Physicochemical, Antioxidant and Antibacterial Properties of Honey Obtained from Different Ecological Zones of Ghana
Mawuli K. Azameti *
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Patience Wekia Ajoawonei
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Foster Wassah Gyabaab
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Lawrence A. Adetunde
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Millicent Captain-Esoah
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Grace Adzo Motey
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Theophilus A. Abalori
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Oliver Awo
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
Elija D. Angyiereyiri
Department of Applied Biology, School of Environment and Life Sciences, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Navrongo, Ghana.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Natural honey has a lot of different biological properties. This study assessed the physicochemical, bioactive, antioxidant, and antibacterial characteristics of two unprocessed Ghanaian honeys: Fumbisi honey (FH) and Kintampo honey (KH). The physicochemical analyses revealed that FH has a pH of 4.58, being slightly less acidic than KH with a pH of 3.75. Both samples had pH values within the 3.5-4.5 Codex Alimentarius standard range for honeydew. Both honeys had electrical conductivity values above the requirements for blossom honey (<0.8 ms/cm) according to European regulation (Council Directive 2001/110/EC). FH was determined to be amber in colour, and KH was dark amber, while FH had a higher total sugar content than KH. The bioactive profiling revealed that KH had a slightly higher total flavonoid content (0.00195 ± 0.00 mg/g) than FH (0.00111 ± 0.00mg/g), while FH had a higher total phenolic content (4.89 mg/g) than KH (1.95 mg/g). According to their antioxidant profiles, FH had higher antioxidant activity (8.58 ± 0.16%) than KH (7.01 ± 0.04 %), as determined by the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical scavenging assay. Concentration-dependent inhibition was shown in antibacterial tests against Salmonella typhi, Bacillus cereus, Escherichia coli, and Staphylococcus aureus. FH produced larger zones of inhibition at 100 % concentration, especially against Gram-positive bacteria. While both honeys performed well, FH exceeded the reported activity ranges for premium natural honeys. These results indicate that both FH and KH have strong antioxidant and antibacterial potential, particularly FH.
Keywords: Honey, physicochemical, bioactive, antioxidant, antibacterial, bacteria