Consumer assessment of varietal honeys and effect of thermal liquefaction of the product on some of its qualitative parameters
Author | Affiliation | |
---|---|---|
LT | ||
LT | ||
LT | ||
Jeznach, Maria | Warsaw University of Life Sciences | LT |
LT |
Date |
---|
2011 |
The research covered two parts: I. Results of the consumer survey on quality of honey. In the survey, 576 college students from Lithuania and Poland took part. They ranged in age from 20-24. II. For the research project, five kinds of honey from flowers of lime, raspberry, buckwheat, cockshead, and forest flowers were selected. Usually, consumers preferred liquid, golden-coloured honey. To liquefy the crystallised honey, a special device was used. Bees from a private apiary were carried for nectar collections to different forest districts. Chemical and sensory analysis of the honey were carried out at the Lithuanian University of Agriculture and at the Laboratory of the National Food and Veterinary Risk Assessment Institute. Data of the research were processed statistically by the software package "SPSS 10.0 for Windows". The most marketable is golden-coloured (46%) and liquid (84%) honey, whereas the best known is lime honey (98.7%). Lime honey was characterized as having the best flavour and the best aroma prior and post melting by the device to liquefy crystallised honey. Raspberry honey and buckwheat honey were noted for having the most attractive colour. Raspberry honey and buckwheat honey were also found to have the best consistency. In all honey samples melted by the device to liquefy the crystallised honey, the moisture content was significantly decreased. In lime and buckwheat honey prior and post thermal processing, diastase activity remained unchanged, whereas in cockshead and forest flower honey it increased significantly. The greatest HMF content was observed in buckwheat and forest honey (respectively 3.27 and 3.46 mg kg(-1)). After melting, the HMF content increased in lime and raspberry honey, however, it did not exceeded the recommended limit (not more than 40 mg kg(-1)).
Journal | IF | AIF | AIF (min) | AIF (max) | Cat | AV | Year | Quartile |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JOURNAL OF APICULTURAL SCIENCE | 0.674 | 1.332 | 1.332 | 1.332 | 1 | 0.506 | 2011 | Q3 |
Journal | IF | AIF | AIF (min) | AIF (max) | Cat | AV | Year | Quartile |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JOURNAL OF APICULTURAL SCIENCE | 0.674 | 1.332 | 1.332 | 1.332 | 1 | 0.506 | 2011 | Q3 |
Journal | Cite Score | SNIP | SJR | Year | Quartile |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Journal of Apicultural Science | 1 | 0.834 | 0.371 | 2011 | Q3 |