• EI
  • Scopus
  • 食品科学与工程领域高质量科技期刊分级目录第一方阵T1
  • DOAJ
  • EBSCO
  • 北大核心期刊
  • 中国核心学术期刊RCCSE
  • JST China
  • FSTA
  • 中国精品科技期刊
  • 中国农业核心期刊
  • CA
  • WJCI
  • 中国科技核心期刊CSTPCD
  • 中国生物医学SinoMed
中国精品科技期刊2020
沈敏,匡海鸥,刘晓青,等. 黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜的理化性质、植物来源和抑菌活性研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2021,42(11):50−58. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020070393.
引用本文: 沈敏,匡海鸥,刘晓青,等. 黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜的理化性质、植物来源和抑菌活性研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2021,42(11):50−58. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020070393.
SHEN Min, KUANG Haiou, LIU Xiaoqing, et al. Physio-chemical Properties, Botanical Sources and Antibacterial Activity of Apis andreniformis Honey[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2021, 42(11): 50−58. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/ j.issn1002-0306.2020070393.
Citation: SHEN Min, KUANG Haiou, LIU Xiaoqing, et al. Physio-chemical Properties, Botanical Sources and Antibacterial Activity of Apis andreniformis Honey[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2021, 42(11): 50−58. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/ j.issn1002-0306.2020070393.

黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜的理化性质、植物来源和抑菌活性研究

Physio-chemical Properties, Botanical Sources and Antibacterial Activity of Apis andreniformis Honey

  • 摘要: 为评估黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜的理化性质和抑菌活性,本文用AOAC等方法测定黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜的理化指标、DNA高通量条形码法鉴定其植物来源,琼脂井扩散法评估其对金黄色葡萄球菌(ATCC6538)、大肠杆菌(ATCC8739)和紫色色杆菌(ATCC12472)的抑菌活性。结果表明:同一时间地点收集的三个黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜的水分、灰分、pH、酸度、游离酸、内酯酸、葡萄糖、果糖、淀粉酶活性、5-羟甲基糠醛含量、电导率有明显差异,麦芽糖和蔗糖含量没有显著差异。各样品的植物来源种类和数量差异明显,三个蜂蜜样品没有共有植物来源,AAH1和AAH2仅有一种共有植物来源蓝花野茼蒿(Crassocephalum rubens),基因丰度分别为16.16%和4.15%,AAH1和AAH3仅有一种共有植物来源白饭树(Flueggea virosa),基因丰度分别为2.06%和31.32%。三个黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜中AAH3对金黄色葡萄球菌的抑菌活性最强,且优于麦卢卡蜂蜜;AAH3对大肠杆菌的抑菌活性与MH1蜂蜜无显著差异,且优于其他蜂蜜;AAH1对紫色杆菌的抑菌活性最强,但是弱于MH3、MH1蜂蜜。结论:黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜具有良好抑菌效果。研究结果可以为黑小蜜蜂蜂蜜的开发和利用提供理论依据。

     

    Abstract: To evaluate the physio-chemical properties and antibacterial activities of A. andreniformis honey (AAH), its physio-chemical properties were determined via AOAC and other methods. The botanical sources and antibacterial activity against bacteria of S. aureus, E. coli and C. Violaceum were determined by using DNA metabarcoding and the agar well diffusion methods, respectively. Results: The three AAH samples harvested at the same time and location had significant differences in physio-chemical characters, there were significant differences in water, ash,pH, acid, free acid, lactone acid, glucose, fructose, amylase activity, 5-hydroxymethylfurfural contents, conductivity among these three honey samples. There were little significant differences in maltose and sucrose contents. There were significant differences among the types and number of botanical sources in these samples; there was no common plant source among the three honey samples. There was only one common plant source of Crassocephalum rubens in AAH1 and AAH2, with gene abundance of 16.16% and 4.15%, respectively. There was only one common plant source of Flueggea virosa in AAH1and AAH3, with gene abundance of 2.06% and 31.32%, respectively. The antibacterial activity of AAH3 against S. aureus was the strongest and better than that of Manuka honey. The antibacterial activity of AAH3 against E. coli was the same as that of MH1 honey and was better than other samples. The antibacterial activity of AAH1 against C. Violaceum was the strongest, but weaker than that of MH3 and MH1 honey. Conclusion: A. andreniformis honey has a good antibacterial activity. The results can provide a theoretical basis for the development and utilization of A. andreniformis honey.

     

/

返回文章
返回