4.5 Article

Ultra-fast liquid chromatography coupled with electrospray ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry for the rapid phenolic profiling of red maple (Acer rubrum) leaves

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 41, 期 11, 页码 2331-2346

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201800037

关键词

Acer rubrum; maplifa; phenolics; red maple; tandem mass spectrometry

资金

  1. Institutional Development Award (IDeA) Network for Biomedical Research Excellence from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [P20GM103430]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The red maple (Acer rubrum) species is economically important to North America because of its sap, which is used to produce maple syrup. In addition, various other red maple plant parts, including leaves, were used as a traditional medicine by the Native Americans. Currently, red maple leaves are being used for nutraceutical and cosmetic applications but there are no published analytical methods for comprehensive phytochemical characterization of this material. Herein, a rapid and sensitive method using liquid chromatography with electrospray ionization time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry was developed to characterize the phenolics in a methanol extract of red maple leaves and a proprietary phenolic-enriched red maple leaves extract (Maplifa (TM)). Time-of-flight mass spectrometry and tandem mass spectrometry experiments led to the identification of 106 phenolic compounds in red maples leaves with the vast majority of these compounds also detected in Maplifa (TM). The compounds included 68 gallotannins, 25 flavonoids, gallic acid, quinic acid, catechin, epicatechin, and nine other gallic acid derivatives among which 11 are potentially new and 75 are being reported from red maple for the first time. The developed method to characterize red maple leaves phenolics is rapid and highly sensitive and could aid in future standardization and quality control of this botanical ingredient.

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