4.6 Article

A series of strategies for solving the shortage of reference standards for multi-components determination of traditional Chinese medicine, Mahoniae Caulis as a case

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1412, Issue -, Pages 100-111

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2015.08.015

Keywords

Traditional Chinese medicine; Reference standards shortage; One single reference standard to determine multi-compounds; Quantitative analysis by standardized reference extract; Quantitative nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy; Relative expanded uncertainty of measurement

Funding

  1. National Natural Sciences Foundation of China [81222051]
  2. Chinese Pharmacopoeia Commission
  3. National Key Technology R&D Program New Drug Innovation of China [2012ZX09301002-002-002, 2012ZX09304-005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to solve the bottleneck of reference standards shortage for comprehensive quality control of traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs), a series of strategies, including one single reference standard to determine multi-compounds (SSDMC), quantitative analysis by standardized reference extract (QASRE), and quantitative nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (qNMR) were proposed, and Mahoniae Caulis was selected as an example to develop and validate these methods for simultaneous determination of four alkaloids, columbamine, jatrorrhizine, palmatine, and berberine. Comprehensive comparisons among these methods and with the conventional external standard method (ESM) were carried out. The relative expanded uncertainty of measurement was firstly used to compare their credibility. The results showed that all these three new developed methods can accurately accomplish the quantification by using only one purified reference standard, but each of them has its own advantages and disadvantages as well as the specific application scope, which were also discussed in detail in this paper. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available