KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Uludağ Arıcılık Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 26

Proline in Honey: A Complementary Biochemical Indicator in Quality, Authenticity, and Adulteration Assessment

Elif Cilavdaroğlu(ONDOKUZ MAYIS UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-8258-2416
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-07-29
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Proline should therefore be considered a complementary indicator within multi-analytical honey authentication systems.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Proline is a major free amino acid in honey and has long been used as a biochemical indicator of honey quality, maturity, and authenticity.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:However, reliable interpretation requires combined evaluation with HMF, diastase activity, electrical conductivity, sugar profile, C4 sugar ratio, amino acid profile, phenolic/mineral content, isotopic analyses, and chemometric methods.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Proline should therefore be considered a complementary indicator within multi-analytical honey authentication systems.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Adulteration · Honey · Proline

Abstract

Proline is a major free amino acid in honey and has long been used as a biochemical indicator of honey quality, maturity, and authenticity. Its association with the biochemical contribution of bees during nectar transformation gives it a distinctive role among conventional quality parameters. However, proline concentration is influenced by botanical origin, geographical conditions, pollen content, bee-feeding practices, harvest time, maturation, storage, and heat treatment. Therefore, proline should not be used as a standalone criterion for honey quality or adulteration. This review evaluates the biological origin of proline in honey, its role in quality and maturity assessment, its limitations, its relevance to botanical and geographical origin determination, and its variation in honeys from Türkiye. Analytical approaches for proline determination, including spectrophotometric, chromatographic, mass spectrometric, kit-based, sensor-based, and multi-analytical systems, are also discussed. The literature indicates that low proline levels may indicate counterfeit honey, intensive sugar feeding, or insufficient maturation. However, reliable interpretation requires combined evaluation with HMF, diastase activity, electrical conductivity, sugar profile, C4 sugar ratio, amino acid profile, phenolic/mineral content, isotopic analyses, and chemometric methods. Proline should therefore be considered a complementary indicator within multi-analytical honey authentication systems.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Cilavdaroğlu, E. (2026). Proline in Honey: A Complementary Biochemical Indicator in Quality, Authenticity, and Adulteration Assessment. Uludağ Arıcılık Dergisi, Volume: 26. https://doi.org/10.31467/uluaricilik.1948540

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (45)

