4.6 Article

Rapid fingerprint analysis based on supercritical fluid chromatography for quality evaluation of Hedyotis diffusa

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2022.114864

关键词

Supercritical fluid chromatography; SFC-MS/MS; Supercritical fluid extraction; Hedyotis diffusa; Fingerprint; Batch quality evaluation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, quality evaluations of Hedyotis diffusa (H. diffusa) batches were conducted using rapid fingerprint analysis based on supercritical fluid chromatography (SFC). The results showed that the SFC method is feasible for batch quality evaluation of H. diffitsa, as it allows for the effective extraction and separation of chemical components in H. diffusa. The fingerprint analysis revealed quality differences of H. diffusa based on origin and harvest year.
In this study, quality evaluations of Hedyotis diffusa (H. diffusa) batches by rapid fingerprint analysis based on supercritical fluid chromatography (SFC) were accomplished. Abundant chemical components of H. diffusa were effectively extracted by optimal supercritical fluid extraction conditions (20 % MeOH as modifier, 45 degrees C, 300 bar and 60 min). Then, the extract was separated by SFC on a Torus 1-AA column (100 x 3.0 mm i.d., 1.7 mu m) within 10 min by gradient elution increasing from 5 % to 45 % modifier (MeOH containing 0.05 % TFA) at 1.2 mL/min, 30 degrees C and 2000 psi. The SFC approach exhibited short analysis time, while maintaining good peak shape and resolution. Seven major compounds were further identified by SFC coupled with tandem mass spectrometer to be phenylpmpanoid, iridoids and anthraquinones. Finally, fingerprint analysis of 10 batches of H. diffusa by the developed SFC method was accomplished. The similarity values were between 0.894 and 0.968, indicating quality differences of H. diffusa from depending on origin and harvest year exist. The result demonstrates the feasibility of the SFC in batch quality evaluation of H. diffitsa.

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

4.6
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