Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Mustafa,G.
Data de Publicação: 2023
Outros Autores: Iqbal,A., Javid,A., Hussain,A., Bukhari,S. M., Ali,W., Saleem,M., Azam,S. M., Sughra,F., Ali,A., Rehman,K. ur, Andleeb,S., Sadiq,N., Hussain,S. M., Ahmad,A., Ahmad,U.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Biology
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842023000100153
Resumo: Abstract The medicinal attributes of honey appears to overshadow its importance as a functional food. Consequently, several literatures are rife with ancient uses of honey as complementary and alternative medicine, with relevance to modern day health care, supported by evidence-based clinical data, with little attention given to honey’s nutritional functions. The moisture contents of honey extracted from University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore honey bee farm was 12.19% while that of natural source was 9.03 ± 1.63%. Similarly, ash and protein contents of farmed honey recorded were 0.37% and 5.22%, respectively. Whereas ash and protein contents of natural honey were 1.70 ± 1.98% and 6.10 ± 0.79%. Likewise fat, dietary fiber and carbohydrates contents of farmed source documented were 0.14%, 1.99% and 62.26% respectively. Although fat, dietary fiber and carbohydrates contents of honey taken from natural resource were 0.54 ± 0.28%, 2.76 ± 1.07% and 55.32 ± 2.91% respectively. Glucose and fructose contents of honey taken out from honeybee farm were 27% and 34% but natural source were 22.50 ± 2.12% and 28.50 ± 3.54%. Glucose and fructose contents of honey taken out from honeybee farm were 27% and 34% but natural source were 22.50 ± 2.12% and 28.50 ± 3.54%. Similarly, sucrose and maltose contents of farmed honey were 2.5% and 12% while in natural honey were 1.35 ± 0.49% and 8.00 ± 1.41% respectively. The present study indicates that such as moisture, carbohydrates, sucrose and maltose contents were higher farmed honey as compared to the natural honey. In our recommendation natural honey is better than farmed honey.
id IIE-1_70b78f44fc709a282bd97d4379af049b
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1519-69842023000100153
network_acronym_str IIE-1
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Biology
repository_id_str
spelling Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apisfructosecarbohydratesnatural honeyApis speciessucroseAbstract The medicinal attributes of honey appears to overshadow its importance as a functional food. Consequently, several literatures are rife with ancient uses of honey as complementary and alternative medicine, with relevance to modern day health care, supported by evidence-based clinical data, with little attention given to honey’s nutritional functions. The moisture contents of honey extracted from University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore honey bee farm was 12.19% while that of natural source was 9.03 ± 1.63%. Similarly, ash and protein contents of farmed honey recorded were 0.37% and 5.22%, respectively. Whereas ash and protein contents of natural honey were 1.70 ± 1.98% and 6.10 ± 0.79%. Likewise fat, dietary fiber and carbohydrates contents of farmed source documented were 0.14%, 1.99% and 62.26% respectively. Although fat, dietary fiber and carbohydrates contents of honey taken from natural resource were 0.54 ± 0.28%, 2.76 ± 1.07% and 55.32 ± 2.91% respectively. Glucose and fructose contents of honey taken out from honeybee farm were 27% and 34% but natural source were 22.50 ± 2.12% and 28.50 ± 3.54%. Glucose and fructose contents of honey taken out from honeybee farm were 27% and 34% but natural source were 22.50 ± 2.12% and 28.50 ± 3.54%. Similarly, sucrose and maltose contents of farmed honey were 2.5% and 12% while in natural honey were 1.35 ± 0.49% and 8.00 ± 1.41% respectively. The present study indicates that such as moisture, carbohydrates, sucrose and maltose contents were higher farmed honey as compared to the natural honey. In our recommendation natural honey is better than farmed honey.Instituto Internacional de Ecologia2023-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842023000100153Brazilian Journal of Biology v.83 2023reponame:Brazilian Journal of Biologyinstname:Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)instacron:IIE10.1590/1519-6984.246651info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMustafa,G.Iqbal,A.Javid,A.Hussain,A.Bukhari,S. M.Ali,W.Saleem,M.Azam,S. M.Sughra,F.Ali,A.Rehman,K. urAndleeb,S.Sadiq,N.Hussain,S. M.Ahmad,A.Ahmad,U.eng2021-08-06T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1519-69842023000100153Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bjb/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbjb@bjb.com.br||bjb@bjb.com.br1678-43751519-6984opendoar:2021-08-06T00:00Brazilian Journal of Biology - Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
title Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
spellingShingle Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
Mustafa,G.
