4bB 5.23±0.9abA
DP3 76.90±3.3bA 66.67±1,9aA 80.73±1.5bB 5.63±0.9aA 5.40±0.3aB 5.13±0.3aA
Norm law2 Min. 65 for FH and 60 for HM Max. 6 for FH and 15 for HM
1Origin of the sample, e.g. AP1: sample from beekeepers association A, producer 1.
2For each parameter (lower case letter- rows) and beekeepers association (upper case letter- columns), rows/columns with different letters are significantly different from each other (Tukey’s test p≤ 0.05).
3Standard defined by Brazilian law. FH, floral honey; HM, honeydew.
improvised, for example, a wood table was used for uncapping the honey frames. Other researchers have reported inappropriate honey houses to be observed in 61% of the beekeepers investigated in Viçosa city, Minas Gerais state (20), and in 64% in Pires do Rio city, Goiás state (5).
With respect to the levels of water-insoluble solids in honey samples from AP1, AP3, DP1, and DP2, these levels significantly decreased from S1 to S3, showing that
the centrifugation, filtration, and decanting were effective in removing suspended wax particles from the honey (22).
Other studies previously found inadequacies in this parameter, for example, Ananias (5) analyzed honey from the state of Goiás and observed water-insoluble-solid levels ranging from 0.01 to 0.21 g/100 g-1 and found that 34%
of the samples showed levels above those permitted by legislation. Whereas Araújo et al. (3), in the city of Crato, Ceará, observed water-insoluble-solid levels from 0.03 to
0.24 g/100 g-1, with 50% of the samples being outside of
the approved limits.
Concerning HMF (Table 3), except for honey from BP1 and DP3, the levels of this parameter significantly increased throughout the stages of processing. This is predictable since the formation of the HMF reaction is indicative of the shelf-life of honey. Furthermore, for AP3, BP2, and BP3, the levels of this parameter showed a more pronounced increase; this observation may be an indication of storage at high temperatures (15, 20). However, all the samples analyzed showed HMF levels within the standards required for marketing.
In contrast, the levels of apparent sucrose (Table 4) varied from 2.63 to 7.67 g/100 g-1, with two honey samples
from BP2 and BP3 showing levels above those permitted for floral honey. In addition, there were no significant differences between the different stages of processing (S1, S2, and S3), indicating that these samples may be composed of honeydew honey or a blend of floral honey, especially the honey from BP3 which also showed high levels of ash. This hypothesis is proposed because the pollen origin of the honey in this region is unknown (23).
Another possibility would be the harvesting of immature floral honey, in which the product has not been fully processed into glucose and fructose by the action of the invertase enzyme secreted by the bees. The unripe or immature honey can be identified at the time of harvest when less than 80% of the combs are operculated (6, 22).
Comparing the beekeepers associations, it appears that the honey from association C presented levels of all the parameters in accordance with the standards established by the legislation, while the honey from the other associations did not conform to these established standards in the levels of either acidity or ash, or both. During sample collection in the apiaries and honey houses of association C, more appropriate apiculture practices were observed than those in the other associations, despite also presenting with some failures in the facilities of the honey houses, for example restrooms and dedicated locker rooms were absent. However, great care was taken in transporting the honey with use of clean tarps and the separation of the reception area in the honey house from the processing area, i.e. only those frames honey were transported to uncapping.
Conclusion
The contamination with ash in 17% of the analyzed honey occurred in the honey house after centrifugation of honey frames, showing inadequate hygiene or the need to use stainless-steel utensils. Combined with the presence of high levels of acidity (33%), inadequate apiculture practices are indicated in the handling of the hive, during honey harvesting, or in the transport of the honey to the honey houses. Therefore, this study identified a need for the implementation of good beekeeping practices in northern Mato Grosso in order to ensure the production of a safe, quality product.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge FAPEMAT for their financial support.
References
1. Souza DC, organizador. Apicultura: Manual do Agente de Desenvolvimento Rural. 2a ed rev. Brasília: SEBRAE; 2007. 183p.
2. Bordini M. Com três biomas, Mato Grosso tem apicultura diversificada. [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2010 Mai. 15]. Available from: <http://www.agenciasebrae.
com.br/ noticia.kmfnoticia=8474274&canal=199 &total=3061&indice=0>.
3. Araújo DR, Silva RHD da, Sousa JS. Avaliação da qualidade físico-química do mel comercializado na cidade de Crato, CE. Rev Biol Ciênc Terra. 2006;6(1):51-5.