  1. Adal S, Çetintaş Y, Ünsal TE. Quality, composition, and adulteration assessment of flower honeys from Afyonkarahisar Province, Türkiye. Journal of the Turkish Chemical Society Section A: Chemistry 2026;2026:1–13. https://doi.org/10.18596/jotcsa.1764295
  2. Adnan NA, Chua LS, Sarmidi MR. Thermal treatment effect on free amino acids in honey samples. Jurnal Teknologi 2014;70. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v70.3425
  3. Anklam E. A review of the analytical methods to determine the geographical and botanical origin of honey. Food Chemistry 1998; 63:549–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(98)00057-0
  4. Bayram NE, Kutlu N, Gercek YC. Utilization of response surface methodology in optimization of proline extraction from Castanea sativa honey. Chemistry & Biodiversity 2023;20: e202201092. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbdv.202201092
  5. Bogdanov S, Lüllmann C, Martin P, Von Der Ohe W, Russmann H, Vorwohl G et al. Honey quality and international regulatory standards: Review by the International Honey Commission. Bee World 1999;80:61–69
  6. Carratù B, Ciarrocchi M, Mosca M, Sanzini E. Free amino acids, oxalate and sulphate for honey characterization. Journal of ApiProduct and ApiMedical Science 2011;3:81–88. https://doi.org/10.3896/IBRA.4.03.2.03
  7. Cotte JF, Casabianca H, Giroud B, Albert M, Lheritier J, Grenier-Loustalot MF. Characterization of honey amino acid profiles using high-pressure liquid chromatography to control authenticity. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 2004; 378:1342–1350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-2430-z
  8. Czipa N, Borbély M, Győri Z. Proline content of different honey types. Acta Alimentaria 2012; 41:26–32. https://doi.org/10.1556/aalim. 2011.0002
  9. Çetintaş Y. Quality, authenticity, and classification of honeys produced in Muğla Province, Türkiye. Journal of Food Science 2025;90:e70782. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.70782
  10. Çiftçi M, Parlat SS. Konya bölgesindeki marketlerde satılan farklı ticari çiçek ballarının bazı kimyasal özelliklerinin Türk Gıda Kodeksi Bal Tebliğine uygunluğunun araştırılması. Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 2018;32:38–42. https://doi.org/10.15316/ SJAFS.2018.61
  11. Çınar SB, Ekşi A. Türkiye’de üretilen çam balının kimyasal profili. Gıda 2012;37:149–156
  12. Dimins F, Cinkmanis I, Radenkovs V, Augspole I, Valdovska A. Analysis of 18 free amino acids in honeybee and bumblebee honey from Eastern and Northern Europe and Central Asia using HPLC-ESI-TQ-MS/MS approach bypassing derivatization step. Foods 2022; 11:2744. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods 11182744
  13. Dominguez MA, Jacksén J, Emmer Å, Centurión ME. Capillary electrophoresis method for the simultaneous determination of carbohydrates and proline in honey samples. Microchemical Journal 2016;129:1–4. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.microc.2016.05.017
  14. Elflein L, Raezke KP. Improved detection of honey adulteration by measuring differences between ¹³C/¹²C stable carbon isotope ratios of protein and sugar compounds with a combination of elemental analyzer-isotope ratio mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography-isotope ratio mass spectrometry (δ¹³C-EA/LC-IRMS). Apidologie 2008;39:574–587. https://doi.org/10.1051/ apido:2008042
  15. Flanjak I, Strelec I, Kenjerić D, Primorac L. Croatian produced unifloral honey characterized according to the protein and proline content and enzyme activities. Journal of Apicultural Science 2016;60:39–48. https://doi.org/10. 1515/jas-2016-0005
  16. Guler A, Bakan A, Nisbet C, Yavuz O. Determination of important biochemical properties of honey to discriminate pure and adulterated honey with sucrose (*Saccharum officinarum* L.) syrup. Food Chemistry 2007;105:1119–1125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.02.024
  17. Guler A, Kocaokutgen H, Garipoglu AV, Onder H, Ekinci D, Biyik S. Detection of adulterated honey produced by honeybee (*Apis mellifera* L.) colonies fed with different levels of commercial industrial sugar (C3 and C4 plants) syrups by the carbon isotope ratio analysis. Food Chemistry 2014;155:155–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.01.033
  18. Guler A, Garipoglu AV, Onder H, Biyik S, Kocaokutgen H, Ekinci D. Comparing biochemical properties of pure and adulterated honeys produced by feeding honeybees (*Apis mellifera* L.) colonies with different levels of industrial commercial sugars. Kafkas Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 2017;23:259–268. https://doi.org/10.9775/kvfd.2016.16373
  19. Gün R, Karaoğlu MM. Detection of honey adulteration by characterization of the physico-chemical properties of honey adulterated with the addition of glucose–fructose and maltose corn syrups. European Food Research and Technology 2024;250:2255–2272. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00217-024-04535-7
  20. Hermosín I, Chicón RM, Cabezudo MD. Free amino acid composition and botanical origin of honey. Food Chemistry 2003;83:263–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(03)00089-X
  21. Janiszewska K, Aniołowska M, Nowakowski P. Free amino acids content of honeys from Poland. Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences 2012;62:85–89. https://doi.org/10.2478/ v10222-011-0041-5
  22. Karlıdağ S, Solak-Amet O. Türkiye’nin farklı lokasyonlarından temin edilen ticari bal örneklerinin melissopalinolojik ve fiziko-kimyasal analizleri. Uludag Bee Journal 2025;25:89–107. https://doi.org/10.31467/ uluaricilik.1669569
