Propolis is a resinous material collected by honeybees from the exudates and buds of plants. It has been widely used as a remedy by humans since ancient times, as well as for dietary supplements and cosmetics. European legislation recently focused on the quality and hygiene standards of foods, including beehive products, and extensive efforts have been made to avoid the presence of chemical contaminants, whilst in contrast few studies have investigated the magnitude of contamination by physical ones. We conducted a filth-test survey to evaluate the contamination of ethanolic extract of propolis by foreign materials. We also compared the abundance of contaminants in propolis extracts currently marketed by small beekeepers and industrial producers. We found different foreign materials in the ethanol extract of propolis. Contaminants differed in abundance, with a higher number of carbon particles (small beekeepers: 2.70 ± 0.63; industrial producers: 1.25 ± 0.49; mean (n/30 ml) ± SE) and other inorganic fragments (small beekeepers: 3.50 ± 0.31; industrial producers: 3.88 ± 1.11) than arthropod fragments (small beekeepers: 0.30 ± 0.21; industrial producers: 0.38 ± 0.26) and mammal hairs (small beekeepers: 0.10 ± 0.10; industrial producers: 0.38 ± 0.26). No differences in the abundance of foreign matter between propolis from small beekeepers and industrial producers were found, allowing us to point out an increased awareness by small producers of issues inherent in hygiene management. Contamination of propolis extracts by animal body parts, such as insect fragments, mites and rodent hairs, indicates poor management of hygiene in the production process and low effectiveness of the filtration phase. Animal-borne contaminants can act as pathogen vectors as well as introducing dangerous allergens when ingested or applied to human skin. The filth-test applied to ethanolic propolis extract quality control can be considered a promising tool, also for small beekeeper activities, since it is cheap and allows the quick interpretation of results.
Keywords: allergens; arthropods; beehive products; quality control; rodent contaminants.