|
CHAPTER 5
PROPOLIS
Contents - Previous - Next
5.1 Introduction
Propolis is a mixture of various amounts
of beeswax and resins collected by the honeybee
from plants, particularly from flowers and
leaf buds. Since it is difficult to observe
bees on their foraging trips the exact sources
of the resins are usually not known. Bees
have been observed scraping the protective
resins of flower and leaf buds with their
mandibles and then carrying them to the hive
like pollen pellets on their hind legs. It
can be assumed that in the process of collecting
and modelling the resins, they are mixed
with some saliva and other secretions of
the bees as well as with wax.
|

Figure 5.1 : Honeybees frequently use propolis
to reduce the size of the entrance for better
defence.
|
These resins are used by worker bees to line
the inside of nest cavities and all brood
combs, repair combs, seal small cracks in
the hive, reduce the size of hive entrances
(see Fig. 5.1) seal off inside the hive any
dead animals or insects which are too large
to be carried out and perhaps most important
of all, to mix small quantities of propolis
with wax to seal brood cells. These uses
are significant because they take advantage
of the antibacterial and antifungal effects
of propolis in protecting the colony against
diseases. Propolis has been shown to kill
the bee's most ardent bacterial foe, Bacillus larvae - the cause of American Foul Brood (Mlagan
and Sulimanovic, 1982; Meresta and Meresta,
1988). The use of propolis thus reduces the
chance of infection in the developing brood
and the growth of decomposing bacteria in
dead animal tissue.
The composition of propolis depends on the
type of plants accessible to the bees. Propolis
changes in colour, odour and probably medicinal
characteristics, according to source and
the season of the year. Moreover, some bees
and some colonies are more avid collectors-generally
to the dismay of the beekeeper, since propolis
is a very sticky substance which, in abundance,
can make it difficult to remove frames from
the boxes.
Foraging for propolis is only known with
the Western honeybee Apis mellifera. The Asian species of Apis do not collect
propolis. Only Meliponine or stingless bees
are known to collect similarly sticky resinous
substances, for sealing hives and constructing
honey and pollen pots for storage. In this
bulletin, however, propoli shall refer only
to resins collected by honeybees, since almost
all of the research has been done on it.
There may well be similar traditional uses
for resins collected by Meliponids.
In the natural distribution ranges of Apis mellifera, a multitude of traditional uses are known
for this versatile substance. The Greeks
and Romans already knew that propolis would
heal skin abscesses and through the centuries
its use in medicine has received varying
attention. The ancient Egyptians knew about
the benefits of propolis and in Africa it
is still used today, as a medicine, an adhesive
for tuning drums, sealing cracked water containers
or canoes and dozens of other uses. It has
been incorporated in special varnishes such
as those used by Stradivarius for his violins
(Jolly, 1978).
An excellent review in Spanish on the production,
characteristics and uses of propolis was
published by Asis (1979 and 1989) another
good overview (in English) was APIMONDIA
(1978). A brief, more recent review in English
is presented by Schmidt and Buchmann (1992).
5.2 Physical characteristics of propolis
The colour of propolis ranges from yellow
to dark brown depending on the origin of
the resins. But, even transparent propolis
has been reported by Coggshall and Morse
(1984).
At temperatures of 250 to 45 0C propolis is a soft, pliable and very sticky
substance. At less than 150 C, and particularly
when frozen or at near freezing, it becomes
hard and brittle. It will remain brittle
after such treatment even at higher temperatures.
Above 45 0C it will become increasingly sticky and
gummy. Typically propolis will become liquid
at 60 to 700C, but for some samples the melting point
may be as high as 1000C.
The most common solvents used for commercial
extraction are ethanol (ethyl alcohol) ether,
glycol and water. For chemical analysis a
large variety of solvents may be used in
order to extract the various fractions. Many
of the bactericidal components are soluble
in water or alcohol.
5.3 The composition of propolis
In one recent analysis of propolis from England,
150 compounds were identified in only one
sample (Greenaway, et al., 1990), but in
total more than 180 have been isolated so
far. It appears that with every new analysis,
new compounds are found.
Propolis resins are collected from a large
variety of trees and shrubs. Each region
and colony seems to have its own preferred
resin sources, which results in the large
variation of colour, odour and composition.
Comparisons with tree resins in Europe suggest
that, wherever Populus species are present,
honeybees preferably collect the resins from
leaf buds of these trees.
A Cuban study suggests that the plant resins
collected are at least partially metabolized
by bees (Cuellar et al., 1990). The presence
of sugars (Greenaway et al., 1987) also suggests
some metabolization by bees, i.e. as a result
of adding saliva during both scraping and
chewing.
A list of the major classes of chemicals
occurring in propolis is given below with
references to some recent reviews and analyses
from different countries (Table 5.1). The
major compounds are resins composed of flavonoids
and phenolic acids or their esters, which
often form up to 50% of all ingredients.
The variation in beeswax content also influences
the chemical analysis. In addition it must
be said that most studies do not attempt
to determine all components, but limit themselves
to a class of chemicals or a method of extraction.
