Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS Omega logoLink to ACS Omega
. 2024 Jun 18;9(26):28852–28865. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.4c03351

Development of Ultrasound-Processed Poppy (Papaver rhoeas L.) Sherbet Enriched with Bee Bread Using Response Surface Methodology: Changes in Shelf Life

Seydi Yıkmış †,*, Nazan Tokatlı Demirok ‡,*, Aksem Aksoy §, Sema Sandıkçı Altunatmaz ∥, Filiz Aksu ∥,*, Rana Muhammad Aadil ⊥, Berna Erdal #
PMCID: PMC11223249  PMID: 38973889

Abstract

graphic file with name ao4c03351_0011.jpg

This research aimed to investigate the effects of ultrasound treatment on the quality characteristics of optimized functional bee bread-enriched poppy sherbet. Antioxidant activity capacity, antimicrobial activity, phenolic compounds, ascorbic acid, organic acid and sugar composition, and sensory properties were performed under storage conditions. The present research was the first to express the effect of ultrasound on the bioactive components in a functional poppy sherbet enriched with bread, using the response surface methodology (RSM) optimization. The maximum optimization, radical scavenging activity (DPPH), total phenolic content (TPC), total anthocyanin content (TAC), and general acceptability values were determined. When comparing the 0th- and 21st-day samples of bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbets, it was observed that the TPC was decreased (p < 0.05). It was also noted that there was no significant decrease in the total flavonoids on day 21. In storage, a decrease in anthocyanin content was observed. Among phenolic compounds, gallic acid had the highest content. While citric acid was found in the highest amount of organic acid, sucrose (6.25 g/L) was found in the highest amount of sugar components 0th day, while MIC values against Micrococcus luteus were lower. The data from this study will be important input for future work.

1. Introduction

Poppy (Papaver rhoeasL.) is a red flowering and annual plants that usually grow in crop fields and meadows where red leaves are used to make poppy sherbet.1 Traditional drinks have been drunk for pleasure or to quench the thirst. They have also been used in medicine as healing agents.2 The poppy plant contains primarily phenolic and anthocyanins and some alkaloids such as coptisine, allotropine, berberine, and rhoeadine.3 As reported previously, poppies have antimutagenic, antigenotoxic, anticarcinogenic, anti-inflammatory, antitussive, soothing anxiety-related digestive problems, and antispasmodic properties.4

Bee products are natural foods/food supplements that people have been consuming for centuries.5 Bee bread, one of the most important functional products of the bees, is a fermented mixture (by lactic acid bacteria) of bee saliva, nectar, and plant pollen with a caramel color.6,7 Thanks to lactic acid fermentation, the bee bread is enriched with new nutrients and is more easily digestible.8 Bee bread has a rich macro- and micronutrients content such as protein, sugars, fatty acids, sterols, and fiber; phenolic acids, flavonoids, and phenylamides; vitamins (C, E, and K); and minerals (K, P, Ca, and Mg).9 Bee bread has been significantly studied by researchers and reported to have anticancer, antimicrobial, antioxidant, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory properties.7

Ultrasound is a nonthermal processing technology, which can be classified in the following ways: diagnostic ultrasound (1–500 MHz), high-frequency ultrasound (100 kHz–1 MHz), and power ultrasound (20–100 kHz).10 Ultrasound technology can shorten processing time, extend shelf life, and improve food quality11 There are a few studies on ultrasound-treated beverages in the literature review.12−16 Response surface methodology (RSM) is a collection of valuable statistical methods for process improvement, maintenance, and design. RSM determines the interaction between independent variables and dependent variables.17,18 The use of RSM in beverage optimization has been the focus of many recent studies.19−22

With the increasing consumer interest in natural, functional, and innovative beverages, there have been a few studies on poppy sherbet. However, this is the first study to optimize ultrasound-treated bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet. RSM was used to optimize the poppy sherbet enriched with bee bread. The aim is to study poppy sherbet enriched with bee bread properties using ultrasound technology. In addition, the objectives of the present study were as follows: (i) to optimize bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet and (ii) to determine antioxidant activity capacity (DPPH and CUPRAC), antimicrobial activity, phenolic compounds, organic acid and sugar composition, and sensory properties.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Preparation of Poppy Sherbet

Poppy leaves were purchased commercially Tekirdağ, Türkiye. The poppy sherbet was prepared at the Nutrition and Dietetics Laboratory of Tekirda Namık Kemal University, Tekirdağ, Türkiye. The formula used for the poppy sherbet was the same as that used in the study by Aydoğdu et al. In brief, the poppy sherbet was prepared with 0.15 g of lemon powder (citric acid), 4.29 g of sucrose sugar, and 0.26 g of poppy.23

2.2. Addition of Bee Bread and Ultrasound Treatment

Bee bread was purchased commercially, originating from the local market of Tekirdağ, Türkiye. The prepared sherbets were mixed with different amounts of bee bread (20–100 mg/100 mL). A 100 mL sample of poppy sherbet was then treated directly with ultrasound (26 kHz, Hielscher Ultrasonics model UP200 St, Germany). The ultrasound treatment parameters were time (4–12 min) and amplitude (60–100%). All samples were filtered after ultrasonic treatment and stored at 4 °C for further analysis. As a result of the optimization, the ultrasound-treated poppy seed sherbet with added bee bread (coded as UT-PS) was stored at +4 °C for 21 days, and the bee bread-enriched functional poppy sherbet samples were analyzed on the 0th, 7th, 14th, and 21st days of storage.

2.3. Modeling Procedure for RSM

RSM was analyzed using Minitab statistical analysis software (Minitab 18.1.1) to understand the effect of bioactive components and overall acceptability in preparing poppy sherbet with added bee bread. A three-level, three-factorial Box-Behnken design was chosen. The adequacy of the model was assessed based on the R2 and the adjusted R2 coefficients, the lack of fit tests, and the results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA). Bee bread (X1), ultrasound time (X2), and ultrasound amplitude (X3) were identified as independent variables. Dependent variables were chosen as the bioactive components and consumer acceptability. The study used three variable factors: the bee bread, ultrasound time, and ultrasound amplitude. Table 1 shows the levels and parameters of the variables in use: −1 is the minimum, 0 is the mean, and 1 is the maximum. A total of 15 experiments were carried out to optimize the process variables based on the coded values formulated in Table 1. To determine the relationship between the responses (bioactive ingredients, consumer acceptance) and the independent variables, the following polynomial was used (eq 1)

2.3. 1

The definition of this formula is as follows: Xi and Xj are independent variables, and the dependent variable (y) is the first-order (linear) equation coefficient (βi), the second-order equation coefficient (βii), the two-factor cross-interaction coefficient (βij), and the intercept term (βo).

