4.5 Article

Novel carbon dots derived from Schizonepetae Herba Carbonisata and investigation of their haemostatic efficacy

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/21691401.2017.1379015

关键词

Schizonepetae Herba Carbonisata; carbon dots; haemostasis; mechanism

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation [81573573, 81503344, 81473338]
  2. Young Teacher Special Projects of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine [2015-JYB-JSMS014]
  3. Classical Prescription Basic Research Team of the Beijing University of Chinese Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Schizonepetae Herba Carbonisata (SHC) has been used in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) to treat haemorrhagic diseases for more than 1000 years. However, little information is available on its haemostatic components and mechanism. In this study, we developed novel water-soluble carbon dots (CDs) in aqueous extracts of SHC for the first time and a modified pyrolysis method was used to prepare the SHC using Schizonepetae Herba (SH) as the sole precursor. The SHC-CDs were characterized using transmission electron microscopy (TEM), high-resolution TEM (HRTEM), Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR), ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) and fluorescence spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Furthermore, the CDs with a quantum yield (QY) around 2.26% exhibited no toxicity within approximately 0.84 mg/mL in the CCK-8 assay. More interestingly, tail haemorrhaging and liver haemorrhaging experiments showed that CDs-treated mice had significantly shorter bleeding time than did normal saline (NS)-treated control group. Coagulation assays suggested that SHC-CDs could stimulate the extrinsic blood coagulation system and activate the fibrinogen system. These results suggested that SHC-CDs possess a remarkable haemostatic property, which provides evidence to support the further investigation of the considerable potential and effective material basis of TCM.

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