4.4 Article

Using the UPLC-ESI-Q-TOF-MSE method and intestinal bacteria for metabolite identification in the nonpolysaccharide fraction from Bletilla striata

期刊

BIOMEDICAL CHROMATOGRAPHY
卷 33, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bmc.4637

关键词

Bletilla striata; intestinal bacteria; metabolite identification; multiple constituents; UPLC-ESI-Q-TOF-MSE method

资金

  1. Guiyang Science and Technology Bureau [[2017]30-29]
  2. Guizhou Science and Technology Department [[2019]5641, [2017]5601]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [U1812403, 81860323, 81460630]
  4. Guizhou Education Department [KY[2018]050]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bletilla striata (Thunb.) Reichb. f. (Orchidaceae), also known as Bai-ji, is a traditional Chinese herb that is widely used in Asia to treat hematemesis, hemoptysis, traumatic bleeding and other similar disorders. Most studies have focused on the pharmacological activities of polysaccharide extracts from B. striata. Our previous studies found that the nonpolysaccharide fraction from B. striata extract also has a hemostatic effect; however, the active constituents responsible for this pharmacological action are unclear. Thus, the metabolic profiles of the nonpolysaccharide fraction were investigated in Sprague-Dawley rats and intestinal bacteria models using ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry. Mass data were acquired by the MSE method. Eight components including five prototypes and three metabolites were identified in rat biofluids after oral administration of the nonpolysaccharide fraction. The parent compounds underwent various metabolic processes, including hydrolysis, deglucosylation, glycosylation and sulfate conjugation. The results not only reveal the possible metabolic pathway, but also indicate the potential pharmacological components. Further mechanistic studies using nonpolysaccharide compounds of the B. striata extract are required to obtain potential candidate compounds.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据