Table 1. Experimental and Predicted Responses of RSM and Results of Poppy Sherbeta.

 
 dependent variables
independent variables
 TPC (mg GAE/L)
 DPPH (% inhibition)
 TAC (mg Cy-3-gly/mL)
 general acceptability
no. bee bread (mg/100 mL) (X1) time (min) (X2) amplitude (%) (X3) experimental data RSM predicted experimental data RSM predicted experimental data RSM predicted experimental data RSM predicted
1 20 4 80 57.91 ± 1.57 57.89 59.99 ± 1.19 59.99 42.45 ± 0.38 42.42 7.76 ± 0.71 7.75
2 100 4 80 58.85 ± 0.83 58.83 50.49 ± 0.71 50.49 33.16 ± 0.47 33.14 5.90 ± 0.25 5.89
3 20 12 80 53.29 ± 0.75 53.28 58.94 ± 0.83 58.95 38.68 ± 0.55 38.66 7.12 ± 0.30 7.11
4 100 12 80 60.65 ± 1.56 60.63 50.11 ± 1.05 50.12 34.11 ± 0.92 34.09 5.91 ± 0.25 5.90
5 20 8 60 56.24 ± 0.80 56.23 65.11 ± 0.92 65.12 43.19 ± 0.61 43.17 7.90 ± 0.34 7.90
6 100 8 60 59.53 ± 0.84 59.52 46.98 ± 0.66 46.98 30.37 ± 1.06 30.36 5.82 ± 0.25 5.81
7 20 8 100 49.78 ± 0.70 49.77 55.61 ± 1.50 55.62 36.97 ± 0.52 36.94 7.48 ± 0.32 7.48
8 100 8 100 54.80 ± 0.77 54.78 55.42 ± 0.78 55.42 35.94 ± 0.51 35.91 6.50 ± 0.28 6.49
9 60 4 60 61.29 ± 1.27 61.28 51.85 ± 1.44 51.85 34.50 ± 0.85 34.48 6.24 ± 0.26 6.23
10 60 12 60 62.07 ± 0.88 62.06 58.38 ± 0.83 58.39 37.84 ± 0.54 37.83 6.79 ± 0.29 6.79
11 60 4 100 57.87 ± 0.82 57.86 58.56 ± 0.83 58.57 38.92 ± 0.55 38.89 7.24 ± 0.31 7.23
12 60 12 100 54.29 ± 0.77 54.27 50.60 ± 0.72 50.61 32.77 ± 0.46 32.74 6.06 ± 0.26 6.05
13 60 8 80 60.14 ± 0.41 60.98 68.55 ± 0.97 68.90 42.58 ± 0.60 42.40 7.12 ± 0.30 7.29
14 60 8 80 61.28 ± 1.24 60.98 69.32 ± 1.20 68.90 41.34 ± 0.93 42.40 7.44 ± 0.16 7.29
15 60 8 80 61.56 ± 0.87 60.98 68.8 ± 0.97 68.90 43.34 ± 0.61 42.40 7.32 ± 0.31 7.29
UT-PS 43.43 7.39 73.33 60.41 69.35 43.52 7.58
experimental values 57.22 ± 0.81 65.55 ± 0.93 40.16 ± 0.57 7.27 ± 0.25
% difference 3.19 3.8 3.36 0.31
Open in a new tab
a

TPC: Total phenolic content; DDPH: radical scavenging activity; TAC: total anthocyanin content; GAE: gallic acid equivalent; Cy-3-gly: cyanidin 3-O-glucoside; UT-PS: Ultrasound-treated poppy sherbet.

2.4. Measurement of Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant Activities

The calorimetric method determined the total flavonoid content (TFC).24 Results are expressed in milligrams of catechin equivalent (CE) per liter of TFC. Total phenolic content (TPC) was determined by the Folin–Ciocalteu method.25 Results are expressed in milligrams of gallic acid equivalent per liter (mg GAE/L) of bee bread-added poppy sherbet. The pH differential method was used to determine total monomeric anthocyanin (TMA).26 The absorbances were measured at 510 and 700 nm (λvis-max). Results are expressed as milligrams of Cy-3-gly/mL. The antioxidant activity was evaluated using the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical. The method was previously described by Grajeda-Iglesias et al.27 A spectrophotometer (SP-UV/vis-300SRB, Melbourne, Australia) was used to measure the changes in absorbance at 517 nm. Trolox (0.0078–1 mg/mL) was used as a standard. Blank experiment was also performed without any sample to determine the absorbance of DPPH. Scavenging activity in this assay was expressed as IC50, which represents the sample concentration (μg/mL) required to inhibit 50% of free radical scavenging activity. Results were expressed in percent inhibition. The cupric reducing antioxidant capacity (CUPRAC) method was used to determine the total antioxidant activity of poppy sherbet with added bee bread by measuring its ability to reduce copper ions.28 The standard used was Trolox (0.0078–1 mg/mL). A blank experiment was also carried out without any sample to determine the absorbance of CUPRAC. CUPRAC in this assay was expressed as IC50. This sample concentration (μg/mL) is required to inhibit 50% of free radical scavenging activity. The results were expressed as % inhibition.

2.5. Determination of Phenolic Compounds Using HPLC-DAD

The analysis of phenolic compounds was performed on an Agilent 1260 Infinity chromatograph (Advanced Chromatography Technologies Ltd., Aberdeen, Scotland, C-18, ACE Generix column). The chromatograph was equipped with a diode array detector. The flow rate of the column was adjusted to 0.80 mL/min. The gradients were: 17% B at 0 min, 15% at 7 min, 20% at 20 min, 24% at 25 min, 30% at 28 min, 40% at 30 min, 50% at 32 min, 70% at 36 min, and 17% at 40 min. The gradient elution was performed by using solution A (phosphoric acid (0.1%) with water) and solution B (acetonitrile). The concentrations were expressed in μg/mL.29

2.6. Determination of Organic Acids and Sugars by HPLC-DAD

Organic acid and sugar content were analyzed using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with slight modifications to the method proposed by Coelho et al.30 The analysis was conducted with Agilent Technologies 1260 Infinity LC model (Santa Clara, CA). A 500 μL sample of poppy sherbet was filtered through a syringe filter (0.45 μm) and was injected (20 μL). The column used was Agilent Hi-Plex H (300 mm × 7.7 mm, 65 °C), and the RID flow cell was maintained at 35 °C. The applied flow rate was 0.6 mL/min, 20 min. The mobile phase consisted of H2SO4 (10.0 mM/L) in ultrapure water. Standards were injected. A diode array detector (DAD) was used for detection at 210 nm. Lactic acid, tartaric acid, malic acid, acetic acid, fumaric acid, oxalic acid, and succinic acids were determined. RID was used for the detection of the sugars fructose, turanose, maltose, glucose, sucrose, and xylose. The results are presented in grams per liter for sugars and organic acids.

2.7. Antibacterial Activity

2.7.1. Bacterial Strains

For determining the antibacterial activity, Gram-negative bacteria: Proteus vulgaris (ATCC 3851), Escherichia coli (ATCC 2592), Klebsiella pneumoniae (ATCC 13883), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 27853) and Gram-positive bacteria: Enterococcus faecalis (ATCC 29212), Micrococcus luteus (ATCC 10240), Bacillus cereus (ATCC 11778), and Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 25923) standard bacterial strains were used.

2.7.2. Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) and Minimum Bactericidal Concentration

The MIC of the samples was determined using the CAMHB (Cation-adjusted Mueller–Hinton broth) medium and broth microdilution methods.31 Bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet samples were prepared with concentrations (100–0.19%). The bacteria were suspended in appropriate quantities in 0.5 McFarland (1.5 × 108 CFU/ml) turbidity standard, diluted to 5 × 105 CFU/mL, and added to a 96-well plate. After the cells were incubated at 37 °C for 18–20 h, a spectrophotometer was used to measure changes in absorbance at 630 nm. The MIC value was determined as the lowest concentration without growth.

