© The Authors, 2026, Published by the Universidad del Zulia*Corresponding author: a.bergal@univ-eltarf.dz
Keywords:
Apiculture
Pollen spectrum
Honey quality parameters
Traditional knowledge
El Tarf-Algeria
Ethnomelissological, melissopalynological and physicochemical characterization of honeys
from the El Tarf region, Northeastern Algeria
Caracterización etnomelisológica, melisopalinológica y sicoquímica de las mieles de la región de
El Tarf, noreste de Argelia
Caracterização etnomelissológica, melissopalinológica e físico-química de méis da região de El
Tarf, nordeste da Argélia.
Amira Bergal
1,3*
Warda Boumaraf
1
Loubna Nea
2
Chahrazed Bouksiba
2
Djamel Eddine Benouareth
3
Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(32): e264337
ISSN 2477-9407
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47280/RevFacAgron(LUZ).v43.n3.V
Food technology
Associate editor: Dra. Gretty R. Ettiene Rojas
University of Zulia, Faculty of Agronomy
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
1
Laboratory of Environmental Sciences and Agroecology,
Department of Biology, Faculty of Natural and Life Sciences,
Chadli Bendjedid University, El-Tarf, P.O. Box 73, 36000,
Algeria.
2
Laboratory of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Pollution,
Department of Biology, Faculty of Natural and Life Sciences,
Chadli Bendjedid University, El-Tarf, P.O. Box 73, 36000,
Algeria.
3
Laboratory of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Department
of Biology, Faculty of Natural and Life Sciences and Earth
and Universe Sciences, University of 8 May, Guelma,
Algeria.
Received: 10-04-2026
Accepted: 21-06-2026
Published: 02-07-2026
Abstract
Honey is a natural product produced by bees from oral nectar
or plant secretions. This study evaluated apicultural practices and
honey quality from the El Tarf region (northeastern Algeria) using
an integrated approach combining ethnomellissological surveys,
melissopalynological analysis, and physicochemical characterization.
A total of 36 samples representing six honey types (white heather,
eucalyptus, lavender, mountain, multioral, and orange blossom) were
collected from four localities (Aïn Khiyar, Zitouna, Bougous, and Aïn
Karma). Pollen analysis revealed a predominance of polyoral honeys
with variable monooral representation. Physicochemical parameters
showed signicant variability among honey types (p < 0.05), with
pH ranging from 3.73 to 4.37, moisture content from 13.90 % to
18.19 %, and electrical conductivity from 330.33 to 719.33 µS.cm
-1
.
Hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) content varied between 41.35 and
49.80 mg.kg
-1
, while total acidity ranged from 41.50 to 63.64 meq.kg
-1
.
Diastase activity (9.50 – 14.00 DN) and proline content (310 – 420
mg.kg
-1
) also showed signicant dierences according to botanical
origin (p < 0.05). All samples complied with international honey
quality standards. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) showed that
honey samples were clearly structured according to botanical origin,
with electrical conductivity, proline, and acidity contributing most
to variability (PC1 = 46.38 %, PC2 = 28.04 %). Monooral honeys
exhibited more homogeneous proles, whereas multioral samples
were more dispersed, conrming signicant compositional variability
(p < 0.05). The results demonstrate that honey quality in the El Tarf
region is primarily inuenced by oral origin and local beekeeping
practices, highlighting the relevance of integrating traditional
knowledge with physicochemical and palynological approaches for
honey authentication and quality assessment.
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(3): e264337 April-June ISSN 2477-9407.
2-8 |
Resumen
La miel es un producto natural producido por las abejas a partir
del néctar oral o las secreciones vegetales. Este estudio evaluó las
prácticas apícolas y la calidad de la miel en la región de El Tarf (noreste
de Argelia) mediante un enfoque integrado que combinó estudios
etnomelisológicos, análisis melisopalinológicos y caracterización
sicoquímica. Se recolectaron 36 muestras de seis tipos de miel
(brezo blanco, eucalipto, lavanda, de montaña, multioral y azahar)
en cuatro localidades (Aïn Khiyar, Zitouna, Bougous y Aïn Karma).
El análisis de polen reveló un predominio de mieles multiorales
con una representación variable de mieles monoorales. Los
parámetros sicoquímicos mostraron una variabilidad signicativa
entre los tipos de miel (p < 0,05), con un pH que osciló entre 3,73
y 4,37, un contenido de humedad entre 13,90 % y 18,19 %, y una
conductividad eléctrica entre 330,33 y 719,33 µS.cm
-1
. El contenido
de hidroximetilfurfural (HMF) varió entre 41,35 y 49,80 mg.kg
-1
,
mientras que la acidez total osciló entre 41,50 y 63,64 meq.kg
-1
. La
actividad de la diastasa (9,50–14,00 DN) y el contenido de prolina
(310–420 mg.kg
-1
) también mostraron diferencias signicativas
según el origen botánico (p < 0,05). Todas las muestras cumplieron
con los estándares internacionales de calidad de la miel. El análisis
de componentes principales (ACP) mostró que las muestras de miel
presentaban una clara estructura según su origen botánico, siendo
la conductividad eléctrica, la prolina y la acidez los parámetros que
más contribuyeron a la variabilidad (CP1 = 46,38 %, CP2 = 28,04
%). Las mieles monoorales exhibieron perles más homogéneos,
mientras que las multiorales mostraron una mayor dispersión, lo
que conrma una variabilidad compositiva signicativa (p < 0,05).
