4.6 Article

Characterisation of Moroccan Spurge (Euphorbia) honeys by their physicochemical characteristics, mineral contents and colour

期刊

ARABIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 2052-2060

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.arabjc.2015.01.003

关键词

Unifloral honey; Euphorbia officinarum subsp. echinus; Euphorbia regis-jubae; PCA; SDA

资金

  1. Agencia Espanola de Cooperacion Internacional para el Desarrollo AECID [A/024044/09]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The quality of 27 Moroccan Spurge (Euphorbia) honey samples was assessed. Eight physicochemical parameters and mineral composition were analysed and the CIELAB colour parameters (L*, a*, b*, C-ab* and h(ab)) were determined. Results show no significant differences between the two Euphorbia honey types (Euphorbia officinarum subsp. echinus and Euphorbia regis-jubae honeys) regarding the physicochemical parameters. Sodium and magnesium show average values that can help to differentiate between E. officinarum subsp. echinus and E. regis-jubae honeys. Potassium was quantitatively the most important mineral (66% of the total minerals quantified), while sodium and calcium were present in moderate amounts (20% and 11% of the minerals, respectively). The colour parameters also have shown significant differences between E. officinarum subsp. echinus and E. regis-jubae honeys. Considering the total information from physicochemical, mineral and colour data, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Stepwise Discriminant Analysis (SDA) were carried out to distinguish between the two Euphorbia honey types. PCA showed that the cumulative variance was approximately 56%. The results of SDA showed that parameters with a higher discriminant power were Na, Mg, L*, C-ab* and h(ab), and almost 100% of the samples were properly classified in their corresponding group, except for one sample. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据