2.7.3. Disk Diffusion Test

The antibacterial activity of samples was determined using the Kirby Bauer disk diffusion method.32 Sheep blood agar (Catalogue Number: HM-09912; BES-LAB, Turkey) was used to inoculate bacteria strains. After incubation (37 °C for 16–18 h), Mueller Hinton agar was inoculated with a density-adjusted bacterial suspension (0.5 MacFarland). Disks (Bioanalyse BLK, CR) of 6 mm diameter were impregnated with 100 μL of samples and then placed onto the surface of inoculated plates (90 mm). After incubation (37 °C for 16–18 h), inhibition zone diameters (millimeters) were measured at the end of the incubation. Gentamicin (Oxoid, 10 μg) disks were used as a positive control.

2.8. Sensory Analysis

Following the optimization results, changes in the sensory properties of the poppy sherbet created after the application of the bee bread ultrasound amplitude and duration were investigated during the shelf life. Poppy sherbet enriched with bee bread (50 mL) was stored at 4 °C for 0, 7, 14, and 21 days. The overall acceptability of the sherbets was evaluated using 60 semitrained panelists (18 males and 42 females) at Tekirda Namık Kemal University, Türkiye. Random three-digit numbers were used to code all of the models. The sensory analysis environment was set up so that the panelists would not be physically influenced by each other. The analyses were conducted during daylight hours between 10:00 and 13:00. The panelists were given information on how to carry out the pretasting and testing procedures. Water was offered to the panelists to refresh their taste buds and to rinse their mouths after they had tasted the samples. The sensory attributes were rated on a nine-point hedonic scale (0–9).

2.9. Statistical Analysis

All analyses were carried out in triplicate. One-way ANOVA statistically examined the acquired data with SPSS 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago). In the present study, Tukey tests were used to compare means using a significance level of p ≤ 0.05. The response surface methodology (RSM) utilized Minitab statistical analysis software (Minitab 18.1.1). The experiments were conducted with three replications.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Optimization of TPC, DPPH, TAC, and General Acceptability Parameters

Table 1 summarizes the data obtained from experimental and predictive results of poppy sherbet associated with dependent variables (TPC, DPPH, TAC, and general acceptability) and independent variables (bee bread (20 mg/100 mL–100 mg/100 mL, X1), time (4–12 min, X2) and amplitude (60–100%, X3)). A three-level, three-factor Box-Behnken Design (BBD) was applied to generate a total of 15 formulations (runs) to optimize the poppy sherbet.

The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was carried out with the restriction that the p-value for the models was set at <0.05 (Table 2). The relation between bee bread (X1), time (X2), and amplitude (X3) for TPC, DPPH, TAC, and general acceptability are described in the following equation (eqs 2–5).

3.1. 2
3.1. 3
3.1. 4
3.1. 5

The three-dimensional (3D) surface plots in Figures 1A–C, 2A–C, 3A–C, and 4A–C show the effects of bee bread, time, and amplitude on the TPC, DPPH, and TAC and general acceptability of the poppy sherbet. The TPC, DPPH, TAC, and general acceptability significantly affected the X1, X2 linear terms, that is, bee bread content and ultrasound treatment time. Some two-way interaquadraticuterms (X2X3) and some quadraiterm as X21 and X23 also showed a significant effect (p < 0.05) on TPC, DPPH, TAC, and general acceptability. Table 1, which shows the highest TPC value (62.07 ± 0.88 mg GAE/L) with the treatment of bee bread content 60 mg/100 mL, ultrasound time 12 min, and ultrasound power 60 amplitude (Run No. 15), as well as shows the lowest TPC value (49.78 ± 0.70 mg GAE/L) with the treatment of bee bread content 20 mg/100 mL, ultrasound time 8 min, and ultrasound power 100 amplitude (Run No. 7). The highest TAC value (43.19 ± 0.61 mg Cy-3-gly/mL) was obtained with the treatment of bee bread content 20 mg/100 mL, ultrasound time 8 min, and ultrasound power 60 amplitude (Run No. 5). The TAC was reduced when the bee bread content was increased. Habryka et al. indicated that taste acceptability decreased with increasing addition of bee bread. This is similar to the results of the present study.33Table 1 shows the highest general acceptability value (7.90 ± 0.34) with the treatment of bee bread content 20 mg/100 mL, ultrasound time (8 min), and ultrasound power (60 amplitude) (Run No. 15). The model was shown to be highly consistent by the F-value (75.790) and the low p-value (p < 0.05) for the general acceptance parameter. Aydoğdu et al. found TPC (47.36 ± 1.01 mg GAE/100 mL) and DPPH values (56.06 ± 0.45%) of optimized poppy sherbet using citric acid, sucrose, and dried poppy flower.23 Specifically, increasing time and amplitude had a negative effect on TPC, consistent with a previous study by Cheng et al. that showed decreasing TPC in ultrasound-treated mandarin (Citrus unshiu) juice.34 Different results obtained from the studies may be related to the ultrasound process, ultrasound power amplitude, ultrasound processing time, and type, volume, quantity, and matrix of food.

Table 2. Analysis of Variance of Independent Values Obtained from the RSMa.

    TPC (mg GAE/L)
 DPPH (% inhibition)
 TAC (mg Cy-3-gly/mL)
 general acceptability
source DF F-value P-value F-value P-value F-value P-value F-value P-value
model 9 88.980 0.000 1362.200 0.000 67.220 0.000 75.790 0.000
linear 3 148.970 0.000 915.770 0.000 81.620 0.000 157.650 0.000
X1 1 152.430 0.000 2721.760 0.000 234.650 0.000 450.940 0.000
X2 1 17.440 0.009 16.410 0.010 9.700 0.026 18.730 0.008
X3 1 277.050 0.000 9.140 0.029 0.520 0.503 3.280 0.130
square 3 94.720 0.000 2451.950 0.000 68.810 0.000 32.700 0.001
X12 1 206.340 0.000 2557.280 0.000 50.070 0.001 6.890 0.047
X22 1 0.920 0.381 3337.030 0.000 79.460 0.000 82.300 0.000
X32 1 89.980 0.000 2584.890 0.000 107.310 0.000 18.420 0.008
2-way interaction 3 23.250 0.002 718.890 0.000 51.230 0.000 37.030 0.001
X1* X2 1 45.510 0.001 1.790 0.238 13.590 0.014 10.190 0.024
X1* X3 1 3.270 0.131 1304.460 0.000 84.880 0.000 28.680 0.003
X2* X3 1 20.980 0.006 850.410 0.000 55.210 0.001 72.200 0.000
error 5                
lack-of-fit 3 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000
pure error 2                
total 14                
R2 99,38% 99.96% 99.18% 99.27%
adj R2 98,26% 97.89% 99.70% 97.96%
pred. R2 98,60% 99.91% 98.16% 98.36%
Open in a new tab
a

X1: Bee Bread; X2: Time; X3: Amplitude; DF: degrees of freedom; TPC: total phenolic content; DDPH: radical scavenging activity; TAC: total anthocyanin content; GAE: gallic acid equivalent; Cy-3-gly: cyanidin 3-O-glucoside.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Three-dimensional response surface plots representing the effect of process variables on TPC (mg of GAE/L).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Effect of process variables on DPPH represented by 3D response surface plots.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Effect of process variables on TAC (mg Cy-3-gly/mL) represented by 3D response surface plots.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Three-dimensional response surface plots that show the effect of the process variables on the general acceptability

The maximum values for optimization, DPPH, TPC, TAC, and general acceptability were 60.41 mg GAE/100 mL, 69.35%, 43.52 mg Cy-3-gly/mL, 7.58 at 7.39 min, and 73.33 amplitude at 43.43 mg/100 mL bee bread content, respectively. Comparison between the RSM and repeated experimental values of UT-PS gave 96.72, 96.72, 92.28, and 95.91% for TPC, DPPH, TAC, and total acceptability, respectively.