Los resultados demuestran que la calidad de la miel en la región de
El Tarf está inuenciada principalmente por el origen oral y las
prácticas apícolas locales, lo que subraya la importancia de integrar el
conocimiento tradicional con enfoques sicoquímicos y palinológicos
para la autenticación y evaluación de la calidad de la miel.
Palabras clave: apicultura, espectro polínico, parámetros de calidad
de la miel, conocimiento tradicional, El Tarf-Argelia.
Resumo
O mel é um produto natural produzido pelas abelhas a partir do
néctar oral ou de secreções vegetais. Este estudo avaliou as práticas
apícolas e a qualidade do mel da região de El Tarf (nordeste da Argélia)
utilizando uma abordagem integrada que combina levantamentos
etnomelissológicos, análises melissopalinológicas e caracterização
físico-química. Um total de 36 amostras, representando seis tipos
de mel (urze branca, eucalipto, lavanda, montanha, multioral e or
de laranjeira), foram recolhidas em quatro localidades (Aïn Khiyar,
Zitouna, Bougous e Aïn Karma). A análise polínica revelou uma
predominância de méis multiorais com representação variável de
méis monoorais. Os parâmetros físico-químicos apresentaram uma
variabilidade signicativa entre os tipos de mel (p < 0,05), com um
pH a variar entre 3,73 a 4,37, um teor de humidade de 13,90 % a
18,19 % e uma condutividade elétrica de 330,33 a 719,33 µS.cm
-1
.
O teor de hidroximetilfurfural (HMF) variou entre 41,35 e 49,80
mg.kg
-1
, enquanto a acidez total variou entre 41,50 a 63,64 meq.
kg
-1
. A atividade da diastase (9,50–14,00 DN) e o teor de prolina
(310–420 mg.kg
-1
) também apresentaram diferenças signicativas
de acordo com a origem botânica (p < 0,05). Todas as amostras
cumpriram os padrões internacionais de qualidade do mel. A Análise
de Componentes Principais (ACP) mostrou que as amostras de mel
apresentaram uma estrutura clara de acordo com a origem botânica,
sendo que a condutividade elétrica, a prolina e a acidez contribuíram
mais para a variabilidade (PC1 = 46,38 %, PC2 = 28,04 %). Os méis
monoorais exibiram pers mais homogéneos, enquanto as amostras
multiorais foram mais dispersas, conrmando uma variabilidade
composicional signicativa (p < 0,05). Os resultados demonstram que
a qualidade do mel na região de El Tarf é inuenciada principalmente
pela origem oral e pelas práticas locais de apicultura, destacando a
relevância da integração do conhecimento tradicional com abordagens
físicoquímicas e palinológicas para a autenticação e avaliação da
qualidade do mel.
Palavras-chave: apicultura, espectro polínico, parâmetros de
qualidade do mel, conhecimento tradicional, El Tarf-Argélia.
Introduction
Algeria is characterized by a wide range of bioclimatic zones,
from humid coastal areas to semi-arid inland regions, supporting a
rich oristic diversity that favors apiculture and the production of
high-value honeys (Hamsas El Youbi et al., 2016; Ayad et al., 2021).
Honey characteristics are largely inuenced by botanical origin,
seasonal owering, and environmental conditions, as well as by
beekeeping practices and post-harvest handling. Although honey is
recognized for its nutritional and medicinal properties (Al-Habsi and
Niranjan, 2012), it remains susceptible to quality degradation and
adulteration, particularly in regions where quality control systems are
limited (Bouddine et al., 2024; Derrar et al., 2024).
Despite the importance of honey production in Algeria, integrated
studies combining ethnomelissological surveys, melissopalynological
analysis, and physicochemical characterization remain scarce,
especially in northeastern regions. The El Tarf area, characterized
by forest, coastal, and agricultural ecosystems, represents a zone of
high apicultural potential, however, the documentation of traditional
knowledge and comprehensive honey quality assessment in this
region is still limited (Boutabia et al., 2016).
This study addresses this gap through a multidisciplinary approach
integrating ethnomelissological investigation, pollen analysis,
and physicochemical characterization. It aims to (i) document
local beekeeping practices, (ii) identify high-potential apicultural
zones, (iii) assess honey quality and botanical origin in relation to
international standards, and (iv) propose strategies to improve honey
quality and market value.
Materials and Methods
Study area
The wilaya of El Tarf is located in the extreme Northeast of
Algeria, on the border with Tunisia (Boussaid et al., 2018). It covers
an area of 2,912.65 km² and belongs to the humid bioclimatic region of
the Algerian coast. The capital, El Tarf, is located approximately 650
km east of Algiers, the country’s capital. This wilaya is characterized
by a varied topography including mountainous, forested, and coastal
areas, favorable for the development of a rich and diverse melliferous
ora (Boutabia et al., 2016). The samples were collected from four
study sites located in the El Tarf region (Figure 1).
