## 3 Results
### Antimicrobial Activity  
In well diffusion assays, all honey samples had an antibacterial effect against pathogens (and reference strains) when compared with artificial honey, where only the osmotic effect is considered (Table 9, Figure 1a-g). The average of inhibition zones from honeys of _Satureja_ spp. were 16.7 \(\pm\) 4.1 mm, oregano and sage 15.9 \(\pm\) 3.5 mm, and of citrus 15.9 \(\pm\) 3.9 mm indicating that samples of _Satureja_ spp. were among the most effective, particularly against S. _aureus_ A, _S. aureus_ B, _S. aureus_ ATCC 12600, _S. mutans_, and _F. nucleatum_. The most sensitive strain was proven to be _S. mutans_, with an average inhibition zone of 19.5 \(\pm\) 4.7 mm and the least sensitive being _S. anaerbius_ and _F. nucleatum_, with average inhibition zones of 14.0 \(\pm\) 3.8 mm and 14.3 \(\pm\) 3.1 mm, respectively, which indicates differences among the susceptibility of the strains (ANOVA F = 25.64, \(p\) < 0.05). Almost all honey samples were more effective against pathogens than the manuka honey. Overall, the manuka honey gave an average inhibition zone of 13.7 \(\pm\) 2.2 mm in comparison to 16.0 \(\pm\) 4.0 mm of the local samples. In these experiments, _F. nucleatum_ was the least sensitive to manuka (mean zone 11.7 \(\pm\) 0.9 mm) and _S. aureus_ ATCC 12600 the most sensitive (mean zone 15.9 \(\pm\) 2.5 mm). The results from MIC experiments showed that local honey samples were effective enough against the seven bacteria tested alone or after treatment with proteinase K, catalase, or by using artificial saliva as diluent. A sample of commercially available manuka honey, equally diluted, was included in the study for comparison (Figures 2a-g and 3a-g). On average 9.3 \(\pm\) 7.6% (_w/v_) of honey inhibited the growth of our pathogens. Again, samples from _Satureja_ spp. floral source were the most effective (mean MIC 8.2 \(\pm\) 6.2%) followed by citrus honey (mean MIC 9.6 \(\pm\) 6.9%) and oregano and sage (mean MIC 10.2 \(\pm\) 9.2%). In those experiments, _S. aureus_ A was the most sensitive strain (mean MIC 8.1 \(\pm\) 3.6%) and _S. aureus_ spp. _anaerobius_ the least sensitive (mean MIC 17.0 \(\pm\) 13.0) with the rest of the pathogens being among the above. When the above experiments were repeated with manuka honey, an increase to the MIC (or a decrease in effectiveness) was observed from 9.3 \(\pm\) 7.6 to 10.7 \(\pm\) 6.4 for all strains and honey samples (ANOVA F = 20.9, \(p\) < 0.05). _S. mutans_ (MIC 6.2 \(\pm\) 0.0), _S. aureus_ ATCC 12600 (MIC 6.2 \(\pm\) 0.4), _S. anaerobius_ (MIC 6.4 \(\pm\) 1.1), and _S. anaerobius_ ATCC 35844 (MIC 6.25 \(\pm\) 0) were the most sensitive to manuka honey and _F. nucleatum_ the least, with a mean MIC of 25.0 \(\pm\) 0. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Honey samples** **(n)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**pH**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**H\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{2}\) (ug/g** **Unprocessed Honey)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Free Acidity**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Lactonic Acidity**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**TPC (mg**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**TFC mg**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Quercetin GAE/100 g of**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Equivalents**} \\  & & & & & & **Honey)** & **(CE)/100 g of** \\ \hline Citrus (20) & 3.81 \(\pm\) 0.3 a & 32.19 \(\pm\) 15.0 a & 15.6 \(\pm\) 4.3 a & 6.2 \(\pm\) 2.3 a & 41.6 \(\pm\) 11.9 a & 1.07 \(\pm\) 0.5 a \\ _Saturja_ spp. (20) & 3.41 \(\pm\) 0.3 b & 6.89 \(\pm\) 3.9 b & 33.8 \(\pm\) 17.4 b & 11.8 \(\pm\) 6.2 b & 73.4 \(\pm\) 44.6 b & 2.48 \(\pm\) 1.2 b \\ Oregon and sage & 3.42 \(\pm\) 0.3 b & 9.59 \(\pm\) 3.5 b & 49.1 \(\pm\) 20.8 c & 11.2 \(\pm\) 4.4 b & 47.6 \(\pm\) 17.4 a & 3.52 \(\pm\) 1.5 c \\  & F = 30.02, \(p\) < 0.05 & F = 13.61, \(p\) < 0.05 & F = 66.9, \(p\) < 0.05 & F = 26.5, \(p\) < 0.05 & F = 34.0, \(p\) < 0.05 & F = 76.9, \(p\) < 0.05 \\ \hline \end{tabular} Different superscript letters in a column indicated statistically significant differences among the honey types for each characteristic (ANOVA, [PERSON]’s HSD post-hoc comparison).  
\end{table}