The selection of the studies presented here
is based on the most recent publications
with preference given to the most complete
studies or to studies from countries where
these are the only references.
5.4 The physiological effects of propolis
5.4.1 Unconfirmed circumstantial evidence
The following uses of propolis or its extracts
have been found in literature, but without
substantiating evidence or reference to scientific
studies:
anti-asthmatic treatment in mouth sprays,
support of pulmonary system,
anti-rheumatic (Donadieu, 1979),
inhibition of melanoma and carcinoma tumour
cells,
tissue regeneration,
strengthening of capillaries,
anti-diabetic activity,
phytoinhibitor,
inhibiting plant and seed germination (Donadieu,
1979) in general and potato and leaf salad
seed germination (Bianchi, 1991) in particular.
Table 5.1:
The major compounds of propolis as analyzed
in recent publications.

5.4.2 Scientific evidence
One of the most widely known and extensively
tested properties of propolis is its antibacterial
activity. Many scientific tests have been
conducted with a variety of bacteria, fungi,
viruses and other microorganisms. Many of
the tests have shown positive control of
the organisms by various extracts and concentrations
of propolis. A synergistic effect has been
reported for propolis extract used together
with antibiotics (Chernyak, 1971). Whether
propolis exhibits bactericidal or bacteriostatic
characteristics often depends on its concentration
in the applied extract. Sometimes, propolis
extracts are more effective than commercially
available drugs (Millet-Clerc, et al., 1987).
In all cases, the specific conditions and
extracts have to be closely considered. Proven
effects of propolis on microorganisms are
listed in Table 5.2.
Though there is a large variety of effects
attributed to propolis, many of the reports
are based on preliminary studies. If clinical
trials were conducted, they were rarely based
on large numbers of patients or rigorous
test designs such as the double-blind placebo
test (Table 5.3). The majority of the studies
were conducted in East European countries.
Much practical work and research is also
being done in China, but information is difficult
to obtain, not least because of the language
barrier. Western European and North American
medical research has largely ignored this
source of milder and widely beneficial material.
More detailed studies are warranted to determine
the potential benefits from the medicinal
use of propolis, particularly for intestinal,
dermatological and dental applications.
In addition to the selected studies cited
here, there have been over 500 publications
in the last 18 years alone. Most were in
vitro studies, but clinical trials were also
conducted. These can be researched by those
further interested in the uses of propolis
in the collection of abstracts prepared by
IBPA which is available from them.
5.5 The uses of propolis today
5.5.1 In cosmetics
Dermatological and cosmetic applications
are at this time probably the most common
uses for propolis and its extracts (Lejeune,
et al., 1988). Its effects on tissue regeneration
and renovation have been well studied. Together
with its bactericidal and fungicidal characteristics
it provides many benefits in various applications
in cosmetics. For some recent specific references
on scientific studies, the reader should
refer to the section on the effects of propolis
(5.4.2). More detailed information on practical
application of propolis in cosmetics can
be found in Chapter 9.
5.5.2 In medicine
General medicinal uses of propolis include
treatment of the cardiovascular and blood
systems (anaemia), respiratory apparatus
(for various infections), dental care, dermatology
(tissue regeneration, ulcers, excema, wound
healing - particularly burn wounds, mycosis,
mucous membrane infections and lesions),
cancer treatment, immune system support and
improvement, digestive tracts (ulcers and
infections), liver protection and support
and many others. Some references to these
applications can be found in the list of
scientifically proven effects of propolis
(Table 5.3) otherwise one might refer again
to IBRA's collection of abstracts, Apimondia
and the American Apitherapy Society.
Table 5.2:
A list of microorganisms against which propolis
or its extracts have been shown to have a
positive effect.

Table 5.3:
Medicinal and other effects described for
propolis or its extracts.

Direct external application of ethanol extracts
or concentrated ointments (with up to 33%
propolis) have given good results in veterinary
use for wound healing and sores. Plastic
surgery too, is using propolis extracts for
improved wound healing and reduced scar tissue
development.
5.5.3 Traditional use
In Europe and North Africa, the special wound
healing properties of propolis were already
known to the Egyptians, Greeks and Romans
and in ancient times. In records of the 12th
century, medicinal preparations with propolis
are described for treating mouth and throat
infections, as well as caries. Propolis probably
has been more commonly used in wood preservatives
or varnishes than may be suggested by the
single, frequently cited reference to Stradivarius
(Jolly, 1978).
In sub-Saharan Africa, propolis is still
used today in herbal medicines and the more
mundane applications mentioned earlier such
as waterproofing containers and wood, adhesive,
bow string preparation and for tuning drums.
5.5.4 Food technology
The antioxidant, antimicrobial and antifungal
activities of propolis offer scope for applications
in food technology. One special advantage
is that, unlike some conventional preservatives,
the residues of propolis seem to have a generally
beneficial effect on human health. However,
only very few studies have been done on the
possible side-effects of increased consumption
of propolis. Individually, some of the components
identified in propolis can be very damaging
to human health.