4. Brasil. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento. Instrução Normativa nº 11 de 20 de outubro de 2000. Aprova o Regulamento de Identidade e Qualidade do Mel. Diário Oficial da União, 23 de outubro 2000. 5. Ananias KR. Avaliação das condições de produção e qualidade de mel de abelhas (Apis mellifera L.) produzido na microrregião de Pires do Rio, no estado de Goiás [Dissertação]. Goiânia: Escola de Agronomia e Ciência e Engenharia de Alimentos, Universidade Federal de Goiás; 2010.
6. Azeredo MAA, Azeredo LC, Damasceno JG. Características físico-químicas dos méis do município de São Fidélis - RJ. Ciênc Tecnol Aliment. 1999;19(1):3-7. 7. Evangelista-Rodrigues A, Silva SEM, Beserra EMF, Rodrigues ML. Análise físico-química dos méis das abelhas Apis mellifera e Melipona scutellaris produzidos em regiões distintas no Estado da Paraíba. Ciênc Rural. 2005;35(5):1166-71.
8. Mendonça K, Marchini LC, Souza BA, Almeida-Anacleto D, Moreti ACCC. Caracterização físico-química de amostras de méis produzidas por Apis mellifera L. em fragmento de cerrado no município de Itirapina, São Paulo. Ciênc Rural. 2008;38(6):1748-53.
9. Richter W, Jansen C, Venzke TSL, Mendonça CRB, Borges CD. Physical-chemical quality evaluation of honey produced in the municipality of Pelotas/RS. Aliment Nutr. 2011;22(4):547-53.
10. Rodríguez GO de, Ferrer BS, Ferrer A, Rodríguez B. Characterization of honey produced in Venezuela. Food Chem. 2004;84(4):499-502.
11. Mendes E, Proença EB, Ferreira IMPLVO, Ferreira MA. Quality evaluation of Portuguese honey. Carbohydrate Polym. 1998;37(3):219-23.
12. Alves EM, Sereia MJ, Toledo VAA, Marchini LC, Neves CA, Toledo TCSOA, Almeida-Anacleto D.
Physicochemical characteristics of organic honey samples of africanized honeybees from Parana River islands. Ciênc Tecnol Aliment. 2011;31(3):635-9.
13. Bendini JN, Souza DC. Physicochemical characterization of the bee honey originating in cashew flowering. Ciênc Rural. 2008;38(2):565-7.
14. Komatsu SS, Marchini LC, Moreti ACCC. Análises físico-químicas de amostras de méis de flores silvestre, de eucalipto e de laranjeira, produzidos por Apis mellifera L., 1758 (hymenoptera, apidae) no estado de São Paulo. Ciênc Tecnol Aliment. 2002;22(2):143-6.
15. Melo ZFN, Duarte MEM, Mata MERMC. Estudo das alterações do hidroximetilfurfural e da atividade diastásica em méis de abelha em diferentes condições de armazenamento. Rev Bras Prod Agroindustr. 2003;5(1):89-99. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official methods of analysis. 15th ed. Arlington: AOAC; 1998. Supl 2.
16. Codex Alimentarius Commission. Official methods of analysis. Rome: FAO; 1990. v. 3, Supl 2.
17. SEBRAE. Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio às Micro e Pequenas Empresas. Manual de Segurança e Qualidade para Apicultura. Brasília: SEBRAE/NA; 2009.
18. Andrade MVAS, Araújo ACD, Santiago MAPA, Alves HMA, Yamanaka CY, Morais CMF. Determinação de Hidroximetilfurfural (HMF) em Mel por Cromatografia Líquida de Alta Eficiência (CLAE). In: 31a Reunião Anual da Sociedade Brasileira de Química; 2008; Águas de Lindóia, São Paulo.
19. Dutra MBL, Chaves JBP, Message D, Silva AF, Dutra AM, Gomes JC. Diagnóstico das condições de colheita e processamento de mel de Apis mellifera. Rev Bras Pesqui Aliment. 2011;2(2):120-7.
20. Silva MBL. Diagnóstico do sistema de produção e qualidade do mel de Apis mellifera [Dissertação]. Viçosa: Instituto de Ciência e Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidade Federal de Viçosa; 2007.
21. Camargo RCR. Boas práticas de manipulação na colheita de mel [Internet]. Teresina: Embrapa; 2002 [cited 2010 maio 23]. (Comunicado Técnico). Available from: http:// www.cpamn.embrapa.br/publicacoes/comunicado/2002/ CT140.pdf.
22. Campos G, Della-Modesta RC, Silva TJP, Baptista KE, Gomides MF, Godoy RL. Classificação do mel em floral ou mel de melato. Ciênc Tecnol Aliment. 2003;23(1):1-5.