3.2. Bioactive Compounds

Phenolics are the most common secondary metabolic products in plants with various biological activities. It has antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, and antitumor activities.35,36 The results of TPC and TFC values on days 0, 7, 14, and 21 in the bee-butter-fortified functional poppy sherbets are given in Figure 5. Considering the total phenolic content, it was determined that it was 70.12 ± 2.91, 69.67 ± 0.63, 67.38 ± 0.37, and 65.04 ± 1.22 mg GAE/L on days 0, 7, 14, and 21, respectively. When comparing the 0th- and 21st-day samples of bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbets, a reduction in the total phenolic content was observed (p < 0.05). In this research, a high correlation was found (r = 0.94) between total phenolic content and antioxidant activity of poppy sherbet. Similarly, several other studies have shown a positive high correlation between total phenolic content and antioxidant activity.37,38 Pearson’s positive coefficient of determination (R2) for predicting the TPC was significantly correlated with TAC (0.98). This finding differs from Habryka et al. who found that increasing bee bread content improves TAC value in honey. They also indicated that as the addition of bee bread increases, the acceptability of the taste decreases, which is similar to the findings of the present study.33 Marsoul et al. indicated that the TPC of P. rhoeasL. extracts were 95.4 ± 2.42 and 165.4 ± 3.84 mg GAE/g. Compared to our study, these values are quite high.4 Aydoğdu et al. similarly detected a decrease in phenolic contents of optimized poppy sherbet samples during storage (0, 10, 20, and 30 days were 47.36 ± 1.01, 46.87 ± 0.48, 43.76 ± 0.53, and 39.66 ± 0.67 mg/L, respectively).23 It is thought that this difference arises from the addition of bee bread and the method used in sherbet production. It is stated that the concentration method and storage temperature significantly affect the bioactivity of the sherbet.39 Flavonoids are the largest group of phenolic compounds found in plants.40,41 These compounds are considered to be very important components in various nutraceutical, pharmaceutical, medical, and cosmetic applications due to their various effects such as antioxidant, antiviral, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and antiallergic potentials.42 TFC in the sample during the storage period were determined as 22.99 ± 0.78, 21.16 ± 0.53, 17.93 ± 0.19, and 17.05 ± 0.14 mg CE/L, respectively. In the 14th-day sample, TFC decreased significantly. However, it was noted that there was no significant decrease in the total amount of flavonoids on the 21st day. A positive correlation (r = 0.92) was detected between total flavonoids and DPPH. It was determined that there was a high positive correlation (r = 1) between total flavonoids and CUPRAC. Similarly, Aydoğdu et al. reported that their TFC values were 16.69 ± 0.40, 15.54 ± 0.37, 13.01 ± 0.30, and 12.28 ± 0.21, respectively.23 This difference may be due to the different methods of adding bee bread and making the sorbet. However, consistent with the results of the above-mentioned study, a partial decrease in the total phenolic content during storage was observed in our study. When our study results were evaluated overall, it was observed that there was a partial decrease in the TPC and TFC values during the storage period.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Total phenols (A), total flavonoids (B), radical scavenging activity (C), cupric reductant antioxidant capacity (D), and total monomeric anthocyanins (E) of the samples. The letters at the top of the bars indicate statistically significant differences. Two replicates were used for analyses (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001).

3.3. Antioxidant Activity during Storage

Poppy has antiradical activity because it contains bioactive compounds (TFC and TPC).4 Studies have emphasized that bee bread also has antioxidant potential.43,44 The results of the DPPH and CUPRAC values on days 0, 7, 14, and 21 in the bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet samples are given in Figure 5. The percentage of DPPH inhibition in the sample during the storage period was determined as 64.39 ± 0.59, 64.79 ± 0.19, 62.62 ± 0.74, and 62.12 ± 0.3%, respectively. It was found that the DPPH and CUPRAC inhibition percentages were statistically higher for the sample stored on day 0 than the sample stored on day 21 (p < 0.05). DPPH and CUPRAC have a high positive correlation (r = 0.92). Isbilir and Sagiroglu found that the scavenging effects of P. rhoeasL. leaves extracts (water and ethanol) at a concentration of 800 μg/mL against DPPH radical were 88.46 ± 0.08 and 86.81 ± 0.37%, respectively, and they suggested that P. rhoea L. leaves have the potential for use as a natural antioxidant.45 In another study examining the TFC and TPC of different extracts of P. rhoeasL., extracts exhibited a strong scavenging activity against DPPH radicals, and this rate was over 80%.46

3.4. Total Monomeric Anthocyanin Content during Storage

Anthocyanins are water-soluble colored pigments and form purple, red, and blue colors in fruits and vegetables.47 The TAC of bee-butter-fortified functional poppy sherbet samples on days 0, 7, 14, and 21 is given in Figure 5. Total anthocyanin contents in the samples during the storage period were 40.73 ± 0.70 mg Cy-3-gly/mL, 40.03 ± 0.69 mg Cy-3-gly/mL, 37.06 ± 1.11 mg Cy-3-gly/mL, and 35.77 ± 0, respectively. However, it was found that the TAC decreased when it was stored for 21 days. A high positive correlation was found between TAC with vanillic acid (r = 1), neohesperidin (r = 0.96), and TPC-TFC (r = 0.98) (Figure 6). In a study, TAC was found to be 774.49 mg cyn-3-glu/kg in vacuum-processed while TAC was found to be 571.31 mg cyn-3-glu/kg in the traditional method poppy sherbet, and researchers indicated that poppy sherbet is an important source of anthocyanins.39 In another study, the total monomer anthocyanin content was found to be 127.23 ± 1.57 mg Cy-3-gly/100 mL, 116.87 ± 2.20 mg Cy-3-gly/100 mL, 98.22 ± 1.14 mg Cy-3-gly/100 mL, and 92.45 ± 1.08 mg Cy-3-gly/100 mL, respectively, of poppy sherbet samples during the 30 days of storage. As in our study, a decrease in TAC was also observed during the storage.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

Pearson correlation coefficients for bioactive compounds, organic acids, sugars, and phenolic compounds and sensory analysis.