Mizuno (1989), registered a patent which
includes propolis as a preservative in food
packing material.
Extension of frozen storage life of fish
by 2-3 times is cited including Donadieu
(1979), but without reference to original
studies. propolis is permitted as a preservative
for frozen fish. by various authors, In Japan,
the use of Addition of only 30 ppm (parts
per million) of propolis to the rations of
laying hens increased egg production, food
conversion and hen weight by S to 6% (Bonomi,
et al., 1976). Ghisalberti (1979) reports
additional weight gains for broiler chicken
of up to 20% when 500 ppm of propolis was
added to their diets.
5.5.5 Others
The search for new uses of propolis continues.
Sangalli (1990) mentioned use of propolis
for post-harvest treatment and conservation
of fruits. Applications in pesticides and
fungicides are still in the testing phase.
However, for many of its traditional uses
propolis is being replaced by more readily
available, sometimes more effective but often
also more toxic alternatives.
Beekeepers use propolis, melted together
with wax or in an ammonia solution (Anon,
1982) to apply to the inside of hives or
swarm traps to attract swarms. Adequate ventilation
and aeration after painting with the ammonia
solution are both necessary. Rubbing propolis
or painting it (after melting with wax from
old combs) works as well or better and avoids
the use of noxious and toxic ammonia.
The current trend to return to environmentally
safer and less energy intensive production
methods in many developed countries, the
increased buying power of consumers and growing
markets for more expensive products may lead
to considerable growth in the use and new
applications of propolis, particularly in
cosmetics and food technology.
5.6 Formulation and application methods for
human and animal use
5.6.1 Raw propolis
Unprocessed propolis can be used in chunks,
or it may be frozen and broken or ground
to fine powder. Large pieces of pure propolis
can be chewed, but it should only be consumed
in small quantities, since it may cause stomach
upsets. Smaller pieces and powders can be
taken in capsules or mixed with food or drinks.
5.6.2 Liquid extracts
Most commercial uses of propolis are based
on preparations made from primary liquid
extracts. The raw material is rarely suited
for direct inclusion in final products. Similarly,
for most private or small scale uses, raw
propolis is usually treated with a solvent
and only the resulting extract is used.
A large variety of organic solvents might
be applied but only a few are non-toxic and
can be used safely for internal and external
applications with humans and animals. The
most commonly used is ethanol. A knowledgeable
pharmacist or cosmetic chemist can select
a few other non-toxic solvents for special
applications. In some instances, reduction
or elimination of the solvent is necessary
and either (on an industrial scale) by lyophilization,
(freeze drying) or vacuum distillation and
(in small-scale production) by evaporation
or distillation.
5.6.3 Additives and tablets
Propolis or its extracts can be taken with,
or be used as an additive to other medicinal,
dietetic and cosmetic preparations. Ethanol
extracts can be directly mixed with most
foods, medicines or cosmetics. Less frequently,
aqueous (water) or glycol extracts are used.
Propolis extract paste can easily be included
in tablets or sweets.
5.6.4 Injection
For experimental purposes with animals, special
extracts of propolis were injected subcutaneously
or intramuscularly. Results were positive
and injectable extracts for humans may become
feasible in the near future.
5.7 Extraction methods
There are a few basic extraction methods
which can be varied by using different solvents.
The selection of the solvent depends on the
final use of the extract and on technical
feasibilities. Most active ingredients seem
to be soluble in propylene glycol and ethanol.
Fewer ingredients are soluble in water, but
even water extracts show at least some bactericidal
and fungicidal effects, as well as wound
healing properties. Acetone extracts have
been used for production of shampoos and
lotions. Once the specific chemicals or chemical
groups and their biological effects are better
understood, better and more specific extracts
can be prepared for equally specific applications.
The antimicrobial action of alcohol extracts
is influenced by the extraction method, e.g.
the duration of the soaking period or the
amount of heating The concentration of the
alcohol used and nature of stirring during
extraction seem to have less of an influence
(Obreg6n and Rojas, 1990). Debuyser (1984)
reports extractions with a 70% solution of
alcohol as the most active, without stating
what kind of activity is being referred to.
In general, it can be said that the longer
the propolis is soaked in alcohol the more
ingredients will be dissolved. Soaking beyond
two or three weeks however, does not seem
to increase the extent of extraction.
In scientific and non-scientific literature
alike, the method for determining propolis
concentration in the extract is not always
specified. A scientific method should consider
the ratio of the dry weight of dissolved
matter to the weight of the solvent (A) or
quantify ppm (parts per million) of active
ingredients. However, a more practical way
appears to be using the ratio (by weight)
of total propolis placed into the solvent
to the weight of the solvent (B). The latter
method is certainly less precise, because
of the incomplete dissolution of propolis,
and the final concentration therefore depends
very much on the extraction method, the solvent
and the quality of the propolis. Thus, for
standardization, in addition to concentration,
a description of the solvent, the temperature
and the duration of extraction is required.