These areas were chosen due to their oristic diversity, notable
beekeeping activity, and their representativeness of the melliferous
ecosystems of Northeastern Algeria.
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Bergal et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(3): e264337
3-8 |
Figure 1. Geographic location of the study area in El Tarf Province
(northeastern Algeria), showing the sampling sites (Aïn
Khiar, Zitouna, El Tarf, Bougous, and Aïn Karma). The
map includes main geographical features such as roads,
rivers, lakes, and urban areas.
Ethnomelissological survey (ethnographic)
An ethnomelissological survey was conducted among local
beekeepers using a semi-structured questionnaire administered
through direct interviews in four study areas (Aïn Khiar, Zitouna,
Bougous, and Aïn Karma). Field visits and hive inspections were
performed to document beekeeping practices, surrounding ora, and
apiary distribution.
The survey focused on the following areas
The survey addressed oristic resources and honey typology (main
melliferous species and their inuence on honey characteristics),
harvesting practices (seasonality and limited transhumance),
local quality criteria, extraction and preservation techniques,
commercialization, and traditional therapeutic uses.
Site-specic ethnomelissological features were identied across
the four study areas. Aïn Khiar was characterized by an agroforestry
system producing mainly polyoral honeys used for digestive and
general health purposes. Zitouna represented a forest–agriculture
transition zone, where honeys were commonly used for respiratory
ailments. Bougous, a mountainous forest area, produced dark honeys
dominated by Arbutus unedo and Quercus spp., highly valued for
medicinal applications. Aïn Karma, with a forested semi-rural
landscape, was associated with honeys used for preventive and
fortifying purposes (Figure 2).
Data collection
A semi-structured interview was conducted with approximately
30 beekeepers selected using a snowball sampling approach across
four sites: E1 (Aïn Khiar), E2 (Zitouna), E3 (Bougous), and E4 (Aïn
Karma) (Figures. 2, 3).
Figure 3: Photograph of the study stations (BERGAL, 2024)
The dataset included independent variables related to production
conditions (site, harvest season, botanical origin, extraction
method, and hive type), and dependent variables describing honey
characteristics, including sensory attributes, traditional uses, and
physicochemical parameters.
Pollen analysis (melissopalynology)
The pollen analysis of honeys was carried out in accordance with
the reference method described by Louveaux et al. (1978).
Physicochemical analyses
Physicochemical analyses were performed according to
harmonized methods of the International Honey Commission (IHC)
and Codex Alimentarius standards (CODEX STAN 12-1981). Honey
samples were stored in airtight glass containers, protected from light,
at room temperature (20–25 °C) and analyzed within two weeks.
All measurements were conducted in triplicate and expressed as
mean ± standard deviation. The analyzed parameters included pH,
free and total acidity, hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), proline, protein,
moisture content, diastatic activity, electrical conductivity, salinity,
and sugar composition (Ghorab et al., 2021).
pH, acidity, moisture, conductivity, and diastase activity were
determined using standard analytical methods (Da Silva et al., 2016).
HMF was measured spectrophotometrically (Khalil et al., 2012),
while proline and protein contents were determined using ninhydrin
and Coomassie methods, respectively (Da Silva et al., 2016).
Sugar composition (glucose, fructose, and sucrose) was
determined by HPLC-RID after dilution, ltration (0.45 µm), and
separation on a carbohydrate column using an acetonitrile:water
(80:20, % v/v) mobile phase. Quantication was performed using
external standards (Derrar et al.,2024; Khalil et al., 2012).
Experimental desing and statistical analysis
A factorial ANOVA (general linear model) was applied to evaluate
the eects of site, season, and honey type, as well as their interactions,
on physicochemical parameters. When signicant dierences were
observed, Tukey’s HSD test was used for multiple comparisons (p
< 0.05). Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed to
explore relationships among honey samples and physicochemical
variables and to identify the main factors explaining variability
between honey types.
Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics
(v.24). Results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation based on
triplicate measurements.
Results and discussion
Survey
During the spring owering period (Figure 4), hive placement
was mainly concentrated in mountainous areas characterized by high
oristic richness and abundant melliferous species.
Figure 2. Spatial distribution of beekeepers and sampling sites
in El Tarf Province (northeastern Algeria): E1 (Aïn
Khiar), E2 (Zitouna), E3 (Bougous), and E4 (Aïn Karma),
overlaid on land use/land cover.
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(3): e264337 April-June ISSN 2477-9407.
4-8 |
Figure 4 : The locations of the hives during the owering period
Orchards represented the second most frequent location due to
fruit tree owering, followed by wetland-associated areas oering
continuous oral resources and favorable microclimatic conditions.
In contrast, agricultural plains and steppe zones were less used,
likely due to intensive farming practices and reduced spontaneous
ora diversity (Derrar et al., 2024). These dierences in hive
distribution among environments were statistically signicant (p <
0.05). These results are consistent with previous studies highlighting
the importance of natural and semi-natural ecosystems in supporting
beekeeping activity and the production of high-quality polyoral
honeys in North Africa and Mediterranean regions (Bouddine et al.,
2024; Al-Habsi and Niranjan, 2012; Anjos et al., 2023; Haderbache
and Mohammedi, 2015).
