Table 7.
Comparative results on honey contamination with Zn and Cu in different research areas.
| Literature Source | Zn Concentration (mg/kg) | Cu Concentration (mg/kg) | Honey Samples Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dzugan et al., 2017 [60] | 12.57 | 0.77 | Polyfloral honey/Podkarpackie southeastern Poland |
| Derebasi et al., 2014 [59] | 0.15–0.17 | 0.17–0.19 | Turkey, Black Sea Region |
| Tuzen and Soylak, 2005 [26] | 1.1–24.2 | 0.25–1.10 | Turkey, Central Anatolia Region |
| Berinde and Michnea, 2013 [52] | 1.09–1.39 | 0.24–0.32 | Romania, city of Baia Mare |
| Bratu and Georgescu, 2005 [62] | 2.3 | Honey samples provided by Bee Breeders Association/unpolluted area | |
| 1.8–5.6 | Romania, CopșaMică, polluted area 8–25 km away from the source of pollution | ||
| Ciobanu and Rădulescu, 2016 [65] | 0.987 | 18.89 | Polyfloral honey/Romania, Timiș County, in the vicinity of sources of pollution |
| Celechovska and Vorlova, 2001 [57] | 0.190–22.9 | 0.057–1.55 | Honey samples from the Czech market |
| Devillers et al., 2002 [63] | 0.04–5.96 | 0.03–2.30 | Acacia honey/Polluted and unpolluted areas of France |
| Roman et al., 2011 [53] | 0.51–7.85 | 0.45–2.43 | Poland, Wroclaw |
| Matusevicius et al., 2010 [58] | 0.564–5.008 | 0.1106–0.3894 | Honey from various areas of Lithuania |