However, the practical method (B) results
in less active ingredients for the same concentration
determined according to the scientifically
measured concentration (A). Standardization
will also require measurable parameters for
control as for example, certain stable compounds
which are extracted in proportions similar
to the total concentration of active ingredients
(for other standards see section 5.11). A
quantitative standardization is needed for
future commercialization of propolis and
its extracts.
Five and ten percent solutions using the
latter method (B) i.e. the ratio of the total
weight of propolis to the weight of the solvent,
are most commonly used in small-scale production.
Frequently however, the weight of alcohol
is assumed to be equal to that of water,
i.e. 1 ml of alcohol is assumed to weigh
1 g. Yet, absolute ethanol weighs approximate
20% less than the same volume of water These
weight differences can also result in large
differences in concentrations of active ingredients.
Fortunately, the exact dosage of propolis
is not usually of great importance. However,
commercialization requires dealing with precise
values. No uniformity exists yet in cosmetic
applications either, since many recipes are
based on propolis extract paste and others
on liquid extracts of various concentrations.
Cosmetic applications however, often contain
not more than 1 % of the preferred propolis
extract which can mean as little as 0.05
% to 0.06% of the active ingredients.
A few extraction methods for commercial use
of propolis are described below. Additional
solvents may be used in order to extract
special components. Medicinal and food technology
processes or studies are almost always conducted
with ethanol or aqueous extracts. Glycol
extracts are practical for many cosmetic
applications because of their improved dissolution
in water based emulsions.
Preuaration for extraction
The propolis should be prepared by removing
coarse debris and excessive wax. It should
then be broken into small pieces or ground
to a fine powder. If the propolis is too
sticky to be broken up, it should be placed
in a refrigerator or freezer for a few hours.
Alternatively, pull the pieces into thin
sheets or strips in order to increase the
contact surface between propolis and alcohol,
to promote dissolution.
Choice of the correct solvent is very important
if the product is to be used for human consumption.
Normally, only ethanol or exceptionally,
glycol (as in method 4) should be used. Other
alcohols may be used only if their internal
and external physiological interactions are
sufficiently known and safe.
So-called denatured, rubbing or methyl alcohol
should not be used. If the extracts are intended
for external application only, rubbing alcohol
may be used in some cases, but different
countries use different chemicals to make
pure alcohol unpalatable for drinking or
internal consumption. Similarly, there are
different types of denatured alcohols intended
for different purposes. If cheap alcohol
is used, care should be taken that the chemicals
used for denaturing it are compatible with
the planned end use. Chemicals added to denature
alcohol may interact negatively with other
ingredients so reducing their beneficial
effects and may cause irritations, burns
or even poisoning. There have been fatal
accidents caused by extracts of propolis
prepared with unsuitable alcohol.
For most preparations intended for internal
use, gin, rum, cachasa, arrak or other clean,
locally distilled liquors can be used. These
liquors usually contain less than the optimal
70% of alcohol but for home processing, they
produce acceptable results. However, for
high quality commercial product, particularly
for cosmetics or medicines, high quality
laboratory grade or drinking alcohol (ethanol)
should be used. 70% ethanol has given the
best results in several studies which tested
the extracts for their bactericidal and fungicidal
effects.
Alcohols of different concentrations extract
different compounds and influence the solubility
of dried extracts. Thus, extracts made with
higher concentrations of alcohol, when dried,
are predominantly soluble in organic solvents
and oils. But dried extracts from extractions
with a very low concentration of ethanol
are much more water-soluble. Sosnowski (1984)
in a patent application described dried filtrates
from 10-25 % alcohol extracts which are completely
soluble in water.
In some, if not most countries, special laws
apply to the manufacture of products containing
alcohol. Information should be sought and
a licence should be obtained, if necessary.
For production and use within the home, most
countries do not require a special licence.
Materials required
The basic requirements for small-scale processing
are a large capacity bottle which can be
tightly closed, a scale (more sensitive if
working with smaller quantities) and a strainer
(special filter paper, several layers of
clean cotton cloth or cotton balls) - A refrigerator
or freezer is useful, but not essential.
A heat source is necessary to evaporate the
solvent but it is better to use a distillation
apparatus, vacuum drier or freeze drier (see
also equipment for royal jelly).
Method 1: Ethanol Extracted Propolis (EEP)
- the simplest method for extracting propolis
The exact concentration of the desired extract
should first be decided. The initial concentration
of propolis to be extracted should not exceed
30%, due to less efficient or less complete
extraction at higher concentrations. The
correct quantity of propolis is weighed and
the right volume of alcohol measured. It
would be easier to weigh the correct quantity
of alcohol since alcohol is much lighter
than water. The specific gravity of pure
ethanol is 0.794 as compared to 1.00 for
water. For reasons of simplicity one can
assume that one litre of 100 % alcohol weighs
800 g, 11 of 70% alcohol approximately 860
g, 11 of 50% alcohol approximately 900 g,
and so on. Other alcohols and solvents have
different specific gravities and quantity
measures will vary accordingly. Therefore,
weighing both the propolis and the solvent
is the preferred method.