The dierent areas for hive placement in relation to the season are
show in gure 5.
Figure 5: The dierent areas for hive placement in relation to the
season
Beekeeping activity shows clear seasonal dynamics across
habitats. During winter, hive placement is limited and mainly
concentrated in agricultural and mountainous areas due to reduced
oral availability and climatic constraints. In spring, hive distribution
increases in all environments, particularly in orchards, corresponding
to peak owering of melliferous species (Boutabia et al., 2016). In
summer, hives are mainly relocated to mountainous and wetland
areas oering favorable microclimatic conditions and sustained oral
resources, while activity decreases in plains and orchards (Ghorab
et al., 2021). In autumn, overall beekeeping activity declines, with
hives mostly concentrated in mountainous and wetland zones (Derrar
et al., 2024).
These seasonal patterns reect a transhumance strategy driven
by oral phenology and climatic conditions, highlighting the key
role of natural ecosystems in shaping honey diversity and quality in
the El Tarf region (Ket et al., 2023). Seasonal dierences in hive
distribution were statistically signicant (p < 0.05).
The feeding periods during the year 2024 are presented in gure 6.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Occurrence (%)
Frequent (%)
Occasional (%)
Figure 6: The feeding periods during the year 2024
The data show a clear seasonal dynamic in feeding activity, with
high values in winter (January–February), a sharp decline from March
to August, and a marked increase in autumn (September–November),
reaching a peak in October–November. Overall dierences between
months were statistically signicant (p < 0.05). This pattern reects
the inuence of climatic and oristic seasonality on beekeeping
practices in the El Tarf region (Boutabia et al., 2016; Al-Habsi and
Niranjan, 2012). The autumn peak coincides with the owering
of late melliferous species such as Arbutus unedo, Erica spp., and
Quercus spp., which contribute signicantly to honey production
(Machado De-Melo et al., 2018). The low activity observed in spring
and summer is likely related to reduced oral availability, high
temperatures, and transhumance or reduced colony management
during this period (Bouddine et al., 2024; Ayad et al., 2021). These
results are consistent with previous studies in Mediterranean regions
reporting a bimodal beekeeping activity pattern, with peaks in early
spring and autumn (Derrar et al., 2024; Machado De-Melo et al.,
2018).
The Figure 7 shows a marked seasonal pattern in owering in El
Tarf, with two main periods.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Number of flowering
species
Figure 7: Chronology of owering during the year 2024
A moderate owering phase occurs in winter (January–February),
dominated by early-owering species providing initial nectar
resources for bee colonies. From March to August, owering is very
limited due to high temperatures and water stress. The main owering
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Bergal et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(3): e264337
5-8 |
peak occurs in autumn (September–November), particularly in
October–November, driven by favorable climatic conditions such
as rainfall and cooler temperatures, which support colony resource
accumulation. Sporadic owering species contribute marginally
throughout the year (Cohen et al., 2022). Overall, owering intensity
showed signicant seasonal variation (p < 0.05). This phenological
pattern highlights the importance of forest and shrub ecosystems in
sustaining beekeeping activity and supports adaptive practices such
as transhumance and supplemental feeding. It also emphasizes the
relevance of owering seasonality in apicultural management, with
a stronger autumn bloom compared to other Mediterranean regions
(Ket et al., 2023; Machado De-Melo et al., 2018).
The annual honey harvest shows a marked seasonal pattern, with a
main peak in summer (June–July), reecting high overall beekeeping
activity (Figure 8).
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Strawberry tree honey
harvest
Citrus honey harvest
Eucalyptus honey harvest
Heather honey harvest
Annual harvest
Figure 8: Harvest periods
Heather honey is mainly produced in spring (March–May), citrus
honey in early spring (March), eucalyptus honey in summer (July–
August), and Arbutus unedo honey in late autumn to early winter
(November–December), extending the harvesting period beyond the
main season. These patterns reect the strong dependence of honey
production on oral phenology (Al-Habsi and Niranjan, 2012; Ayad,
2021). The summer peak highlights the importance of eucalyptus as
a key nectar source (Bouddine et al., 2024), while Arbutus unedo
contributes to late-season production, supporting colony sustainability
during nectar scarcity periods (Ket et al., 2023). Overall, honey
production diered signicantly across harvest periods (p < 0.05),
conrming the strong seasonal inuence of oral availability on
beekeeping yields.
Table 1 show the characEthnomellissological of honeys from the
El Tarf region.
A factorial ANOVA revealed signicant variability in honey
characteristics according to site, season, and botanical origin. A signicant
site eect (p < 0.05) indicated that geographical origin strongly inuences
honey composition and sensory properties. Seasonal variation was also
signicant (p < 0.05), with spring honeys generally showing lighter
oral proles, while autumn honeys exhibited darker and more woody
characteristics. Botanical origin had a highly signicant eect (p < 0.01),
conrming clear dierences between monooral and polyoral honeys,
with monooral types showing more homogeneous proles (Khalil et al.,
2012; Machado De-Melo et al., 2018).
Signicant interactions were observed between site × season and
season × honey type (p < 0.05), indicating that environmental and
botanical factors jointly inuence honey variability.