  23. Kaškonienė V, Venskutonis PR. Floral markers in honey of various botanical and geographic origins: A review. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 2010; 9:620–634. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-37.2010.00130.x
  24. Kečkeš J, Trifković J, Andrić F, Jovetić M, Tešić Ž, Milojković-Opsenica D. Amino acids profile of Serbian unifloral honeys. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 2013;93:3368–3376. https://doi.org/10.1002/ jsfa.6187
  25. Khakpour F, Pirsa S, Nejabi F. Design of a kit based on nano-fibrous cellulose film modified with ninhydrin and carboxymethyl cellulose for examining proline and the authentication of natural honey. Heliyon 2025;11:e43665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e43665
  26. Kıvrak İ. Free amino acid profiles of 17 Turkish unifloral honeys. Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies 2015;38:855–862. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10826076.2014.976712
  27. Kibar M. A cheaply non-destructive technique to estimate honey quality: Thermal imaging and machine learning. Uludag Bee Journal 2024;24:79–92. https://doi.org/10.31467/ uluaricilik.1429971
  28. Nisbet C, Kazak F, Ardalı Y. Determination of quality criteria that allow differentiation between honey adulterated with sugar and pure honey. Biological Trace Element Research 2018; 186:288–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12011-018-1305-2
  29. Özbay M, Arslan FN, Görür G. Determination of quality characteristics of some monofloral, polyfloral and honeydew honeys in terms of physical properties and proline content. Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi 2024;13:1201–1206. https://doi.org/10.28948/ngumuh.1503821
  30. Paiano V, Breidbach A, Lörchner C, Ždiniaková T, De Rudder O, Maquet A et al. Detection of honey adulteration by liquid chromatography—high-resolution mass spectrometry: Results from an EU coordinated action. Separations 2025;12:47. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations12020047
  31. Puścion-Jakubik A, Borawska MH, Socha K. Modern methods for assessing the quality of bee honey and botanical origin identification. Foods 2020;9:1028. https://doi.org/10.3390/ foods9081028
  32. Schoder D. Honey fraud as a moving analytical target: Omics-informed authentication within a multi-layer analytical framework. Foods 2026;15:712. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods 15040712
  33. Soares S, Amaral JS, Oliveira MBP, Mafra I. A comprehensive review on the main honey authentication issues: Production and origin. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 2017;16:1072–1100. https://doi. org/10.1111/1541-4337.12278
  34. Sun Z, Zhao L, Cheng N, Xue X, Wu L, Zheng J et al. Identification of botanical origin of Chinese unifloral honeys by free amino acid profiles and chemometric methods. Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 2017;7:317–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2017.06.009
  35. Tabay Sümbül D. Ağrı yöresi geven ballarının kimyasal kalitesi: Prolin miktarı ve şeker profili üzerine bir çalışma. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi 2024;14:1195–1206. https://doi.org/10.17714/gumusfenbil.1394347
  36. Tarapatskyy M, Sowa P, Zaguła G, Dżugan M, Puchalski C. Assessment of the botanical origin of Polish honeys based on physicochemical properties and bioactive components with chemometric analysis. Molecules 2021;26:4801. https://doi.org/10. 3390/molecules26164801
  37. Truzzi C, Annibaldi A, Illuminati S, Finale C, Scarponi G. Determination of proline in honey: Comparison between official methods, optimization and validation of the analytical methodology. Food Chemistry 2014;150:477–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem. 2013.11.003
  38. Tsagkaris AS, Koulis GA, Danezis GP, Martakos I, Dasenaki M, Georgiou CA et al. Honey authenticity: Analytical techniques, state of the art and challenges. RSC Advances 2021; 11:11273–11294. https://doi.org/10.1039/ D1RA00069A
  39. Turkish Food Codex Honey Communiqué. Türk Gıda Kodeksi Bal Tebliği (Tebliğ No: 2020/7). Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Türkiye, 2020. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/ eskiler/2020/04/20200422-13.htm Accessed: 09 February 2026
  40. Turkish Food Codex Honey Communiqué Annexes. Ek-1: Ballara ait diğer özellikler; Ek-2: Botanik kaynağı belirtilen balların minimum polen içerikleri. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Türkiye, 2020. https://www.resmigazete. gov.tr/eskiler/2020/04/20200422-13-1.pdf Accessed: 09 February 2026
  41. Ulberth F. Advances in testing for adulteration in honey. In Advances in food authenticity testing. Woodhead Publishing, 2016, p.729–753. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100220-9.00026-6
  42. Wen YQ, Zhang J, Li Y, Chen L, Zhao W, Zhou J et al. Characterization of Chinese unifloral honeys based on proline and phenolic content as markers of botanical origin, using multivariate analysis. Molecules 2017;22:735. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22050735
  43. Yang J, Liu Y, Cui Z, Wang T, Liu T, Liu G. Analysis of free amino acid composition and honey plant species in seven honey species in China. Foods 2024;13:1065. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/foods13071065
  44. Zhang GZ, Tian J, Zhang YZ, Li SS, Zheng H, Hu FL. Investigation of the maturity evaluation indicator of honey in natural ripening process: The case of rape honey. Foods 2021;10:2882. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112882
  45. Zonouri SA, Amirabadi PA, Sarabi HG. Microwave sensing of honey composition: A triplexer-based approach for sucrose and proline measurement. Measurement Science and Technology 2025;36:055102. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1361-6501/adc9ce