4.6 Article

Qualitative Analysis of Multiple Phytochemical Compounds in Tojapride Based on UHPLC Q-Exactive Orbitrap Mass Spectrometry

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 27, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27196639

关键词

Tojapride; phytochemical compounds; UHPLC Q-Exactive Orbitrap mass spectrometry

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [82004355]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central public welfare research institutes [ZZ14-YQ-005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For the first time, this study systematically characterized the chemical constituents in Tojapride, identifying a total of 222 compounds, including 218 that were reported for the first time. This newly developed approach provides a new method for understanding the chemical constituents of Tojapride and can be extended to other traditional Chinese medicine compound research.
Tojapride is composed of Caulis Perillae, Rhizoma Cyperi, Radix Glycyrrhizae, Citrus aurantium L., Coptis chinensis Franch, Pericarpium Citri Reticulatae, Reynoutria japonica Houtt, Tetradium ruticarpum, and Cleistocactus sepium. It has the effects of inhibiting gastric acid and relieving pain. It is clinically used for treating gastroesophageal reflux disease. To further study the pharmacodynamic properties of Tojapride, the systematic characterization of the chemical constituents in Tojapride was investigated using ultra-performance liquid chromatography with Q-Exactive Orbitrap mass spectrometry combined with parallel reaction monitoring for the first time. Eventually, a total of 222 compounds, including flavonoids, alkaloids, and glycyrrhizic acid derivatives, were identified based on the chromatographic retention times, MS/MS2 information, and bibliography data; a total of 218 of these were reported for the first time as being present in Tojapride. This newly developed approach provides a powerful tool for extending our understanding of chemical constituents of Tojapride, which can be further extended to other TCMP composition research.

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