Pollen taxa identied in the samples
Pollen analysis of the 36 honey samples (Table 1) revealed taxa
mainly associated with forest, Mediterranean, and agricultural ora
characteristic of the El Tarf region (Al-Kafaween et al., 2023; Anjos
et al., 2015).
Ethnographic data showed that spring was the dominant harvesting
season (60 %), followed by autumn (40 %). Centrifugation was the
most common extraction method (60 %), compared to pressing (40
%), and Langstroth hives were predominant (60 %) over traditional
hives (40 %).
Polyoral honeys were more frequent (60 %) than monooral
types (40 %). Thymus species represented the most commonly
cited oral source (60 %), followed by Arbutus unedo and Quercus
spp. (40 %). Honey use was mainly associated with medicinal and
nutritional purposes. Overall dierences in frequencies among
categories were statistically signicant (p < 0.05), indicating a non-
random distribution of beekeeping practices and honey types across
the studied samples.
The main pollens identied are presented in Table 2.
Monooral strawberry tree honeys were mainly associated with
forested areas (Bougous, Aïn Karma), conrming the importance of
sylvatic formations. Citrus honeys were linked to agricultural areas
(Zitouna and Aïn Khiyar) (Table 2, 3). The high frequency of Quercus
and Cistus pollen reects the strong inuence of Mediterranean forest
ecosystems (Boutabia et al., 2016; Ket et al., 2023). Overall, pollen
frequencies diered signicantly among taxa and ecological groups
(p < 0.05), indicating a non-random distribution of oral resources in
the studied honeys.
Melissopalynological analysis revealed a predominance of forest
and Mediterranean taxa, particularly
Arbutus unedo, Quercus spp.,
Thymus spp., and Cistus spp. These results conrm the presence
of monooral and polyoral honeys and are consistent with
ethnomelissological data obtained from local beekeepers (Table 3 and
4) (Hamsas El Youbi et al., 2016; Anjos et al., 2023).
Overall, the distribution of honey types based on pollen criteria
showed signicant dierences (p < 0.05), indicating a non-random
pattern of botanical origin across the samples.
The pollen spectrum revealed a strong dominance of forest and
Mediterranean taxa, particularly Arbutus unedo, Citrus spp., and
Rubus spp. Most samples exhibited a polyoral character, although
several monooral honeys were identied, mainly dominated
by Arbutus and Citrus. These results highlight the importance of
local oristic diversity and conrm the information obtained from
ethnomellissological surveys conducted among beekeepers in the
region (Boutabia et al., 2016; Ayad et al., 2021). Overall, pollen
distribution among taxa showed signicant heterogeneity (p < 0.05),
indicating a non-random botanical structure in the studied honeys.
This melissopalynological prole reects the forest–agricultural
mosaic of El Tarf and supports the valorization and certication of
local honeys.
Physico chemical analyzes
The results of physicochemical analyzes dierent types of honey
are show in table 5.
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(3): e264337 April-June ISSN 2477-9407.
6-8 |
Table 2. Main pollens identied
Pollen taxon Family
Frequency of
occurrence
Role in honey
Arbutus unedo Ericaceae Very common
Monooral /
dominant honey
Oak spp. Fagaceae Frequent Forest indicator
Thymus spp. Lamiaceae Frequent Major nectar source
Cistus spp. Cistaceae Frequent Mediterranean ora
Citrus spp. Rutaceae
Moderate to
high
Citrus honey
Rubus spp. Rosaceae Moderate Blackberry honey
Eucalyptus spp. Myrtaceae Casual
Secondary
contributions
Various Asteraceae Asteraceae
Low to
moderate
Pollen accessories
various Fabaceae Fabaceae Weak Secondary pollens
Table 3. Pollen spectrum of the samples
Type of honey Pollen criterion Number of samples
Monooral Strawberry Tree Arbutus > 45 % 11
Monooral Citrus Citrus > 45 % 8
Monooral Bramble Rubus > 45 % 6
Polyoral No pollen > 45 % 11
Total
36
Overall, physicochemical parameters such as electrical conductivity,
diastase activity, proline, and protein content eectively discriminate
between dark, mineral-rich honeys (eucalyptus, white heather, lavender)
and lighter honeys (orange, multioral, mountain) (Gheldof et al., 2002;
Ket et al., 2023) (Table 5, Figure 9 and 10). Signicant dierences were
observed among honey types for the measured parameters (p<0.05),
conrming that oral origin strongly inuences honey physicochemical
proles.Mountain and multioral honeys showed lower mineralization
due to diverse oral origins, while orange honey displayed typical
citrus characteristics with low conductivity, moderate acidity, and high
enzymatic activity, indicating good quality and freshness.