3.5. Analysis of Phenolic Compounds during Storage

Phenolic compounds have antioxidant, antimicrobial, and anti-inflammatory effects. It has also been reported that it is used in the treatment of diseases such as obesity, cancer, and diabetes.36,48,49 It has been reported that poppy and bee bread are rich in phenolic components and bee bread is a functional food.3,,51

The polyphenol results of the sherbet samples prepared with poppy and bee bread in the present study are shown in Table 3. Optimized bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet samples were analyzed for 17 phenolic compounds on days 0, 7, 14, and 21. Gallic acid was found to be the most abundant of these compounds. In this study, gallic acid, which had the highest amount, showed a significant decrease of (29.21 ± 0.41 to 21.12 ± 0.30 μg/mL) p < 0.05 during the storage period. Similarly to this study, in a study where poppy sherbet was evaluated during storage (30 days), as the time increased, protocatechuic acid (1.146 ± 0.048, 1.047 ± 0.038 μg/mL) and gallic acid (23.886 ± 0.164, 23.403 ± 0.343 μg/mL) nonsignificant decreased.23 The values of the phenolic compounds gallic acid, gentisic acid, vanillic acid, catechin, ferulic acid, neohesperidin, quercetin, coumarin, p-coumaric acid, and hydroxybenzoic acid at the beginning of storage were higher than the values obtained by Aydoğdu et al.23 The reason for this difference is thought to be due to the phenolic components of bee bread added to poppy sherbet. Dranca et al. reported that protocatechuic acid, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, gallic acid, chlorogenic acid, and vanillic acid were not detected in bee bread, while the highest concentration was kaempferol (31.25 mg/L) followed by myricetin, luteolin, and rosmarinic acid.50 Sawicki et al. reported that gallic acid, chlorogenic acid, protocatechuic acid, and routine were detected in bee bread.52 Among the phenolic compounds, routine, naringin, resveratrol, and trans-cinnamic acid are seen to be higher in poppy sherbet.23 This result may be because these phenolic compounds are higher in poppy. In the present study, naringin and o-coumaric acid were not detected in the analyses performed during storage. While coumarin and p-coumaric acid could not be detected after the seventh day; catechin, hydroxybenzoic acid, resveratrol, and trans-cinnamic acid could not be detected on day 21. The increase in ferulic acid on the 7th and 14th days was not statistically significant.

Table 3. Change in the Phenolic Content of the UT-PS Sample during Storagea.

  storage days
phenolic compounds (μg/mL) 0 7 14 21
gallic acid 29.21 ± 0.41a 25.34 ± 0.35b 24.97 ± 0.52b 21.12 ± 0.30c
protocatechuic acid 1.03 ± 0.01a 0.85 ± 0.02b 0.83 ± 0.02b 0.59 ± 0.01c
catechin 0.64 ± 0.01a 0.45 ± 0.01b 0.44 ± 0.01b 0.00 ± 0.00
hydroxybenzoic acid 0.15 ± 0.00a 0.03 ± 0.00b 0.03 ± 0.00b 0.00 ± 0.00
vanillic acid 0.03 ± 0.00a 0.03 ± 0.00a 0.02 ± 0.00a 0.02 ± 0.00a
gentisic acid 1.36 ± 0.02a 0.88 ± 0.01b 0.87 ± 0.00b 0.60 ± 0.02c
p-coumaric acid 0.03 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00
rutin 0.52 ± 0.01a 0.48 ± 0.01b 0.47 ± 0.01b 0.42 ± 0.01c
ferulic acid 0.85 ± 0.01b 0.9 ± 0.01a 0.87 ± 0.00ab 0.45 ± 0.01c
naringin n.d n.d n.d n.d
o-coumaric acid n.d n.d n.d n.d
neohesperidin 4.33 ± 0.06a 2.91 ± 0.10b 1.90 ± 0.07c 0.96 ± 0.03d
coumarin 0.09 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00 0.00 ± 0.00
resveratrol 0.01 ± 0.00a 0.01 ± 0.00b 0.01 ± 0.00b 0.00 ± 0.00
quercetin 0.30 ± 0.01a 0.24 ± 0.01b 0.24 ± 0.01b 0.19 ± 0.01c
trans-cinnamic acid 0.20 ± 0.01a 0.22 ± 0.01a 0.22 ± 0.01a 0.00 ± 0.00b
hesperidin 0.41 ± 0.01a 0.40 ± 0.01a 0.39 ± 0.01a 0.31 ± 0.01b
total 39.16 ± 0.57a 32.8 ± 0.55b 31.33 ± 0.67b 24.66 ± 0.38c
Open in a new tab
a

The results are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Different letters indicate significant differences among the values within the same row (p < 0.05). n.d: not detected.

The TPC in bee bread-poppy sherbet was determined as 39.16 ± 0.57 at the beginning and 24.66 ± 0.38 on the 21st day. It was stated that the TPC of poppy sherbet was 31.388 ± 0.413 at the beginning and 27.152 ± 0.016 on the 20th day,23 while the TPC of bee bread was between 5.6 ± 0.1 and 11.4 ± 0.4.51 It is stated that dried poppy flower contains 48.09 ± 0.31 mg GAE/g.3 In parallel with our study, Aydoğdu et al. detected a significant decrease in the concentration of the total phenolic components during the storage period. In general, it is thought that the decrease in phenolic content may be related to changes in the polymerization of phenolic compounds.53

When the linear relationship between the variables was examined, TPC was significantly associated with quercetin (r = 1), vanillic acid (r = 0.98), ferulic acid (r = 0.94), and p-coumaric acid (r = 0.93). In addition, a positive correlation was observed between TFC and vanillic acid (r = 0.98) and neohesperidin (r = 0.98) (Figure 6).

3.6. Sensory Properties during Storage

Sensory analysis results (odor, color, taste, and general acceptability) of sherbet samples evaluated on the 0th, 7th, 14th, and 21st days are given in Figure 7. Color is the most important parameter in consumer taste perception.54 When the optimized bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet sample was evaluated in terms of color and taste, it showed statistically significant variability after the seventh day (p < 0.05). Similarly, in the present study, color losses occurred as a result of the 30-day storage of the poppy sherbet produced by Aydoğdu et al., who reported that color loss was due to the Maillard reaction and losses in anthocyanins.23 It was determined that the panelists gave the highest scores to the sherbet samples at the beginning of storage: color (8.05), smell (7.15), taste (7.95), and overall preference (7.77). Similar results were obtained by Aljaloud et al., who investigated the color, consistency, taste, odor, and overall preference properties of raspberry, blueberry, strawberry, and passion fruit-mango sherbets during a 6-month storage period, and they found that the products showed the best sensory properties was at the beginning storage.55 In this study, it was observed that there was a tendency for color, odor, taste, and general likability values to decrease with increasing storage time. However, this decrease did not show a statistical difference, and the sherbet samples were still within the general acceptability limits on the 21st day. As seen in Figure 5, there was no strong positive correlation between color, odor, taste, odor, general acceptability values, and all other parameters.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

Changes in the sensory properties of the samples during their shelf life.

3.7. Organic Acid and Sugars

Changes in the amounts of organic acids and sugar during storage are shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9. While citric acid (1.615 g/L) was found in the highest amount of organic acid, sucrose (6.246 g/L) was found in the highest amount of sugar components on the zeroth day. All sugars detected decreased during storage, except fructose, sucrose, and xylose. The amount of fructose increased by 0.013 g/L on the 7th day, decreased by 0.046 g/L on the 14th day, and increased by 0.20 g/L from the beginning on the 21st day. Decreasing glucose and turanose amounts were found to be statistically significant.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Open in a new tab

Storage of organic acid compounds (A–H).

Figure 9.

Figure 9

Open in a new tab

Storage sugar components (A–F).

In the present research, bee bread was added to poppy sherbet, and the product also contained sugar and organic acids originating from bee bread. Dranca et al. found fructose (19.73%), glucose (8.82%), melezitose (0.97%), raffinose (0.96%), acetic acid (10.4 g/kg), gluconic acid (79.2 g/kg), propionic acid (1.30 g/kg), butyric acid (0.33 g/kg), and formic acid (6.75 g/kg) in bee bread.50 Significant correlations were observed in TPC between sucrose (r = 0.93), maltose (r = 0.98), and turanose (r = 0.94). A positive correlation was observed between TFC and turanose (r = 0.99), maltose (r = 0.94), and glucose (r = 0.94; Figure 6).

