## 3 Results and Discussion
### Determination of Geographical and Botanical Origins of Corsican \"Spring\" Honeys

Table 1: _Cont._of 6.1%. The second group (group II: 23 samples, 19-41) was characterized by the absence of a _Citrus_ sp._/A. sinensis_ association and the significant presence of _A. ramosus_**T22** associated with _Pistacia lentiiscus_**T20**, _Phillyrea_ sp. **T24**, _Apiaceae_**T14** and _Brassicaceae_**T16**. _A. ramosus_ displayed an extreme \"under-represented\" pollen type due to the flower form (nectar protected by a large base of long stamens that prevented contact with pollen during bee foraging) and the large pollen size. _Asphodelus_ pollen was present in two samples of group I (0.5%-1.3%) and 16 samples of group II (0.2%-2.9%). In the case of honey with the \"under-represented\" pollen type, the contribution of other nectariferous species could not be discounted. It had to note that some honeys samples possessed dominant nectariferous taxa (RF \(>\) 45%): _Trifolium_ sp. **T9** for sample 2 and 3, _Echium_ sp. **T13** for sample 4 and _Lotus_ sp. **T7** for sample 38. The nectar contribution of these taxa could not be neglected. Otherwise, several taxa might take part in the honey composition for their high RF in the pollen spectrum: _Trifolium_ sp. **T9** and _E. arborea_**T5** were characteristic for both groups (RF\({}_{\rm max}\) 53.5% and 35.5% for group I and 44.1% and 29.9% for group II, respectively); _Echium_ sp. **T13**, _Prunus_ form **T11** and _Viburnum tinnitus_**T26** possessed a higher RF\({}_{\rm max}\) in group I (71.1%, 24.1% and 16.2%, respectively) than in group II (30.1%, 3.3% and 3.7%, respectively), while _Lotus_ sp. **T7**, _Genista_ form **T6**, _Salix_ sp. **T8**, _Lupinus angustifolius_**T41** and _Apiaceae_**T14** were higher in group II (FR\({}_{\rm max}\): 52.8%, 31.5%, 29.9%, 18.9% and 17.5%, respectively) than in group I (FR\({}_{\rm max}\): 8.7%, 11.8%, 12.9%, 3.5% and 4.5%, respectively). A quantitative analysis showed that 32 samples possessed a pollen density between 20 and \(100\times 10^{3}\) PG/10 g, eight samples were between 100 and \(300\times 10^{3}\) PG/10 g and one sample (23) could be distinguished by high pollen density (600 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\) PG/10 g). Compared with the previous studies of Corsican \"chestnut grove\" and \"_Erica arborea_ spring maquis\" honey (636.6 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\) PG/10 g and 177 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\) PG/10 g, respectively), the \"spring\" honey displayed a lower pollen density (90 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\) PG/10 g) [24, 29]. Excluding sample 23, the average pollen density of \"clementine\" honeys (68 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\) PG/10 g) was slightly lower than that of other Corsican \"spring\" honeys (84 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\) PG/10 g) (Table 2). The decreasing pollen richness was in accordance with the pollen representation type in the spectrum of the predominant nectariferous taxa: \"over-represented\" (_C. sativa_), \"normal\" (_E. arborea_) and \"under-represented\" (_Citrus_ sp.) types. _Foods_**2014**, \(3\) \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{**Group I—”Clementine” Honeys**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Group II—Other “Spring” Honeys**} \\  & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{**18 Samples (I–18)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**23 Samples (I–41)**} \\ \cline{3-14}  & & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{**RF \({}^{*}\)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**RF \({}^{*}\)**} \\ \hline  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Melissopalynological and physico-chemical characteristics of Corsican “clementine” honeys and other “spring” honeys.