Table 1. Ethnomellissological table of honeys from the El Tarf region (Algeria)
Site
Harvest
date
Season
Extraction
method
Type of beehive
Floral sources
cited
Traditional
uses
Sensory notes Type of honey
Ain Khiyar
April 2024
Spring
Centrifuge Langstroth
Strawberry tree,
Oak
Cough, cold Dark, woody
Monooral
Strawberry
Tree
October
2024
Autumn
Pressing Traditional
Thymus,
Rockrose
Digestive
Golden,
herbaceous
Polyoral
Zitouna April 2024
Spring
Centrifuge Langstroth
Citrus fruits,
Thymus
Food use
Light yellow,
oral
Monooral
Citrus
Bougous April 2024
Spring
Centrifuge Langstroth Thymus, Bramble
Traditional
infusion
Golden, fruity Polyoral
Ain Karma
October
2024
Autumn
Pressing Traditional
Strawberry tree,
Quercus
Local medicinal
use
Dark, woody Polyoral
Table 4. Main pollen taxa identied in the studied honeys
Pollen taxon
Frequency
(%)
Pollen
class
Botanical interpretation
Arbutus unedo 35–55 Dominant
Monooral strawberry tree
honey
Cistus spp. 25–55
Dominant
to
secondary
Citrus honey
Thymus spp. 20–45 Secondary Marked aromatic inuence
Cistus spp.. 10–30 Secondary Mediterranean vegetation
Oak spp.. 5–20 Secondary Forest origin
Rubus spp. 15–50 Dominant Blackberry honey
Eucalyptus spp. 5–15 Minor Additional contribution
Other taxa <10 Minor Polyoral character
Classication used • Dominant: > 45 % • Secondary: 16–45 % • Minor: < 15 %
The Comparison of the dierent honey samples studied are presented
in Figure 9. Each axis represents a physicochemical parameter (pH,
electrical conductivity, salinity, etc.), and the curves show the normalized
mean proles of each honey type, allowing visual comparison of their
overall physicochemical signatures (Amessis-Ouchemoukh et al., 2021).
The radar analysis highlights clear inter-oral variability, reecting
ecological and botanical diversity. White heather and lavender honeys
exhibited richer biochemical proles, with higher enzymatic and
mineral-related parameters, consistent with honeys derived from woody
and aromatic ora. Eucalyptus honey also displayed a prole typical of
mineral-rich dark honeys (Figure 10).
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Bergal et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(3): e264337
7-8 |
Table 5. Comparative table of physicochemical analyzes (Mean±SD) of dierent types of honey.
Physicochemical
characterisitics
White heather Eucalyptus Lavender Mountain Multiowers Orange tree
pH 4.310± 0.010 4.367 ± 0.015 4.110 ± 0.010 4.230 ± 0.010 3.730 ± 0.010 3.980 ± 0.010
Conductivity 609.333 ± 2.517 719,333 ± 2,517 510.333 ± 1.528 402.333 ± 1,528 330.333 ± 1.528 470.000 ± 2,000
Salinity 293.100 ± 0.656 394.100 ± 1.054 245.233 ± 0.351 192.733 ± 0.802 155.733 ± 0.862 210,600 ± 0.557
Humidity 18.187 ± 0.035 16.590 ± 0.036 15.447 ± 0.025 14.127 ± 0.025 15.807 ± 0.025 13.900 ± 0.020
Sugar 78.50 ± 0.50 80.20 ± 0.40 79.10 ± 0.45 77.80 ± 0.35 76.90 ± 0.50 79.50 ± 0.40
Water content 29.340 ± 0.040 27.777 ± 0.025 26.210 ± 0.036 22.700 ± 0.010 25.020 ± 0.020 23.883 ± 0.031
Protein 0.063 ± 0.006 0.043 ± 0.006 0.073 ± 0.006 0.053 ± 0.006 0.083 ± 0.006 0.063 ± 0.006
HMF 49.800 ± 0.100 45.117 ± 0.176 42.100 ± 0.100 44.550 ± 0.050 43.700 ± 0.100 41.350 ± 0.050
Free acidity 44.307 ± 0.200 45.077 ± 0.166 38.750 ± 0.250 55.140 ± 0.212 35.100 ± 0.100 36.767 ± 0.252
Lactone acidity 7.800 ± 0,000 7.200 ± 0,000 7.000 ± 0.000 8.500 ± 0.000 6,400 ± 0,000 6.500 ± 0,000
Total acidity 52.107 ± 0.200 52.277 ± 0.166 45.750 ± 0.250 63.640 ± 0.212 41.500 ± 0.100 43.267 ± 0.252
Diastase 14.000 ± 0.000 9.500 ± 0.000 11.000 ± 0,000 13.000 ± 0.000 10.500 ± 0,000 12.500 ± 0.000
Proline 400.000 ± 0.000 350.000 ± 0.000 370.000 ± 0.000 420.000 ± 0.000 310.000 ± 0.000 390.000 ± 0.000
ASH 0.240 ± 0.000 0.180 ± 0.000 0.190 ± 0.000 0.220 ± 0.000 0.160 ± 0.000 0.200 ± 0.000
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
pH
Conductivity
Salinity
Humidity
Sugar
Water content
Protein
HMF
Free acidity
Lactone acidity
Total acidity
Diastase ( Mean ± SD)
Proline
ASH
H1,White heather
H2,Eucalyptus
H3,Lavender
H4,Mountain
H5,Multiflowers
H6,Orange tree
Figure 9. Comparison of the dierent honey samples studied
Figure 10: The radar of the physico-chemical analyzes of the
dierent honey samples.
These dierences among honey types were statistically signicant
(p<0.05), conrming the inuence of oral origin on physicochemical
composition.