Pour the alcohol and propolis into a container,
seal the top and shake briefly. Repeat the
shaking once or twice a day, but otherwise
leave the mixture in a warm dark place for
at least three days. To achieve the best
results, the propolis should be extracted
for one or two weeks. Soaking for more than
one week, according to some authors and for
two weeks according to others, provides no
additional benefits.
Some producers boil the alcohol and propolis
mixtures for eight hours in order to dissolve
all the resins. If the propolis contains
wax, most of this will be dissolved by heating
or must be removed prior to extraction. For
a high quality product, however, heating
should be avoided.
After one or two weeks, the liquid is filtered
through a clean and very fine cloth, paper
filters or cotton ball. The cloth may be
folded into several layers to increase its
effectiveness. A second filtration may be
advantageous and if the extract can be refrigerated
to less than 4 0C but not freezing, for several hours or
a day until filtration, better results are
achieved. The filter should also be cooled
prior to use. The remains of the first filtration
can be washed or soaked in alcohol again.
The filtrate should be a clear liquid, free
of particles and dark brown or slightly reddish
in colour. It should be kept in CLEAN, dark,
airtight bottles. If dark coloured bottles
are not available, the bottles should be
kept in a cool dark place or wrapped with
a cloth, paper or straw, to keep out light.
Ingredients for a 10% extract:
| Propolis |
1 part |
or |
100 g |
or |
1 kg |
| Alcohol |
9 parts |
|
900 g |
|
9 kg |
or any multiple thereof.
Ingredients for a 5% extract:
| Propolis |
1 part |
or |
100 g |
or |
1 kg |
| Alcohol |
19 parts |
|
1900 g |
|
19 kg |
or any multiple thereof.
Since solvents are relatively expensive,
consideration should be given to preparing
a more concentrated first extract (< 30%)
The final extract can be diluted or further
concentrated depending on its intended use.
Most extracts are used with reduced solvent
content, i.e. very high propolis concentration.
Starting with a concentrated solution will
therefore require less evaporation, however,
as also extracts all compounds less efficiently.
Higher concentration of the extracts can
be achieved by simply leaving the extract
in an open large mouth container, suitably
protected against dirt, dust and insects
for a while. Most of the alcohol will evaporate
at room temperature in a few hours. For further
drying and recuperation of the alcohol, see
method 6 and 7.
Method 2: Quick extraction
For this extraction, finely broken pieces
or powdered propolis are placed in a large
filter or cloth bag and pure alcohol (over
95 % ethanol) is poured through the filter.
This may be repeated several times. The resulting
extract should be stored as described in
method 1.
The extraction is much less effective with
lower concentrations of alcohol. The extract,
once finished, can later be diluted with
water. However, concentration of active ingredients
can hardly be compared to extracts achieved
with method 1, because of the lesser degree
of extraction.
No references could be found for a quantitative
comparison of the effectiveness of this method
with method 1. Since extraction efficiency
increases with time in method 1, it may be
assumed that for some applications method
2 is of limited use, particularly when the
desired active ingredients are less soluble.
Method 2 may be used with sediment from the
filtration in method 1.
Method 3: Glycol extracted propolis (GEP)
This method is similar to method 1 and differs
only in the solvent used. Instead of ethanol,
glycol (propylene glycol) is used. However,
the concentration of propolis should not
exceed 10% and extraction is more efficient
under partical vacuum (Sangalli, 1990) The
disadvantage of glycol as compared to ethanol
is the need for higher temperatures during
evaporation of the solvent, which adversely
affects many of the volatile compounds of
the propolis extract.
Glycol is usually cheaper than drinking quality
alcohol, because of lower taxes, but it may
be more difficult to obtain in some countries.
Some cosmetic producers prefer glycol extracts
to ethanol extracts for certain preparations.
Glycol extracts mix more easily with some
lotions, particularly those with a large
water phase. They are also easier to use
with nasal or oral sprays, since the glycol
evaporates slower and it is not toxic for
external applications. However, it must always
be taken into consideration that glycol is
considered safe for human consumption, i.e.
internal use only up to 1.5 g of glycol per
day per adult (Sangalli, 1990).
Method 4: Aqueous (water) extracted propolis
(AEP)
Aqueous extracts can be obtained by soaking
propolis for several days or boiling it in
water. The yield of active ingredients is
lower than with alcohol, but aqueous extracts
have been shown to exhibit bactericidal and
fungicidal effects. All other processing,
filtering etc., are the same as those in
method 1.
Method 5: Oil extracted propolis (OEP)
Extracts prepared according to this method
described by Marchenay (1977), and cited
by Debuyser (1984) are less adaptable to
commercialization, but present some simple
ways of preparing inexpensively, small quantities
of extract for internal as well as external
application.
Mix 10 g of cleaned propolis with 200 ml
(about 200 g) of olive or almond oil, or
with 100 ml of quality linseed oil (refined
food quality) or with 100 g of butter. Other
edible oils can be substituted for the ones
mentioned here.