Most organic acids showed a decreasing trend, depending on the storage process. A positive correlation was found between TPC and oxalic, malic, and succinic acids (r = 0.97). TFC was extremely positively correlated with citric (r = 0.96), oxalic (r = 0.94), malic, and succinic acids (r = 0.93). Other significant correlations were observed between lactic, acetic, and fumaric acids with hydroxybenzoic acid (r = 1).

The results obtained are appropriate for the findings in the literature. Ergün et al. reported that the sugar amounts of blueberry and mulberry sherbets decreased significantly after 60 days of storage.56 Evrendilek et al. did not determine a significant change in organic acid values (acetic, formic, and fumaric acid) as a result of the 25-day storage of licorice beverages with hydrostatic pressure.57

3.8. Analysis of Antimicrobial Activity

MIC values of bee-butter-fortified functional poppy sherbet against Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria after 21 days of storage were investigated by broth microdilution test (Table 4). While the MIC values of B. cereus, E. faecalis, and E. coli were found to be the same in sherbet samples stored for 0, 7, 14, and 21 days, MIC values against M. luteus were determined to be lower. The inhibitory effects of the sherbet against S. aureus, M. luteus, P. aeruginosa, and K. pneumoniae were higher at the beginning of storage. In addition, the fact that MBK results were close to/the same as the MIC results showed that this substance has a bactericidal effect on all of the bacteria studied. The antibacterial effects of the samples stored for 0, 7, 14, and 21 days at concentrations ranging from 100% to 6.25% were determined by the disk diffusion method. At the end of the study, zone diameter was determined only in M. luteus.

Table 4. MIC and MBC Results for 0, 7, 14, and 21 Days.

  0 (%)
 7 (%)
 14 (%)
 21 (%)
bacteria MIC MBC MIC MBC MIC MBC MIC MBC
B. cereus 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
S. aureus 25 50 25 50 25 50 25 50
E. faecalis 50 50 50 100 50 100 50 100
M. luteus 12.5 12.5 25 25 25 25 25 25
P. vulgaris 25 50 50 50 50 25 50 50
P. aeruginosa 25 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
E. coli 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 100
K. pneumoniae 25 25 50 50 50 25 50 25
Open in a new tab

It is important that the zone diameter was detected at 25% concentration of 14- and 21-day storage samples. Considering that the lowest MIC and MBC values are seen in M. luteus, it can be said that bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet samples show an effective antibacterial activity, especially on this bacterium (Figure 10). The lowest MIC and MBK values were detected in M. luteus, and it was determined that all samples stored for 0, 7, 14, and 21 days showed important antibacterial activity. When M. luteus MIC/MBC results of the 0-, 7-, 14-, and 21st-day samples were compared, it was observed that the antibacterial effect of M. luteus decreased depending on the increase in storage time (Table 5). Similarly, in the present study, Marsoul et al. reported that P. rhoeasL. flower extracts (maceration) against E. coli have higher MIC values than K. pneumoniae. Poppy is thought to have antimicrobial activity because it contains phenolic, flavonoids, lignans, fatty acids, anthocyanins, and isoquinoline alkaloids.4 In a similar study, Micrococcus roseus was given 8.1 ± 3.4 mm zone diameter antibacterial activities of aqueous decoctions of poppy.58 It was found that antimicrobial activity decreased as the storage time increased.

Figure 10.

Figure 10

Open in a new tab

Antibacterial activity of five different concentrations (1:100, 2:50, 3:25, 4:12.5, 5:6.25%) of 0th- (A), 7th- (B), 14th- (C) and 21st-day (D) samples against M. luteus. This figure was photographed by Berna Erdal.

Table 5. Inhibition Zone Diameters for M. luteus in mma.

storage days concentration (%) zone diameter (mean ± SD, mm)
0 100 10.08 ± 0.28
50 8.150 ± 0.15
25 ND
7 100 11.08 ± 0.28
50 8.03 ± 0.09
25 ND
14 100 9.13 ± 0.44
50 8.10 ± 0.60
25 7.03 ± 0.10
21 100 9.20 ± 0.27
50 7.98 ± 0.13
25 7.01 ± 0.09
Open in a new tab
a

SD: Standard deviation, ND: None diameter.

4. Conclusions

In the present paper, the effects of ultrasound on the antioxidant activity of capacity (DPPH and CUPRAC), antimicrobial activity, phenolic compounds, organic acid and sugar composition, and sensory properties optimizing bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet were evaluated. It was determined that there was a decrease in the total monomeric anthocyanin content during the 21-day storage period. Seventeen phenolic compounds were detected in optimized bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet. Gallic acid, which had the highest amount, showed a significant decrease after 21 days. All sugars detected decreased during storage, except fructose, sucrose, and xylose. The lowest MIC and MBK values were detected in M. luteus. It was determined that the score the panelists gave to the bee bread-fortified functional poppy sherbet decreased during storage. Based on these results, further research (toxicity, anticarcinogenicity) is needed to better elucidate the impact of the ultrasonic process and the storage of the sherbet. The data we have obtained for poppy sherbet enriched with bee bread as a functional product will lead to in vivo studies.

Acknowledgments

This paper was funded by Tekirdag Namik Kemal University as open access under Institutional Open Access Agreements.

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting this study’s findings are available upon request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Author Contributions

All of the authors have contributed to the work and they are known with the submission.

