## 2 Results and Discussion
### Physico-Chemical Results  
Table 3 provides a summary of the results of the physico-chemical composition of the control honey and the honey with added spirulina. The physico-chemical analysis revealed some differences among the samples analyzed. On one hand, the degree of Brix and the pH value are similar between the samples studied, with no significant differences observed (Table 3), in accordance with the results proposed by [PERSON] et al. [17]. On the other hand, adding spirulina to honey affects the moisture content, electrical conductivity (EC), and hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) content of the final product. The moisture content in both samples studied is under the maximum limit of 20% defined by the EU honey legislation. Spirulina, being a powdered algae, likely absorbed a certain amount of moisture from the honey, reducing the overall moisture content as reported in Table 3. [PERSON] et al. [25] also observed a reduction in moisture content in a yogurt drink to which spirulina powder was added. The moisture content of honey is crucial for its quality, stability, resistance to spoilage, and shelf life. Higher moisture content increases the risk of fermentation during storage, while lower moisture levels extend the shelf life of honey. In addition, the addition of spirulina seems to affect the EC content of wildflower honey, which changes from an average value of 0.74 (+0.02) to 0.88 (0.02). The increase in EC could be due to the high quantity of mineral salts present in spirulina. Indeed, as reported by [PERSON] and co-authors [26], spirulina powder contains mineral salts such as iron, potassium and magnesium. Since the HMF content derives from the degradation of fructose and is directly linked to the aging process of honey [27]. We tested if the addition of spirulina could affect this parameter. The HPLC quantification of HMF showed that \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \(\mathbf{N}^{\circ}\) & **Components** & **Wildflower Honey** & **Wildflower Honey + Spirulina** \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Carbohydrates and Carbohydrate Derivatives**} \\ \hline
11 & glycerol & tr & 3.2 \(\pm\) 0.05 \\
12 & ribitol & 0.1 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 0.3 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\
13 & myo-inositol & 10.6 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 0.1 \(\pm\) 0.00 \\
14 & D-gluconic acid & 0.6 \(\pm\) 0.03 & - \\
15 & D-talofuranose & 0.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 1.2 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\
16 & D-tagtofuranose & 0.4 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 4.2 \(\pm\) 0.05 \\
17 & D-ribofuranose & 0.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 15.7 \(\pm\) 0.09 \\
18 & D-fructofuranose & 28.3 \(\pm\) 0.14 & 29.7 \(\pm\) 0.11 \\
19 & D-erythrose & 0.3 \(\pm\) 0.02 & - \\
20 & D-fructose & 21.1 \(\pm\) 0.15 & 13.3 \(\pm\) 0.08 \\
21 & D-glucose & 6.3 \(\pm\) 0.03 & 1.8 \(\pm\) 0.04 \\
22 & spiscofuranose & 0.4 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 1.0 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\
23 & L-sorbofuranose & 0.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 4.4 \(\pm\) 0.05 \\
24 & \(\beta\)-D-glucopyranose & 25.6 \(\pm\) 0.15 & 3.5 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\
25 & \(\beta\)-D-xylofuranose & 0.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 & - \\
26 & 2-deoxypentofuranose & - & 3.7 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\
27 & D-mnamopyranose & 0.1 \(\pm\) 0.01 & - \\
28 & dihydroacetone & - & 2.9 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\
29 & levoglucosan & 0.6 \(\pm\) 0.02 & - \\
30 & turnanose & 1.5 \(\pm\) 0.02 & - \\
31 & lactulose & 1.3 \(\pm\) 0.03 & - \\
32 & uridine & 0.2 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 4.5 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Others**} \\ \hline
33 & diethylene glycol & - & 3.3 \(\pm\) 0.03 \\
34 & furfuryl alcohol & - & 0.4 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\
35 & cadalene & 0.5 \(\pm\) 0.02 & - \\
36 & carvacrol & 0.1 \(\pm\) 0.01 & - \\
37 & trans-calamenene & 0.1 \(\pm\) 0.00 & - \\
38 & philorgolucinol & - & 0.6 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._the samples studied had an HMF content within the standard thresholds of 40 (mg/kg) as defined by legislation. The content of HMF increased significantly due to the enrichment of the honey with spirulina (\(p>0.05\)) and changed from an average value of 2.40 (mg/kg) in the control honey to 8.13 (mg/kg) in the treated samples (Table 3).