MICROBIOLOGICAL COMPARISON BETWEEN HONEY IN JAR AND HONEY IN COMB FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION


Submitted: 21 February 2013
Accepted: 21 February 2013
Published: 21 March 2009
Abstract Views: 862
PDF: 1036
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

  • F. Tomassetti Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Regioni Lazio e Toscana, .
  • M. Milito Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Regioni Lazio e Toscana, .
  • E. Dell’Aira Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Regioni Lazio e Toscana, .
  • L. De Santis Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Regioni Lazio e Toscana, .
  • G. Migliore Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Regioni Lazio e Toscana, .
  • G. Formato Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Regioni Lazio e Toscana, .
The Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Regioni Lazio e Toscana, during August-July 2007 analyzed, for the microbial aspects, 37 samples of jar honey and 53 samples of honey in comb obtained from 37 farms of Latium Region. In the jar honey there weren’t values up to 1*103 colony-forming unit (CFU)/g of bacteria mesophiles, while in the honey in comb it was not up to 2*103 CFU/g. Bacillus cereus was found in 22 samples (41,5%) of honey in comb and in 18 samples (48,6%) of jar honey; Clostridium perfringens was found in 6 (11,3%) samples of honey in comb and in 6 samples (16,2%) of jar honey; Clostridium baratii was found in 1 (1,9%) sample of honey in comb and in 1 sample (2,7%) of jar honey; coagulase-positive staphylococci were found in 4 (11,3%) samples of honey in comb and in 4 samples (10,8%) of jar honey; Clostridium sordelli was found in 2 samples (3,8%) of honey in comb and in 1 sample (2,7%) of jar honey. Only 2 samples of honey in comb and 1 sample of jar honey had yeasts up to 1000 CFU/g. Finally, 9 samples (24,3%) of jar honey and 16 samples (30,2%) of honey in jar were positives for moulds.

1.
Tomassetti F, Milito M, Dell’Aira E, De Santis L, Migliore G, Formato G. MICROBIOLOGICAL COMPARISON BETWEEN HONEY IN JAR AND HONEY IN COMB FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION. Ital J Food Safety [Internet]. 2009 Mar. 21 [cited 2024 Apr. 19];1(3):65-6. Available from: https://www.pagepressjournals.org/ijfs/article/view/ijfs.2008.3.65

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations