| Literature DB >> 33066379 |
Dessislava Gerginova1, Svetlana Simova1, Milena Popova2, Marina Stefova3, Jasmina Petreska Stanoeva3, Vassya Bankova2.
Abstract
Bulgaria and North Macedonia have a long history of the production and use of honey; however, there is an obvious lack of systematic and in-depth research on honey from both countries. The oak honeydew honey is of particular interest, as it is highly valued by consumers because of its health benefits. The aim of this study was to characterize honeydew and floral honeys from Bulgaria and North Macedonia based on their NMR profiles. The 1D and 2D 1H and 13C-NMR spectra were measured of 16 North Macedonian and 22 Bulgarian honey samples. A total of 25 individual substances were identified, including quinovose, which was found for the first time in honey. Chemometric methods (PCA-principal component analysis, PLS-DA-partial least squares discriminant analysis, ANOVA-analysis of variance) were used to detect similarities and differences between samples, as well as to determine their botanical and geographical origin. Semiquantitative data on individual sugars and some other constituents were obtained, which allowed for the reliable classification of honey samples by botanical and geographical origin, based on chemometric approaches. The results enabled us to distinguish oak honeydew honey from other honey types, and to determine the country of origin. NMR was a rapid and convenient method, avoiding the need for other more time-consuming analytical techniques.Entities:
Keywords: NMR spectroscopy; classification; geographical origin; honey; honeydew honey
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33066379 PMCID: PMC7587359 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25204687
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Chemical shifts of used signals and their F* values.
| 13C δ [ppm] | Components | F (α = 0.1, F crit = 2.12) |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
|
| Fructose (F) | 12.89 |
|
| Glucose (G) | 4.32 |
|
| Quinovose (Qui) | 1.19 |
|
| ||
|
| Sucrose (Su) | 1.10 |
|
| Kojibiose (Kb) | 25.59 |
|
| αα-Trehalose (ααTr) | 1.75 |
|
| Trehalulose (Tru) | 12.68 |
|
| Isomaltose (IMa) | 11.32 |
|
| Nigerose (Ng) | 21.51 |
|
| Maltose (Ma) | 5.84 |
|
| Leucrose (Lu) | 7.53 |
|
| Maltulose (Mu) | 24.93 |
|
| Turanose (Tu) | 19.24 |
|
| Gentiobiose (Gb) | 0.61 |
|
| α,β-Trehalose (αβTr) | 15.56 |
|
| Isomaltulose (IMu) | 5.50 |
|
| ||
|
| Raffinose (Rf) | 13.69 |
|
| Melezitose (Mz) | 3.36 |
|
| Isokestose (1-Ks) | 8.94 |
|
| Panose (Pa) | 5.67 |
|
| Erlose (Er) | 2.61 |
|
| ||
|
| Meso 2,3-butanediol (mBd) | 7.62 |
|
| Racemic 2,3-butanediol (rBd) | 8.51 |
|
| Proline (Pro) | 1.69 |
|
| Quercitol (Q) | 11.83 |
|
| ||
|
| U16 | 2.74 |
|
| U15 | 1.03 |
|
| U14 | 1.17 |
|
| U13 | 26.62 |
|
| U12 | 0.89 |
|
| U11 | 14.92 |
|
| U10 | 2.80 |
|
| U9 | 2.53 |
|
| U8 | 1.02 |
|
| U7 | 3.27 |
|
| U6 | 2.43 |
|
| U5 | 1.63 |
|
| U4 | 4.09 |
|
| U3 | 5.34 |
|
| U2 | 5.50 |
|
| U1 | 10.37 |
* F value indicates the variable is statistically significant for the discrimination model.
Figure 1Selective TOCSY spectrum of quinovose (red line) and 1H spectrum of honey (grey line).
Figure 2Nightingale’s Rose Diagrams of the content of 26 constituents in Bulgarian and North Macedonian honeys (Qui—quinovose, F—fructose, G—glucose, Rf—raffinose, Su—sucrose, Mz—melezitose, Kb—kojibiose, 1-Ks—1-kestose, ααTr—α,α-trehalose, Tru—trehalulose, IMa—isomaltose, Ng—nigerose, Ma—maltose, Pa—panose, Er—erlose, Lu—leucrose, Mu—maltulose, Tu—turanose, Gb—gentiobiose, αβTr—α,β-trehalose, IMu—isomaltulose, U1–U16—sum of 16 unidentified constituents, Q—quercitol, mBd—meso-2,3-butanediol, rBD—rac-2,3-butanediol, Pro—proline).
Figure 3(a) 2D score PCA plot of Bulgarian honey samples using quantities of all components; (b) Dendrogram of Bulgarian honey samples.
Figure 4(a) 2D score PCA plot of North Macedonian honey samples using quantities of all components; (b) Dendrogram of North Macedonian honey samples.
Figure 5PLS-DA 3D score plot of the honey samples.
Figure 6Box plot presentation for quercitol, nigerose, kojibiose, trehalulose, maltulose and fructose.
Misclassification table of mixed, honeydew (hdew), and polyfloral honeys the for PLS-DA model used (SIMCA15).
| Predicted | Members | Correct | Mixed (BG) | Mixed (NM) | Hdew (BG) | Hdew (NM) | Polyfloral (BG) | No Class | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual | |||||||||
|
| 6 | 100% | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
|
| 9 | 88.89% | 0 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
|
| 10 | 100% | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
|
| 7 | 100% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | |
|
| 6 | 100% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
|
| 38 | 97.37% | 6 | 8 | 11 | 7 | 6 | 0 | |
|
| 1.40 × 10−22 | ||||||||