Flavonoids in Australian Melaleuca, Guioa, Lophostemon, Banksia and Helianthus honeys and their potential for floral authentication

Flavonoids in Australian honeys from five botanical species (Melaleuca, Guioa, Lophostemon, Banksia and Helianthus) have been analyzed in relation to their floral origins. Tea tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia) and heath (Banksia ericifolia) honeys show a common flavonoid profile comprising myricetin (3,5,7,3',4',5'-hexahydroxyflavone), tricetin (5,7,3',4,5'-pentahydroxyflavone), querectin (3,5,7,3',4'-pentahydroxyflavone) and luteolin (5,7,3',4'-tetrahydroxyflavone), which was previously suggested as a floral marker for an Australian Eucalyptus honey (bloodwood or Eucalyptus intermedia honey). These honeys of various floral species can be differentiated by their levels of total flavonoids, being 2.12 mg/100 g for heath honey and 6.35 m/100 g for tea tree honey. In brush box (Lophostemon conferta) honey, the flavonoid profile comprising mainly tricetin, luteolin and quercetin is similar to that of another Eucalyptus honey (yellow box or Eucalyptus melliodora honey). These results indicate that the flavonoid profiles in some of the Australian non-Eucalyptus honeys may contain more or less certain flavonoids from Eucalyptus floral sources because of the diversity and extensive availability of Eucalyptus nectars for honeybee foraging yearly around or a possible cross contamination of the monofloral honeys during collection, transportation and/or storage. Further analyses are required to differentiate and/or verify the botanical sources of the flavonoids that contribute to the flavonoid profiles of these honeys, by restricting honey sampling areas and procedures, employing other complementary analytical methods (e.g. pollen analysis, sugar profile) and using materials (e.g. nectar) directly sourced from the flowering plant for comparative studies. In Australian crow ash (Guioa semiglauca) honey, myricetin, tricetin, quercetin, luteolin and an unknown flavonoid have been found to be the main flavonoids, which is characteristic only to this type of honey, and could thus be used as the floral marker, while in Australian sunflower (Helianthus annuus) honey, the content of total flavonoids is the smallest amount comparing to those in the other honeys analysed in this study. However, the flavonoid quercetin and the flavonoid profile mainly consisting of quercetin, quercetin 3,3'-dimethyl ether (5,7,4'-trihydroxy3,3'-dimethoxyflavone), myricetin and luteolin are characteristic only to this sunflower honey and could thus be used for the authentication.

Phenolic acids in Australian Melaleuca, Guioa, Lophostemon, Banksia and Helianthus honeys and their potential for floral authentication

Eight phenolic acids and two abscisic acid isomers in Australian honeys from five botanical species (Melaleuca, Guioa, Lophostemon, Banksia and Helianthus) have been analyzed in relation to their botanical origins. Total phenolic acids present in these honeys range from 2.13 mg/100 g sunflower (Helianthus annuus) honey to 12.11 mg/100 g tea tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia) honey, with amounts of individual acids being various. Tea tree honey shows a phenolic profile of gallic, ellagic, chlorogenic and coumaric acids, which is similar to the phenolic profile of an Australian Eucalyptus honey (bloodwood or Eucalyptus intermedia honey). The main difference between tea tree and bloodwood honeys is the contribution of chlorogenic acid to their total phenolic profiles. In Australian crow ash (Guioa semiglauca) honey, a characteristic phenolic profile mainly consisting of gallic acid and abscisic acid could be used as the floral marker. In brush box (Lophostemon conferta) honey, the phenolic profile, comprising mainly gallic acid and ellagic acid, could be used to differentiate this honey not only from the other Australian non-Eucalyptus honeys but also from a Eucalyptus honey (yellow box or Eucalyptus melliodora honey). However, this Eucalyptus honey could not be differentiated from brush box honey based only on their flavonoid profiles. Similarly, the phenolic profile of heath (Banksia ericifolia) honey, comprising mainly gallic acid, an unknown phenolic acid (Phl) and coumaric acid, could also be used to differentiate this honey from tea tree and bloodwood honeys, which have similar flavonoid profiles. Coumaric acid is a principal phenolic acid in Australian sunflower honey and it could thus be used together with gallic acid for the authentication. These results show that the HPLC analysis of phenolic acids and abscisic acids in Australian floral honeys Could assist the differentiation and authentication of the honeys. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Growth performance and management of a mixed rainforest tree plantation

Monoculture plantations of Pinus, Eucalyptus and Acacia have been established oil rainforest lands throughout the world. However, this type of reforestation generally supplies low quality timber and contributes to landscape simplification. Alternatives to exotic monoculture plantations are now beginning to gain momentum with farmers and landholders attempting to establish a variety of rainforest trees in small plantations. When compared to the well studied commercial species, knowledge concerning the growth and management of many of these rainforest species is in its infancy. To help expand this limited knowledge base an experimental plantation of 16 rainforest tree species in a randomised design was established near Mt. Mee, in south-eastern Queensland, Australia. Changes in growth, form (based on stem straightness, branch size and branchiness), crown diameters and leaf area of each species were examined over 5 years. Patterns of height growth were also measured monthly for 31 months. Species in this trial could be separated into three groups based on their overall growth after 5 years and their growth patterns. Early successional status, low timber density, high maximum photosynthetic rates and large total leaf areas were generally correlated to rapid height growth. Several species (including Araucaria cunninghamii, Elaeocarpus grandis, Flindersia brayleyana, Grevillea robusta and Khaya nyasica) had above average form and growth, while all species in the trial had considerable potential to have increased productivity through tree selection. As canopy closure occurred at the site between years four and five, growth increments declined. To reduce stand competition a number of different thinning techniques could be employed. However, simple geometric or productivity based thinnings appear to be inappropriate management techniques for this mixed species stand as they would either remove many of the best performing trees or nearly half the species in the trial. Alternatively, a form based thinning would maintain the site's diversity, increase the average form of the plantation and provide some productivity benefits.