fructose
carbohydrates
natural honey
Apis species
sucrose
title_short Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
title_full Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
title_fullStr Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
title_full_unstemmed Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
title_sort Variations in nutritional profile of honey produced by various species of genus Apis
author Mustafa,G.
author_facet Mustafa,G.
Iqbal,A.
Javid,A.
Hussain,A.
Bukhari,S. M.
Ali,W.
Saleem,M.
Azam,S. M.
Sughra,F.
Ali,A.
Rehman,K. ur
Andleeb,S.
Sadiq,N.
Hussain,S. M.
Ahmad,A.
Ahmad,U.
author_role author
author2 Iqbal,A.
Javid,A.
Hussain,A.
Bukhari,S. M.
Ali,W.
Saleem,M.
Azam,S. M.
Sughra,F.
Ali,A.
Rehman,K. ur
Andleeb,S.
Sadiq,N.
Hussain,S. M.
Ahmad,A.
Ahmad,U.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Mustafa,G.
Iqbal,A.
Javid,A.
Hussain,A.
Bukhari,S. M.
Ali,W.
Saleem,M.
Azam,S. M.
Sughra,F.
Ali,A.
Rehman,K. ur
Andleeb,S.
Sadiq,N.
Hussain,S. M.
Ahmad,A.
Ahmad,U.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv fructose
carbohydrates
natural honey
Apis species
sucrose
topic fructose
carbohydrates
natural honey
Apis species
sucrose
description Abstract The medicinal attributes of honey appears to overshadow its importance as a functional food. Consequently, several literatures are rife with ancient uses of honey as complementary and alternative medicine, with relevance to modern day health care, supported by evidence-based clinical data, with little attention given to honey’s nutritional functions. The moisture contents of honey extracted from University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore honey bee farm was 12.19% while that of natural source was 9.03 ± 1.63%. Similarly, ash and protein contents of farmed honey recorded were 0.37% and 5.22%, respectively. Whereas ash and protein contents of natural honey were 1.70 ± 1.98% and 6.10 ± 0.79%. Likewise fat, dietary fiber and carbohydrates contents of farmed source documented were 0.14%, 1.99% and 62.26% respectively. Although fat, dietary fiber and carbohydrates contents of honey taken from natural resource were 0.54 ± 0.28%, 2.76 ± 1.07% and 55.32 ± 2.91% respectively. Glucose and fructose contents of honey taken out from honeybee farm were 27% and 34% but natural source were 22.50 ± 2.12% and 28.50 ± 3.54%. Glucose and fructose contents of honey taken out from honeybee farm were 27% and 34% but natural source were 22.50 ± 2.12% and 28.50 ± 3.54%. Similarly, sucrose and maltose contents of farmed honey were 2.5% and 12% while in natural honey were 1.35 ± 0.49% and 8.00 ± 1.41% respectively. The present study indicates that such as moisture, carbohydrates, sucrose and maltose contents were higher farmed honey as compared to the natural honey. In our recommendation natural honey is better than farmed honey.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842023000100153
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-69842023000100153
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1519-6984.246651
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Internacional de Ecologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Internacional de Ecologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Biology v.83 2023
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Biology
instname:Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)
instacron:IIE
instname_str Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)
instacron_str IIE
institution IIE
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Biology
collection Brazilian Journal of Biology
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Biology - Instituto Internacional de Ecologia (IIE)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bjb@bjb.com.br||bjb@bjb.com.br
_version_ 1752129889789542400