Heat gently in a water bath for approximately
10 minutes to not more than 50 0C, stirring continuously. Filter and store
the extract in well sealed containers in
the dark. Refrigerated storage is recommended.
Method 6: Propolis paste
This method is the same as method 1 until
the filtered liquid extract is obtained.
The liquid is then partially evaporated to
provide a product with paste-like consistency.
The paste is well suited for mixing with
various emulsifiers for applications in cosmetics.
Evaporation can be achieved by gently heating
the extract in an open container over low heat. Alcohol is very flammable, so appropriate
precautions should be adopted around open
flames and abundant ventilation should always
be provided.
A simple distillation apparatus, like the
one used for preparing local distilled liquors,
would allow the collection of most of the
expensive alcohol for reuse. The most sophisticated
and least damaging evaporation would, however,
be accomplished with low pressure vacuum
evaporators or freeze driers. If quality
control is exercised, the propolis extracts
in this paste form may become easier to market
and should sell for a considerably higher
price.
Method 7: Dry propolis extract
Dry extracts are those with a solvent content
of less than 5 %. They are obtained from
extracts according to methods 1, 2 or 3,
followed by evaporation, freeze drying or
spray drying (Sangalli, 1990). The last two
drying methods require relatively expensive
laboratory equipment (see Suppliers List
in the Annex).
Drying does not result in powders is the
propolis was extracted with highly concentrated
alcohol. Instead, the residue is a sticky
elastic paste. To achieve a dry powder which
would be easier to use in most pharmaceutical
or cosmetics applications, one of the following
methods should be used. The problem is that
the following methods may compromise the
extraction process and have not been tested
for their biological effectiveness, in contrast
to extracts from Method 1.
Method 8: Water-soluble, dried powder ethanol
extracts
Propolis is prepared and extracted as described
in method 1 but using a 10-25 % ethanol solution,
though many other solvents are mentioned
in a patent application (Sosnowski, 1984).
After 1 to 10 days at 0 to 370C (preferably towards the warmer temperature
limit) with periodic agitation, the solution
is filtered for the first time through Whatman
No. 1 filter paper, or a double layer of
very fine cotton cloth. The filtrate is cooled
as much as possible (without freezing) for
24 hours and is then filtered again, cold,
through a Whatman No.50 filter paper. A third
and final filtration may be carried out cold
or at room temperature with a 2 ~m filter.
Finally, the solvent is removed by evaporation
or freeze drying.
For extraction methods like this one and
others, where the final product is a paste
or powder, the initial proportions of propolis
and solvent are not very important. Much
larger quantities of propolis can be used
for quicker extraction, e.g. 500 g propolis
in 1000 ml solvent. However, sufficient active
ingredients usually remain in the filter
residues to justify another, longer extraction
with clean alcohol.
A few recipes using the dried powder are
mentioned at the end of this chapter. No
scientific publications or studies were cited
by Sosnowski (1984) concerning the efficacy
or biological activity of this extract, though
he claims that the antioxidant properties
of the propolis extract from concentrated
ethanol or diluted ethanol are the same.
Method 9: Free-flowing, non-hygroscopic propolis
powder
For those who have access to the appropriate
equipment and chemicals, propolis extracts
can be made easier to handle and more heat
stable by complexing with Bcyclodextrin.
The result is a free-flowing, non-hygroscopic
powder (Szente and Szejtli, 1987).
Method 10: Water soluble derivatives (WSD)
Water-soluble propolis extracts are important
for some medicinal and cosmetic applications.
Dimov et al., (1991) published a method patented
by Nikolov et al., (1987) which produces
a dry powder of lysine-complexed propolis
extracts, known as the Water Soluble Derivatives
(WSD). A translation of the Bulgarian Patent
was provided by Dr.Ivanovska:
100 g of propolis are extracted three times
with boiling methanol for one hour, using
800 ml of methanol each time. The extracts
are filtered hot, stored overnight at 4 0C and filtered again. The precipitates, i.e.
the filter residues of the cold filtration,
are washed with cold (4 0C) ethanol and filtered. Both filtrates are
combined and evaporated to dryness, giving
60 g of a resinous, brown product. 10 g of
this dry product are gradually stirred into
150 ml of an 8% L-lysine solution at 50-600C. This solution is freeze-dried, resulting
in 22 g of a dry, yellow-brown powder.
WSD 's are still being tested for their antibiotic
characteristics. They were found to induce
non-specific protection against gram-negative
bacteria, i.e., Klebsiella i,neumoniae, Proteus vul~aris, Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Dimov et al., 1992).
Elaboration of any of the above-mentioned
extracts often includes evaporation of part
or all of the solvent. If concentrated extracts
are required, it is better to use concentrated
ethanol for extractions since it evaporates
at a lower temperature than the other solvents
mentioned. Thus, the risk of destroying some
of the active ingredients through heat damage
is reduced. This is important, even though
some of the active compounds are thermostable
(resistant to heat) since the synergistic
forces of all the ingredients in propolis
are not yet fully understood.
