4.5 Article

Differentiation of essential oils in Atractylodes lancea and Atractylodes koreana by gas chromatography with mass spectrometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 39, 期 24, 页码 4773-4780

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201600574

关键词

Atractylodes rhizome; Essential oils; Multicomponent analysis; Principal component analysis; Traditional Chinese medicine

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [81274072, 81473346, 81673593]
  2. Important New Drug Research Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2014ZX09304307-002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Atractylodes rhizome is a valuable traditional Chinese medicinal herb that comprises complex several species whose essential oils are the primary pharmacologically active component. Essential oils of Atractylodes lancea and Atractylodes koreana were extracted by hydrodistillation, and the yield was determined. The average yield of essential oil obtained from A. lancea (2.91%) was higher than that from A. koreana (2.42%). The volatile components of the essential oils were then identified by a gas chromatography with mass spectrometry method that demonstrated good precision. The method showed clear differences in the numbers and contents of volatile components between the two species. 41 and 45 volatile components were identified in A. lancea and A. koreana, respectively. Atractylon (48.68%) was the primary volatile component in A. lancea, while eudesma-4(14)-en-11-ol (11.81%) was major in A. koreana. However, the most significant difference between A. lancea and A. koreana was the major component of atractylon and atractydin. Principal component analysis was utilized to reveal the correlation between volatile components and species, and the analysis was used to successfully discriminate between A. lancea and A. koreana samples. These results suggest that different species of Atractylodes rhizome may yield essential oils that differ significantly in content and composition.

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

4.5
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