Multivariate analysis and physicochemical variability
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) combined with hierarchical
clustering (Ward’s method) was used to explore relationships among
physicochemical parameters and classify honey samples (Figure 11).
The rst two principal components explained a substantial proportion
of the total variance (PC1 = 46.38 %, PC2 = 28.04 %), indicating a
reliable representation of the dataset.
Figure 11. Combined Principal Component Analysis (PCA)
and hierarchical clustering of honey samples.
Physicochemical variables are represented as color-
coded vectors (legend provided for clarity). Ellipses
indicate clusters obtained using Ward’s hierarchical
method. The rst two principal components (PC1 and
PC2) explain 46.38 % and 28.04 % of the total variance,
respectively.
PC1 was mainly driven by mineral-related variables such as
electrical conductivity, salinity, total acidity, and proline, which
contributed to the dierentiation of forest and mountain honeys (e.g.,
eucalyptus and white heather), in agreement with previous studies on
Mediterranean honeys (Amessis-Ouchemoukh et al., 2021; Da Silva
et al., 2016; Al-Kafaween et al., 2023). PC2 was associated with
quality and freshness indicators, particularly moisture content, HMF,
and diastase activity, reecting storage and environmental eects
(Anjos et al., 2015; Machado De-Melo et al., 2018). The PCA score
plot revealed a clear separation of honey types according to botanical
origin. Monooral honeys clustered into more homogeneous groups,
while multioral and mountain honeys exhibited greater dispersion,
indicating higher variability in oral composition. The clustering
analysis conrmed these patterns and supported the robustness of
group separation (Boussaid et al
., 2018 ; Al-Habsi and Niranjan,
2012).
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2026, 43(3): e264337 April-June ISSN 2477-9407.
8-8 |
Strong positive correlations were observed between conductivity
and proline, whereas an inverse relationship between HMF and
diastase activity conrmed the eect of thermal exposure on honey
quality (Amessis-Ouchemoukh et al., 2021; Da Silva et al., 2016).
Statistical analysis of physicochemical parameters
One-way ANOVA revealed signicant dierences among honey
types for most physicochemical parameters (p<0.05), including
electrical conductivity, total acidity, proline content, moisture, and
HMF. These results conrm that botanical origin is the main factor
inuencing honey composition (Gheldof et al., 2002; Amessis-
Ouchemoukh et al., 2021; Boussaid et al., 2018). Electrical
conductivity and proline showed the strongest discriminatory power,
with signicantly higher values in forest and mountain honeys
compared to multioral and citrus honeys. Moisture content and total
acidity also varied signicantly (p < 0.05), while pH showed limited
variability and weak discriminating ability (Da Silva et al., 2016;
Hamsas El Youbi et al., 2016).
Integration and interpretation
The combined PCA and ANOVA results demonstrate that honey
variability is primarily structured by botanical origin, followed by
environmental and management factors. These ndings are statistically
supported by signicant dierences among groups (p < 0.05–0.01),
conrming a non-random distribution of honey physicochemical
proles and supporting previous reports on Mediterranean honeys
(Al-Kafaween et al., 2023; Anjos et al., 2023; Bouddine et al., 2024).
Conclusion
This study provides an integrated assessment of the
ethnomellissological, melissopalynological, ecological, and
physicochemical characteristics of honeys from the El Tarf region
(northeastern Algeria). The results demonstrate a strong relationship
between traditional beekeeping practices, oristic diversity, and
seasonal owering dynamics, which together structure honey
composition and quality.
Melissopalynological and physicochemical analyses conrmed
the botanical origin and quality of the studied honeys, with signicant
dierences observed among honey types according to their oral
origin and environmental conditions. These ndings were further
supported by multivariate analyses, which clearly separated samples
according to their physicochemical proles. Overall, the honey
samples complied with international quality standards, indicating
good physicochemical stability and regional specicity. The El
Tarf region therefore represents a signicant apicultural potential
supported by rich biodiversity and traditional knowledge.
To enhance honey quality and market value, improvements in
harvesting and storage practices, reinforcement of quality control,
prevention of adulteration, and promotion of certied monooral
honeys are recommended. The development of traceability systems
and regional branding could further strengthen the competitiveness of
Algerian honeys in national and international markets.
Literature cited
Al-Habsi, N., & Niranjan, K. (2012). Eect of high hydrostatic pressure
on antimicrobial activity and quality of Manuka honey.
Food Chemistry, 135(3), 1448–1454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodchem.2012.06.012
Al-Kafaween, M. A., Alwahsh, M., Hilmi, A. B. M., & Abulebdah, D. H. (2023).
Physicochemical characteristics and bioactive compounds
of dierent types of honey and their biological and
therapeutic properties: A comprehensive review.