For large-scale operations, evaporation under
low pressure (partial vacuum) or by freeze
drying are preferred because any damage due
to heating can then be avoided. However,
a Hungarian study showed some antibacterial
activity was still present in steam-distilled
essential oils from propolis (Petri et al.,
1988).
Other solvents can be used to extract propolis,
for example many alcohols, ether, acetic
acid, acetone, benzene, 2% sodium hydroxide
and ammonia (common household cleaner) (Anon,
1982). These solvents should not however
be used if the extract is intended for consumption
by humans or animals.
5.8 Collection
The average production of propolis per colony
per year has been described as 10 to 300g
(Ochi, 1981 and Andrich et al., 1987) but
the production depends on the bees, the climate,
the forest resources and the trapping mechanism.
According to personal observations, it may
occasionally be considerably higher. If there
is any selection by queen breeders and beekeepers,
it has been against heavily propolizing bees,
since they make work in the apiary more difficult.
Bees which produce larger quantities of propolis
could be selected if required.
Contamination of propolis with wax, pieces
of wood, paint and other debris should be
avoided. The cleanest collection methods
employ special traps placed on top of a hive,
below the covers (see Fig. 5.2 to 5.5) or
next to lateral walls inside the hives. Thus
bees do not mix as much wax with the propolis
and no contamination occurs during harvesting.
Trap harvesting is also faster and may be
more productive.
Traps are basically screens or special plates
with small holes which simulate cracks in
the hive walls (see Figure 5.2). Bees try
to seal the holes and thus fill the trap
with propolis. The most economic trap design
is an inner cover with a large hole, covered
with regular nylon fly screen, secured in
place by the points of nails and a perforated
frame (see Figure 5.5). However, to avoid
contamination with wax, the screen should
not touch the top of the frames. The total
area exposed by a screen may have to be varied
according to the bees and local conditions.
Trap harvested propolis usually fetches a
better price because of its cleaner and therefore
of better quality.
Light, and in particular air circulation
are important to stimulate propolis use.
Accordingly, traps placed on top of hives
should be covered but the hive cover needs
to be propped opened slightly to increase
air circulation and to allow in some light
(see Fig. 5.4). In tropical regions it may
be necessary to prevent the entry of too
much rain. Also, when using a type of bee
sensitive to disturbances or likely to abscond,
the lid should not be opened too far otherwise
bees might escape. Newly established colonies
should be given some time to establish themselves
before they are used for trapping.
Propolis is removed from traps by cooling
the plastic sheets or fly-screens for a few
hours in a refrigerator or freezer. Once
cooled, the propolis becomes brittle and
can be removed from the screens by simply
flexing and brushing them, pulling over a
table edge or by using a special high pressure
air device designed by Pechhacker and Huettinger
(1986). The trap is then ready for re-use.
Before the advent of recent trap designs,
most propolis was collected by scraping the
"bee glue" off walls, frames, entrances
and covers. Marletto (1983) noted that the
propolis collected from the cover or top
frames was usually cleaner than that collected
near the entrance. Even contaminated scraped
material can be used and purified by repeated
extraction and filtering.
In order to avoid contamination with too
much wax, scrapings from frames or bottom
boards and lids should be kept separate from
each other and from propolis collected with
traps. Chunks and pieces should never be
combined into large balls. Enquiries should
be made with potential buyers to see how
they prefer propolis. Large pieces often
have to be ground or broken into smaller
chunks first.
|

Figure 5.2: Flexible, 3 mm plastic sheets with rows of
slots,
2 mm side on one side and 4 mm on the other
|
|

Figure 5.3: Four sheets are placed on the
top super with the wider side of the holes
facing down and with bee space (1 cm) between
sheets and frame tops.
|
|

Figure 5.4: The cover is left open a little
to increase ventilation and let light in.
This stimulates the bees to seal the slots
with propolis.
|
|

Figure 5.5: A simple design of a propolis
trap made from nylon, fly or mosquito screen.
The screen is removable and can be quickly
replaced with a
new one during harvest.
|
For better quality propolis, some authors
recommend collection after the major nectar
flow (Donadieu, 1979. This may be true in
temperate climates where bees are preparing
for over-wintering and therefore collecting
more propolis. In tropical climates, no studies
are available which demonstrate seasonal
variation, or its absence. It is possible
that at the beginning of the rainy season,
propolizing will be more active. Internal
traps may be more advantageous, but some
experimentation is required. Tropical races
of A. mellifera have also been reported as producing very
little propolis.
5.9 Buying
Unprocessed propolis should always be acquired
in the form of chunks or small pieces and
never lumped into larger pieces or balls.
Some buyers prefer large chunks and others
like smaller pieces, but preference for the
latter is usually related to trap collected
propolis, since small scrapings often have
a high level of contamination. Quality criteria
are described in section 5.11.
Buying quality propolis extracts is difficult,
because the brownish colour of alcohol extracts
does not reveal the quantity and quality
of the propolis nor the care taken in extracting
it. Even chemical analyses can only provide
a quantitative judgement with regard to the
major compounds (for a simple antioxidant
activity test see 5.16.13) and biological
activity tests are slow and expensive. Extracts
should therefore be bought only from producers
whose methods and commitment are well known.
