Honeybee Production and Honey Quality Assessment in Guji Zone, Ethiopia

Assessment of Honeybee production practices and quality assessment were undertaken in Guji district of Ethiopia. Honey samples were collected from farmers’ hives and local honey market for chemical analysis to determine its quality. Physicochemical analysis of honey was carried out at Haramaya University Animal Nutrition and Food Science technology. All physicochemical parameters analyzed lie within limits of local and international standard. Honey laboratory analysis was subjected to one way ANOVA of SAS. Above all, improving the low level of technological input and honey quality defects, address the skill gap on postharvest handling of hive products, processing and packaging need a practical training to local beekeepers. Moreover, facilitating supply of quality apicultural equipment is crucial and further consistent practical training on bee and bee products management for community is recommended. Honeybee Production and Honey Quality Assessment in Guji Zone, Ethiopia


Introduction
Honey is a natural substance produced by bees and nutritious food of economic importance worldwide. It is a sweet viscous liquid that is composed of sugars, amino acids, proline, minerals, aromatic substances, pigment waxes and grains [1,2] and contains large amount of glucose but low in sucrose (<8%) [3]. Honey is easily digestible and a more palatable which supplies substantial energy with 75 to 85% fructose and glucose. The physicochemical composition, flavour and colour of honey vary due to climate, soil, flora, bee species and production methods. The precise composition variation depending on the plant species on which bee forages are the main constituents [4,5]. Storage conditions may also influence final composition, with the proportion of disaccharides increasing overtime [6]. Careless handling of honey can reduce quality like, high temperature, length of storage and moisture content which lead to fermentation, high levels of Hydroxy-methylfurfural (HMF), loss of enzymatic microbial growth [7]. Therefore, this study was designed to collect information on production system, productivity, bee flora and post managements of honey and determine its quality.

Sampling techniques and sample size
The study was conducted in beekeeping potential of Guji Zone. A total of 16 honey samples were purposively selected from four of beekeeper peasants of the zone and a sample of honey from market. A half (1/2) kg of honey samples were collected from two types of hives for laboratory analysis.

Collected data
The study was requiring wide range of information with reference to beekeeping. The chemical compositions of honey samples was determined accordingly [8,9] in the laboratory.

Moisture content:
The moisture content of honey was determined by using the refractive index of the honey. The

Where
W=Water content in g/100 g honey and R.I. is the refractive index Mineral (ash) content: Ash content was determined after the sample burnt in an electric muffle furnace. Percent ash g/100 g honey was calculated by using: The result will be expressed as g apparent sucrose per 100 g honey Data Management and Statistical Analysis: Honey quality parameters were analyzed by using one way ANOVA and ± SD.

Feeding honey bees and flora condition
Honey bee colonies naturally withstand themselves and produce honey by foraging natural and cultivated crops and store honey for their own feeding during dearth period. But, beekeepers are harvesting honey which honey bees stored for them. The management for honey bees is very minimal in the study area. During the survey period it was observed that some farmers who have modern beehives (33.33%) were manage and 66.67% did not manage it properly. With regard to type of feed they provide, respondent feeding their bees (36.67%) use honey and pea flour (3.33%), pea flour and sugar syrup (6.67%), sugar syrup (10.0%) and pea flour (16.67.8%). 63.33% beekeepers were not give anything to honey bees as food.

Hive products harvesting and post handling
The frequency and amount of honey harvested varied depending on flowering condition of major bee forage, colony management practices and number of beehive [12]. In the study area, honey harvesting periods were from March to April and July to August where harvesting periods correlate with availability of moisture and peak flowering period. During honey harvested, beekeepers cut and pull the fixed combs one by one and then pollen, brood and honey combs were removed, and kept in a container and covered with a lid which affects quality of honey in relation to length of storage. According to Gichora [13], plastic container is the ideal one for the quality of honey. Accordingly plastic bucket and plastic sack were highly used and in some case they use nickels to store honey for both short and long period and which result rusting; deteriorates the honey and technically not appropriate for storage facilities.

Honey bee flora
Beekeeping is more dependable on ecological suitability of an area than any other livestock production [14] and, honey bee population and their productivities in general are mainly influenced by the nature of honey bee flora. Vegetation characteristics of the study areas are considered to be an important indicator for the potentialities of the area for beekeeping. Survey conducted showed that, the potential of cultivated and natural honey flora makes it very favorable for beekeeping. The respondents pointed that, even though there are different types of bee plants and flora seasons, there is a shortage of bee feed during the dry seasons where ground and surface water resources are limited. They also indicated that bee forages become declined as compared with the past period due to forest degradation, use of herbicides and expansion of cultivated lands in the area.

Honey quality laboratory result
Physicochemical properties of honey produced in the study area were analyzed compared to Quality and Standards Authority of Ethiopia (QSAE), Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) and European Union (EU) were described below.

Moisture:
The mean moisture contents of honey samples collected from different locations and hive types are reported below which is depends on the environmental conditions such as temperature, relative humidity of the area and the manipulation of honey during harvesting period by beekeepers, and seasonal variation [15,16].
Ash: The minimum, maximum and mean ash contents of the honey samples analyzed in the present study was lower than the maximum limits (0.6%) set for ash content of the honey by EU, CA and QSAE and the average was within the national and international limits for ash content of honey.

Free acidity:
The overall mean free acidity of honey samples analyzed was 24.08% which is within the acceptable limits (≤40 meq/kg) set by QSAE and CAC, whereas the limit for honey acidity according to EU (2002) honey standard is ≤50 meq/kg. None of the samples exceeded the limit set, which may be taken as indicative of freshness of all the honey samples of the study area. Variation in free acidity among different honeys can be attributed to floral origin or to variation in the harvest season [17].
pH: There was no significant difference (p>0.05) in pH between honey samples obtained from traditional (3.45) and modern hives (4.03) (Table 1), similarly, no significant difference in acidity observed was also other factor. Honey pH has great importance during storage of honey, as they influence the texture, stability and shelf life of honey [18]. pH of honey samples in the current study ranged from 4.13 to 5.02, with an average value of 4.45 (Table 3).

Reducing sugars:
The overall mean reducing sugar content of the analyzed honey samples was 76% which within quality requirement limits (≥65%) (QSEA; CAC; EU). There were no significant differences (P>0.05) in reducing sugars content between honey samples obtained from the two hive types and locations (Tables 1 and 2). Similarly, the average reducing sugars content of honey obtained from market location (80.2%) was significantly higher (p<0.05) than the average moisture content of honey obtained from the two agro ecologies (collected directly from beekeepers).
Apparent sucrose: Apparent sucrose are set to be 5 g/ 100 g for the majority of honeys, which have higher limits (10 g/100 g), as well as