BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bill Hurd <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 21 Apr 2020 02:43:27 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (13 lines)
Due to the unfortunate confluence of my obsessive-compulsive nature, relative inexperience and insufficient record-keeping I had obtained some 250 lbs of ‘honey’ that I suspected, rightly as it turned out, had been extracted from frames that had contained a good deal of capped sugar syrup.  I determined to have this ‘honey’ tested and so with a modified syringe withdrew 40 ml from each of the six pails and thoroughly mixed those amounts in a small container from which I prepared two 100 ml samples.  One was sent to a commercial lab at Lexington KY and the other to the USDA lab at Gastonia NC for sugar analysis.

The commercial lab reported glucose at 28.69%, fructose at 35.77% and sucrose at 15.09% and the method as AOAC (HPLC).

The USDA lab reported the method as LC-IRMS with units as d13C(%0).  The numbers reported were Fructose -15.58, Glucose -16.18, Disaccharides -13.86, Trisaccharides -14.06.  There were other numbers reported but I think these were the main numbers that led to the comment “Test results for this sample indicated added sugar not from nectar.”

Could someone on this list help me understand the difference between the two methods used on identical samples?

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2