For evaluating products derived from propolis,
(5.16.13) tests and analyses become inevitable
as well as a reliable and responsible manufacturer.
5.10 Storage
In general, propolis is fairly stable, but
proper storage is important. Propolis and
its extracts should be stored in airtight
containers in the dark, preferably at less
than 100C-120C and away from excessive and direct heat.
For similar reasons, very old propolis from
the hive should not be mixed with fresher
propolis. Over 12 months of proper storage,
propolis will lose very little or none of
its antibacterial activities. Alcohol extracts
may be stored even longer.
Lyophilization (freeze drying) of extracts
has been described as a method which preserves
the antibacterial characteristics, but nothing
has been written about effects of long-term
storage of such materials. This method may
gain importance for larger scale use and
certain formulations, but it is possible
that some of the synergistic characteristics
of propolis may be lost during lyophilisation.
The shelf-life of propolis containing products
depends very much on their composition and
has to be determined for each case. The more
the other components of a product are susceptible
to decomposition, the shorter will be the
shelf-life of that product. This is the reason
for compromises that are necessary in the
selection of artificial and/or natural and
traditional ingredients, preservatives and
larger production for extended markets. However,
propolis and its extracts function as a mild
preservative due to their antioxidant and
antimicrobial activities and thus may actually
prolong the shelf live of some products.
5.11 Quality control
Since propolis comes in many colours, odours
and composition, it is very difficult to
give precise guidelines. Most fresh propolis
has a pleasant resinous odour. Wax content
and visual contamination should obviously
be as low as possible. Old propolis becomes
very hard and brittle and may also be very
dark. However, frozen or recently frozen
propolis is also very brittle.
Official quality standards exist for propolis
in various East European countries, but most
standards refer to the cleanliness or adulteration
of the raw product and sometimes, its extracts.
Maximum and minimum limits for certain chemical
groups are set, but few standardised tests
are available to determine the biological
activities of various components. Tikhonov
et al., (1978) describe the average contents
of the principal ingredients as possible
standards for raw propolis (Table 5.4). Official
quality standards exist in Romania and the
former USSR (Crane, 1990).
Franco and Kurebayashi (1986) suggested methods
for quality control and Hollands et al.,
(1988) for testing coccidiostatic effects.
Vakikonina et al., (1975), Petri et al.,
(1984) and Bianchi (1991), describe the discoloration
of a 0. iN potassium permanganate solution
as a reliable test for the antioxidant effect
of propolis and its extracts, and the detection
of some adulterants (see 5.16.13). Bacteriological
tests can be carried out and the results
compared with those from samples of known
purity and origin, but these tests apply
to only a small proportion of all the various
beneficial activities of propolis. None of
these tests have yet been widely accepted
as providing a reliable evaluation of the
overall quality of propolis or its extracts.
Most likely, only a range of tests will ever
give a reliable evaluation of the numerous
diverse characteristics of propolis.
Because of its recent manipulation and harvesting
by bees, fresh trap-collected propolis is
of the highest quality and the least contaminated,
if collected on a regular basis. Plant origin
however, may be important for certain applications
and therefore propolis collected in a certain
region or during a certain season may be
preferred.
Table 5.4:
Quality standards for propolis as suggested
by Tikhonov et al (1978) and upper and lower
limits as established by Russian Regional
Standards (RSFSR, 1977).
| |
Tikhonov et al,
|
RSFSR
|
| Extractable substances |
21.93 +/- 2.22%
|
|
| Oxidizability value |
17.08 +/- 5.52%
|
< 22.0%
|
| Resinous-balsam substances |
46.18 +/- 1.15%
|
|
| Waxes |
27.11 +/- 7.68%
|
< 30.0%
|
| Polyphenols |
14.66 +/- 2.34%
|
> 20.0%
|
| Plysaccharides |
2.26 +/- 0.32%
|
|
| Mechanical impurities |
9.76 +/- 1.81%
|
< 20.0%
|
| Iodine number |
|
> 35.0
|
After incorporation into other products,
testing for propolis becomes even more complicated
and overall product quality becomes important.
Since there is a wide variety of products
in which propolis can be included, the standards
for each type of product need to be considered.
In section 5.16.13 a method is given to evaluate
propolis antioxidant quality in other products.
One easy way to determin a different kind
of quality, particularly poor qualaity as
a defect, is the homogeneity of products
containing propolis extracts (see Figure
9.9). Without good equipment, a good and
stable emulsion is difficult to obtain. Hand-mixed
emulsions tend to be stable for shorter periods
of time only. Separation after brief or inappropriate
storage is unacceptable to consumers and
also affect performance of the product. Thus
special care needs to be taken to ensure
the compatibility of the extraction method
and ~e ingredients of the end product. Suitable
emulsifiers and better mixing techniques,
i.e higher speed, longer time, warmer temperatures
and different mixing sequences would have
to be determined by testing (see Chapter
9).
Contents - Previous - Next
|