IntroductionAntibacterial properties of honey vary according to its floral origin; few studies report the percentage of pollen types in honey, making it difficult to reproduce and compare the results. This study compares the antibacterial and wound-healing properties of three kinds of monofloral Ulmo honey with different percentages of pollen fromEucryphia cordifolia.MethodsThe pollen percentage of the honey was determined by melissopalynological analysis, and they were classified into three groups: M1 (52.77% of pollen fromEucryphia cordifolia), M2 (68.41%), and M3 (82.80%). They were subjected to chemical analysis and agar diffusion test againstStaphylococcus aureus. A total of 20 healthy adult guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) of both sexes were randomly assigned to four groups for experimental burn skin wound (uninfected) production and treatment with Ulmo honey. On day 10 post-injury, biopsies were obtained, and histological analysis was performed to assess wound-healing capacity following the treatment with honey.ResultsThe chemical analysis showed that M3 differed significantly from M1 in terms of pH (P= 0.020), moisture (P= 0.020), total sugars (P= 0.034), and total solids (P= 0.020). Both strains ofStaphylococcus aureuswere susceptible to M1 and M2 at 40% w/v but were resistant to M3 at all concentrations. All groups (I–IV) were in the initial proliferative phase, with complete or partial re-epithelialization of the epidermis.DiscussionThe antibacterial activity showed a wide range of variation in the different types of honey studied, with no significant differences between wound healing and pollen percentage in the groups studied. Higher pH and the absence of Tineo in M3 conferred a lower antibacterial capacity but not a lower wound healing capacity. Despite its variability in the percentage ofEucryphia cordifolialike primary pollen in Ulmo's monofloral honey, this has the same properties in relation to wound healing.