Antibiotics (Basel), 12(2), 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/
antibiotics12020337
Amessis-Ouchemoukh, N., Maouche, N., Otmani, A., Terrab, A., Madani,
K., & Ouchemoukh, S. (2021). Evaluation of Algerian’s honey
in terms of quality and authenticity based on melissopalynology,
physicochemical analysis, and antioxidant power. Mediterranean
Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism, 14(3), 305–324.
https://doi.org/10.3233/MNM-210561
Anjos O, Seixas, N., Antunes, C. A. L., Campos, M. G., Paula, V., &
Estevinho LM (2023). Quality of bee pollen submitted to drying,
pasteurization, and high-pressure processing A comparative
approach. Food Research International, 170, 112964.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2023.112964
Anjos, O.; Campos, M. G.; Contreras Ruiz, P.; & Antunes, P. (2015).
Application of FTIR-ATR spectroscopy to the quantication of sugar in honey.
Food Chemistry, 169, 218–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodchem.2014.07.138
Ayad, R., Amessis-Ouchemoukh, N., Ouchemoukh, S., Madani, K., & Boulekbache-
Makhlouf, L. (2021). Pollen proles, physicochemical characteristics,
and antioxidant activities of honey from Jijel City (Algérie). Annals of
University Dunarea de Jos of Galati. Food Technology, 45(2), 147–167.
https://doi.org/10.35219/foodtechnology.2021.2.10
Bouddine, T., Kachmar, M. R., Akdad, M., Bouymajane, A., Ajebli, M., & Mothana,
R. (2024). Authentication of Ziziphus lotus Honey from the Middle Atlas
Mountains of Morocco: Physicochemical Properties, Mineral Content,
Sugar, Polyphenol Proles, and Antioxidant Capacity. ACS Omega, 9(45),
44956–44973. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.4c04284.
Boussaid, A., Chouaibi, M., Rezig, L., Hellal, R., Donsì, F., Ferrari,
G., & Hamdi, S. (2018). Physicochemical and bioactive
properties of six honey samples from various oral origins
from Tunisia. Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 11(2), 265–274.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2014.08.011
Boutabia L., Telailia S. & Chefrour A. (2016). Spectre pollinique de miels
d’abeille (Apis mellifera L.) de la région d’El Tarf (Nord-Est algérien).
Livestock Research for Rural Development, 28(8). https://www.lrrd.org/
lrrd28/8/tela28150.html
Codex Alimentarius Commission (2001). Standard for Honey (CODEX STAN 12-
1981. Rev. 2-2001).
Cohen, H., Ponisio, L. C., Russell, K. A., Philpott, S. M., & McFrederick, Q. S.
(2022). Floral resources shape parasite and pathogen dynamics in bees
facing urbanization. Molecular Ecology, 31(7), 1964–1977. https://doi.
org/10.1111/mec.16374
Da Silva, P.M., Gauche, C., Gonzaga, L.V., Costa, A.C.O., & Fett, R. (2016).
Honey: Chemical composition, stability and authenticity. Food Chemistry,
196, 309–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.09.051
Derrar, S., Lo Turco, V., Albergamo, A., Sgrò, B., Ayad, M. A., Litrenta, F.,
Saim, M. S., Potortì, A. G., Aggad, H., Rando, R. & Di Bella, G. (2024).
Study of physicochemical quality and
organic contamination in Algerian honey.
Foods, 13(9), 1413.https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13091413
Gheldof, N., Wang, X.-H., & Engeseth, N. J. (2002). Identication and
quantication of antioxidant components of honeys from various oral
sources. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50(21), 5870–5877.
https://doi.org/10.1021/jf0256135
Ghorab, A., Rodríguez-Flores, M. S., Nakib, R., Escuredo, O., Haderbache, L.,
Bekdouche, F., & Seijo, M. C. (2021). Sensorial, melissopalynological and
physico-chemical characteristics of honey from Babors Kabylia’s region
(Algeria). Foods, 10(2), 225. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10020225
Haderbache, L., & Mohammedi, A. (2015). Quality of imported honeys marketed
in Algeria: Physicochemical, labeling and pollen analysis. Journal
of Fundamental and Applied Sciences, 7(1), 139–149. https://doi.
org/10.4314/jfas.v7i1.10
Hamsas El Youbi, A., Ouahidi, I., El Mansouri, L., Daoudi, A., & Bousta, D. (2016).
Ethnopharmacological survey of plants used for immunological diseases in
four regions of Morocco. European Journal of Medicinal Plants, 13(1), 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.9734/EJMP/2016/12946
Khalil, M. I., Moniruzzaman, M., Boukraâ, L., Benhania, M., Islam, M. A.,
Islam, M. N., Sulaiman, S. A., & Gan, S. H. (2012). Physicochemical and
antioxidant properties of Algerian honey. Molecules, 17(9), 11199–11215.
https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules170911199
Ket, L., Draiaia, R., Necib, A., & Mohamadi, N. (2023). Physicochemical and
melissopalynological study of some honey samples from the Algerian East
Region. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology,
11
(4), 780-784. https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v11i4.780-784.5941.
Louveaux, J., Maurizio, A., & Vorwohl, G. (1978). Methods of
melissopalynology. Bee World, 59(4), 139–157. https://doi.
org/10.1080/0005772X.1978.11097714.
Machado De-Melo, A. A., Almeida-Muradian, L. B. de, Sancho, M. T., & Pascual-Maté,
A. (2018). Composition and properties of Apis mellifera honey: A review.
Journal of Apicultural Research, 57(1), 5–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00
218839.2017.1338444