Standardization of Specific and Nonspecific Parameters of Propolis Extract From 3 Different Harvest Times Derived From Klaten

Abstract

Background: Propolis is one of the herbal ingredients with many health benefits, especially to increase immunity; it was recently many developed by the health industry to be marketed to the public as herbal health support. Objective: This study aims to standardize the specific and non-specific parameters of propolis extract from 3 different harvest times so that the eligibility of propolis as a raw material for making propolis-based medicinal preparations can be identified. Methods: The sample used was raw propolis taken at three different harvest times, namely January, April, and August, and extracted by maceration with 96% ethanol solvent. The propolis extract was standardized for its specific and non-specific parameters according to the applicable regulations. Result: The standardized propolis extract is characterized by a slightly viscous liquid texture, a yellow to dark brown color, and a distinctive smell and taste. The water and ethanol content in propolis extract harvested in January (PEHJ), harvested in April (PEHAP), and harvested in August (PEHAU) are 29.742% and

47.838%; 28.832% and 49.547%; and 32.040% and 47.141%, respectively. UV- Vis spectrophotometer analysis revealed flavonoid content at 89.750 mgEQ/g,

106.125 mgEQ/g, and 76.5 mgEQ/g and phenolic content at 743.023 mgGAE/kg, 961.628 mgGAE/kg, and 573.256 mgGAE/kg for PEHJ, PEHAP, and PEHAU, respectively. TLC confirmed the presence of CAPE in all extracts. Non-specific parameters showed specific gravity of 0.814%, 0.819%, and 0.811%; water content of 10.29%, 9.77%, and 12.06%; loss on drying of 10.289%, 10.255%, and 10.357%; total ash content of 1.576%, 1.607%, and 1.548%; and acid-insoluble ash content of 0.051%, 0.053%, and 0.049%. Lead contamination was found at 17 mg/kg for PEHJ, 19 mg/kg for PEHAP, and 19 mg/kg for PEHAU. Microbial contamination showed TPC at 1.5 x 104 , 2.5 x 104 , and 4.1 x 103

colonies/g with YFN values ≤ 10

colonies/g. Conclusion: The analysis of propolis from three different harvesting times revealed that the selection of harvesting time affected some of the propolis quality parameters, with propolis gathered in April having slightly higher quality than the other two harvests.