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. Çelik İ.; Göncü A. Effects of Hibiscus (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.) and Poppy (Papaver rhoeas l.) Extracts on Dough and Bread Properties the Usage of Hibiscus and Poppy in Bread. Gıda 2021, 46 (5), 1270–1278. 10.15237/gida.GD21075. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Tamer C. E.; Ömeroğlu P. Y.; Çopur Ö. U.. Functional and Traditional Nonalcoholic Beverages in Turkey. In Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Woodhead Publishing, 2019; Vol. 6, pp 483–521. [Google Scholar]
  3. Yüksel M.; Acar A.; Gögen F.; Arslantaş N. M.; Berktaş S.; Çam M. Production of Iced Tea from Poppy Flowers Extract-Gelincik Çiçeği (Papaver rhoaes L.) Ekstraktından Soğuk Çay Üretimi. Akademik Gida 2022, 20 (3), 263–273. 10.24323/AKADEMIK-GIDA.1187023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Marsoul A.; Ijjaali M.; Oumous I.; Bennani B.; Boukir A. Determination of Polyphenol Contents in Papaver Rhoeas L. Flowers Extracts (Soxhlet, Maceration), Antioxidant and Antibacterial Evaluation. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 31, S183–S189. 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.08.082. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Çelik S.; Gerçek Y. C.; Özkök A.; Bayram N. E. Organic Acids and Their Derivatives: Minor Components of Bee Pollen, Bee Bread, Royal Jelly and Bee Venom. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2022, 248 (12), 3037–3057. 10.1007/s00217-022-04110-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Poyraz F.; Yalmanci D.; İspirli H.; Dertli E. Characterization of Bee Bread Produced with Defined Starter Cultures Mimicking the Natural Fermentation Process. Fermentation 2023, 9 (2), 174 10.3390/fermentation9020174. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Khalifa S. A. M.; Elashal M.; Kieliszek M.; Ghazala N. E.; Farag M. A.; Saeed A.; Xiao J.; Zou X.; Khatib A.; Göransson U.; El-Seedi H. R. Recent Insights into Chemical and Pharmacological Studies of Bee Bread. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 97, 300–316. 10.1016/j.tifs.2019.08.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bakour M.; Laaroussi H.; Ousaaid D.; El Ghouizi A.; Es-Safi I.; Mechchate H.; Lyoussi B. Bee Bread as a Promising Source of Bioactive Molecules and Functional Properties: An Up-To-Date Review. Antibiotics 2022, 11 (2), 203 10.3390/antibiotics11020203. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Aylanc V.; Falcão S. I.; Vilas-Boas M. Bee Pollen and Bee Bread Nutritional Potential: Chemical Composition and Macronutrient Digestibility under in Vitro Gastrointestinal System. Food Chem. 2023, 413, 135597 10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.135597. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lauteri C.; Ferri G.; Piccinini A.; Pennisi L.; Vergara A. Ultrasound Technology as Inactivation Method for Foodborne Pathogens: A Review. Foods 2023, 12 (6), 1212 10.3390/foods12061212. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Ojha K. S.; Tiwari B. K.; O’Donnell C. P. Effect of Ultrasound Technology on Food and Nutritional Quality. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 2018, 84, 207–240. 10.1016/bs.afnr.2018.01.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kamińska-Dwórznicka A.; Kot A.; Jakubczyk E.; Buniowska-Olejnik M.; Nowacka M. Effect of Ultrasound-Assisted Freezing on the Crystal Structure of Mango Sorbet. Crystals 2023, 13 (3), 396 10.3390/cryst13030396. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Mukhtar K.; Nabi B. G.; Arshad R. N.; Roobab U.; Yaseen B.; Ranjha M. M. A. N.; Aadil R. M.; Ibrahim S. A. Potential Impact of Ultrasound, Pulsed Electric Field, High-Pressure Processing and Microfludization against Thermal Treatments Preservation Regarding Sugarcane Juice (Saccharum officinarum). Ultrason. Sonochem. 2022, 90, 106194 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2022.106194. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Margean A.; Lupu M. I.; Alexa E.; Padureanu V.; Canja C. M.; Cocan I.; Negrea M.; Calefariu G.; Poiana M. A. An Overview of Effects Induced by Pasteurization and High-Power Ultrasound Treatment on the Quality of Red Grape Juice. Molecules 2020, 25 (7), 1669 10.3390/molecules25071669. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Khalil A. A.; Khan A. A.; Khalid A.; Abid Z.; Proestos C.; Bhat Z. F.; Shahbaz M. U.; Aadil R. M. Comparing the Antioxidant Properties and Volatile Compounds of Carrot-Orange Juice Blend Processed through Varied Chemical, Pasteurization and Ultrasound Conditions. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2023, 98, 106534 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2023.106534. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kalsi B. S.; Singh S.; Alam M. S. Influence of Ultrasound Processing on the Quality of Guava Juice. J. Food Process Eng. 2023, 46 (6), e14163 10.1111/JFPE.14163. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Chen S.; Zhang H.; Yang L.; Zhang S.; Jiang H. Optimization of Ultrasonic-Assisted Extraction Conditions for Bioactive Components and Antioxidant Activity of Poria Cocos (Schw.) Wolf by an RSM-ANN-GA Hybrid Approach. Foods 2023, 12 (3), 619 10.3390/foods12030619. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Priyadharsini P.; Dawn S. S. Optimization of Fermentation Conditions Using Response Surface Methodology (RSM) with Kinetic Studies for the Production of Bioethanol from Rejects of Kappaphycus Alvarezii and Solid Food Waste. Biomass Convers. Biorefin. 2023, 13 (11), 9977–9995. 10.1007/s13399-021-01819-w. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hadree J.; Shahidi F.; Mohebbi M.; Abbaspour M. Evaluation of Effects of Spray Drying Conditions on Physicochemical Properties of Pomegranate Juice Powder Enriched with Pomegranate Peel Phenolic Compounds: Modeling and Optimization by RSM. Foods 2023, 12 (10), 2066 10.3390/foods12102066. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Sirichan T.; Kijpatanasilp I.; Asadatorn N.; Assatarakul K. Optimization of Ultrasound Extraction of Functional Compound from Makiang Seed by Response Surface Methodology and Antimicrobial Activity of Optimized Extract with Its Application in Orange Juice. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2022, 83, 105916 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2022.105916. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Nkosi N.; Tumba K. Optimization and Energy Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Hydrate-Based Fruit Juice Concentration Process.. Food and Bioprocess Technol. 2023, 1–17. 10.1007/S11947-023-03228-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Chakraborty S.; Mahale S.; Dhar R. Response Surface Optimization of the Enzymatic Clarification Process for Apple Ber Juice and Pasteurization by Thermal and Pulsed Light Treatments. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2023, 17 (5), 4495–4505. 10.1007/s11694-023-01976-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Aydoğdu B. İ.; Demirok N. T.; Yıkmış S. Modeling of Sensory Properties of Poppy Sherbet by Turkish Consumers and Changes in Quality Properties during Storage Process. Foods 2023, 12 (16), 3114 10.3390/foods12163114. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Zhishen J.; Mengcheng T.; Jianming W. The Determination of Flavonoid Contents in Mulberry and Their Scavenging Effects on Superoxide Radicals. Food Chem. 1999, 64 (4), 555–559. 10.1016/S0308-8146(98)00102-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Singleton V. L.; Rossi J. A. Colorimetry of Total Phenolics with Phosphomolybdic-Phosphotungstic Acid Reagents. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 1965, 16 (3), 144–158. 10.5344/ajev.1965.16.3.144. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Giusti M. M.; Wrolstad R. E. Characterization and Measurement of Anthocyanins by UV-Visible Spectroscopy. Curr. Protoc. Food Anal. Chem. 2001, (1), F1-2. 10.1002/0471142913.FAF0102S00. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Grajeda-Iglesias C.; Salas E.; Barouh N.; Baréa B.; Panya A.; Figueroa-Espinoza M. C. Antioxidant Activity of Protocatechuates Evaluated by DPPH, ORAC, and CAT Methods. Food Chem. 2016, 194, 749–757. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.07.119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Apak R.; Güçlü K.; Özyürek M.; Karademir S. E. Novel Total Antioxidant Capacity Index for Dietary Polyphenols and Vitamins C and E, Using Their Cupric Ion Reducing Capability in the Presence of Neocuproine: CUPRAC Method. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52 (26), 7970–7981. 10.1021/jf048741x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Portu J.; López R.; Santamaría P.; Garde-Cerdán T. Elicitation with Methyl Jasmonate Supported by Precursor Feeding with Phenylalanine: Effect on Garnacha Grape Phenolic Content. Food Chem. 2017, 237, 416–422. