## 2 Results and Discussion
### QDA Profile of Bee Products in the Aspect of Color and Odor Quality  
The QDA method of sensory profiling has already been used to determine the properties of honey samples (2018; 2019). The crucial points in this method include an appropriate training of the sensory panel and the choice of descriptors and standards related to them. Therefore, in the primary step, panelists prepare definitions of odor terms and choose reference materials, which help them identify the selected odors. In this case, honey-like \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Sugar [g/100 g]**} \\ \cline{2-5}
**Bee Products** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Fructose**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Glucose**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Success**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**TOTAL**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**F/G Ratio**} \\  & & & & & **Amount of Sugars** & \\ \hline Beeswax & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 2.03 \(\pm\) 0.14 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & - & 2.09 & 0.03 \\ Beebread & 11.58 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 5.12 \(\pm\) 0.33 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 0.11 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 16.81 & 2.26 \\ Bee pollen & 14.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 11.56 \(\pm\) 0.43 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 25.63 & 1.22 \\ Honey & 27.60 \(\pm\) 0.48 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 26.32 \(\pm\) 0.49 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.10 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 54.02 & 1.05 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Values were presented as mean at standard deviation. Values followed by different letters in the same column are significantly different (\(p<0.05\)), as determined by [PERSON]’s multiple comparison test.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: The content of sugars (fructose, glucose, and sucrose at the level of g/100 g), total amount of sugars, and fructose/glucose ratio (F/G) determined in bee products. was defined as an aromatic impression related to honey, and the standard used in this case was an essence on the tissue paper le nez du cafe no. 19 honey; sweet was described as a delicate sweet note characteristic of cotton candy (cotton candy); acid as an odor associated with organic acid, e.g., organic acids (lemon slice); pungent as an intensive odor of spices (black pepper); waxy as an odor characteristic of beeswax (beeswax); and plant-based as an odor related to plant material. The results of QDA are presented in Figure 2. According to the scores given by the sensory panel to the color of bee products, beeswax was the less yellow product with a value of 3.53 arbitrary units (au), in comparison to beebread (9.00 au), honey (7.00 au), and bee pollen (5.00 au). Moreover, the sensory panel identified six odor descriptors for bee products: Honey-like, sweet, acid, pungent, waxy, and plant-based. Honey received the highest score for honey-like odor (2-3 times higher compared to beeswax and beebread), and had the sweetest aroma compared to the other bee products. This result is in agreement with findings from our previous study (data not published), indicating that multiflorous honey possesses the sweetest and honey-like odor compared to other types of honey. [PERSON] et al. [46] defined the main honey descriptors as floral and fruity. However, they can be contributed to sweet and honey-like sensory markers. In the bee pollen, panelists did not note the honey-like aroma, but its aroma was described using attributes of sweet, acid, and plant-based. Moreover, [PERSON] et al. [48] characterized the aroma of bee pollen as sour/acid at the same level as in our study. Furthermore, in the present study, beebread exhibited the highest intensity for the attributes of acid aroma, whereas in beeswax acidity was not recognized at all. Other odor descriptors, including waxy, pungent, and plant-based were noted only in beeswax, honey, and pollen, respectively. The waxy in beeswax and plant-based in pollen received the high scores of 6.00 and 5.80 au, respectively, which might be deemed sensory markers of these two products. Figure 2: Spider diagram of mean scores of aroma attributes of bee products.