4.6 Article

Tissue-Specific Analysis of Secondary Metabolites Creates a Reliable Morphological Criterion for Quality Grading of Polygoni Multiflori Radix

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 23, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules23051115

关键词

Polygoni Multiflori Radix; laser microdissection; ultra-performance liquid chromatography triple-quadrupole mass spectrometry (UPLC-QqQ-MS; MS); secondary metabolites; quality grading

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of the People's Republic of China [11475248]
  2. Research Grants Council [12102415]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In commercial herbal markets, Polygoni Multiflori Radix (PMR, the tuberous roots of Polygonum multiflorum Thunb.), a commonly-used Chinese medicinal material, is divided into different grades based on morphological features of size and weight. While more weight and larger size command a higher price, there is no scientific data confirming that the more expensive roots are in fact of better quality. To assess the inherent quality of various grades and of various tissues in PMR and to find reliable morphological indicators of quality, a method combining laser microdissection (LMD) and ultra-performance liquid chromatography triple-quadrupole mass spectrometry (UPLC-QqQ-MS/MS) was applied. Twelve major chemical components were quantitatively determined in both whole material and different tissues of PMR. Determination of the whole material revealed that traditional commercial grades based on size and weight of PRM did not correspond to any significant differences in chemical content. Instead, tissue-specific analysis indicated that the morphological features could be linked with quality in a new way. That is, PMR with broader cork and phloem, as seen in a transverse section, were typically of better quality as these parts are where the bioactive components accumulate. The tissue-specific analysis of secondary metabolites creates a reliable morphological criterion for quality grading of PMR.

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