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.05.126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Coelho E. M.; da Silva Padilha C. V.; Miskinis G. A.; de Sá A. G. B.; Pereira G. E.; de Azevêdo L. C.; dos Santos Lima M. Simultaneous Analysis of Sugars and Organic Acids in Wine and Grape Juices by HPLC: Method Validation and Characterization of Products from Northeast Brazil. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2018, 66, 160–167. 10.1016/j.jfca.2017.12.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Kahlmeter G.; Giske C. G.; Kirn T. J.; Sharp S. E. Point-Counterpoint: Differences between the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing and Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Recommendations for Reporting Antimicrobial Susceptibility Results. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2019, 57 (9), 1–9. 10.1128/JCM.01129-19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Abbey T. C.; Deak E. What’s New from the CLSI Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing M100, 29th Edition. Clin. Microbiol. Newslett. 2019, 41 (23), 203–209. 10.1016/j.clinmicnews.2019.11.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Habryka C.; Socha R.; Juszczak L. The Influence of Bee Bread on Antioxidant Properties, Sensory and Quality Characteristics of Multifloral Honey. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13 (13), 7913 10.3390/app13137913. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Cheng C. x.; Jia M.; Gui Y.; Ma Y. Comparison of the Effects of Novel Processing Technologies and Conventional Thermal Pasteurisation on the Nutritional Quality and Aroma of Mandarin (Citrus unshiu) Juice. Innovative Food Sci. Emerging Technol. 2020, 64, 102425 10.1016/J.IFSET.2020.102425. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Yang X.; Lan W.; Sun X. Antibacterial and Antioxidant Properties of Phenolic Acid Grafted Chitosan and Its Application in Food Preservation: A Review. Food Chem. 2023, 428, 136788 10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.136788. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhang Y.; Cai P.; Cheng G.; Zhang Y. A Brief Review of Phenolic Compounds Identified from Plants: Their Extraction, Analysis, and Biological Activity. Nat. Prod. Commun. 2022, 17 (1), 1–14. 10.1177/1934578X211069721. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. de Souza Carvalho L. M.; Lemos M. C. M.; Sanches E. A.; da Silva L. S.; de Araújo Bezerra J.; Aguiar J. P. L.; das Chagas do Amaral Souza F.; Filho E. G. A.; Campelo P. H. Improvement of the Bioaccessibility of Bioactive Compounds from Amazon Fruits Treated Using High Energy Ultrasound. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 67, 105148 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2020.105148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Feng X.; Zhou Z.; Wang X.; Bi X.; Ma Y.; Xing Y. Comparison of High Hydrostatic Pressure, Ultrasound, and Heat Treatments on the Quality of Strawberry–Apple–Lemon Juice Blend. Foods 2020, 9 (2), 218 10.3390/foods9020218. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Ekici L. Effects of Concentration Methods on Bioactivity and Color Properties of Poppy (Papaver rhoeas L.) Sorbet, a Traditional Turkish Beverage. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 56 (1), 40–48. 10.1016/j.lwt.2013.11.015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Mutha R. E.; Tatiya A. U.; Surana S. J. Flavonoids as Natural Phenolic Compounds and Their Role in Therapeutics: An Overview. Future J. Pharm. Sci. 2021, 7 (1), 25 10.1186/s43094-020-00161-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Sun W.; Shahrajabian M. H. Therapeutic Potential of Phenolic Compounds in Medicinal Plants—Natural Health Products for Human Health. Molecules 2023, 28 (4), 1845 10.3390/molecules28041845. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Panche A.; Diwan A. D.; Chandra S. R. Flavonoids: an overview. J. Nutr. Sci. 2016, 5, e47 10.1017/jns.2016.41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Mayda N.; Özkök A.; Bayram N. E.; Gerçek Y. C.; Sorkun K. Bee Bread and Bee Pollen of Different Plant Sources: Determination of Phenolic Content, Antioxidant Activity, Fatty Acid and Element Profiles. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2020, 14 (4), 1795–1809. 10.1007/s11694-020-00427-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Beykaya M.; Samancl A. E. T.; Samancl T.; Önder E. Y.; Uzun E. M.; Tosun F. Investigation of Nutritional and Antioxidant Properties of Anatolian Bee Bread. J. Apic. Sci. 2021, 65 (2), 255–263. 10.2478/JAS-2021-0017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Isbilir S. S.; Sagiroglu A. An Assessment of In Vitro Antioxidant Activities of Different Extracts from Papaver rhoeas L. Leaves. Int. J. Food Prop. 2012, 15, 1300–1308. 10.1080/10942912.2010.520542. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Kostic D. A.; Mitic S. S.; Mitic M. N.; Zarubica A. R.; Velickovic J. M.; Dordevic A. S.; Randelovic S. S. Phenolic Contents, Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity of Papaver Rhoeas L. Extracts from Southeast Serbia. J. Med. Plants Res. 2010, 4 (17), 1727–1732. 10.5897/JMPR10.121. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Khoo H. E.; Azlan A.; Tang S. T.; Lim S. M. Anthocyanidins and Anthocyanins: Colored Pigments as Food, Pharmaceutical Ingredients, and the Potential Health Benefits. Food Nutr. Res. 2017, 61, 1–21. 10.1080/16546628.2017.1361779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Saleh M.; Ramadan M.; Elmadawy R.; Morsi M.; El-Akabawy L. The Efficacy of Alcoholic Extracts of Morus Macroura (Mulberries), Lepidium Sativum (Garden Cress Seeds) and Diclazuril Against E. Stiedae in Experimentally Infected Rabbits. Int. J. Vet. Sci. 2023, 12 (6), 869–878. 10.47278/journal.ijvs/2023.049. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Swantara M. D.; Rita W. S.; Dira M. A.; Agustina K. K. Effect of the Methanol Extract of Annona Squamosa Linn Leaf on Cervical Cancer. Int. J. Vet. Sci. 2023, 12 (3), 295–301. 10.47278/journal.ijvs/2022.187. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Dranca F.; Ursachi F.; Oroian M. Bee Bread: Physicochemical Characterization and Phenolic Content Extraction Optimization. Foods 2020, 9 (10), 1358 10.3390/foods9101358. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Çobanoğlu D. N.; Şeker M. E.; Temizer İ. K.; Erdoğan A. Investigation of Botanical Origin, Phenolic Compounds, Carotenoids, and Antioxidant Properties of Monofloral and Multifloral Bee Bread. Chem. Biodiversity 2023, 20 (3), e202201124 10.1002/cbdv.202201124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Sawicki T.; Starowicz M.; Kłębukowska L.; Hanus P. The Profile of Polyphenolic Compounds, Contents of Total Phenolics and Flavonoids, and Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Properties of Bee Products. Molecules 2022, 27 (4), 1301 10.3390/molecules27041301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Wang L. F.; Kim D. M.; Lee C. Y. Effects of Heat Processing and Storage on Flavanols and Sensory Qualities of Green Tea Beverage. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48 (9), 4227–4232. 10.1021/jf0003597. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Aadil R. M.; Zeng X. A.; Han Z.; Sun D. W. Effects of Ultrasound Treatments on Quality of Grapefruit Juice. Food Chem. 2013, 141 (3), 3201–3206. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.06.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Aljaloud S. O.; Dar B. N.; Al-Temimi A.; Palka A.; Wilczy′nska A.; Wilczy′nska W. Storage Quality Changes in Craft and Industrial Blueberry, Strawberry, Raspberry and Passion Fruit-Mango Sorbets. Foods 2023, 12 (14), 2733 10.3390/FOODS12142733. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Ergün A. R.; Tekgül Y.; Bozkır H.; Baysal T. Changes in the Quality of Black Mulberry and Blueberry Sherbets During Storage. Turkish J. Agric. - Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 5 (1), 54–59. 10.24925/TURJAF.V5I1.54-59.919. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Evrendilek G. A.; Bakay S.; Uzuner S. High Pressure Processing of Licorice Drink with Respect to Quality Characteristics, Microbial Inactivation, and Shelf-Life Extension. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2021, 45 (5), e15465 10.1111/jfpp.15465. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Chaudhry N. M.; Tariq P. In Vitro Antibacterial Activities of Kalonji, Cumin and Poppy Seed. Pak. J. Bot. 2008, 40, 461–467. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting this study’s findings are available upon request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Articles from ACS Omega are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES