4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Development of high-performance liquid chromatographic fingerprints for distinguishing Chinese Angelica from related umbelliferae herbs

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1073, 期 1-2, 页码 383-392

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2004.11.080

关键词

Angelica spp.; Ligusticum chuanxiong; Cnidium officinale; umbelliferae herbs; fingerprint

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A high-performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) fingerprint of Chinese Angelica (CA) was developed basing on the consistent chromatograms of 40 CA samples (Angelica sinensis (Oliv.) Diels). The unique properties of this HPLC fingerprints were validated by analyzing 13 related herbs including 4 Japanese Angelicae Root samples (JA, A. acutiloba Kitagawa and A. acutiloba Kitagawa var. sugiyame Hikino), 6 Szechwan Lovage Rhizome samples (SL, Ligusticum chuanxiong Hort.) and 3 Cnidium Rhizome samples (CR, Cnidium officinale Makino). Both correlation coefficients of similarity in chromatograms and relative peak areas of characteristic compounds were calculated for quantitative expression of the HPLC fingerprints. The amount of senkyunolide A in CA was less than 30-fold of that in SL and CR samples, which was used as a chemical marker to distinguish them. JA was easily distinguished from CA, SL and CR based on either chromatographic patterns or the amount of coniferyl ferulate. No obvious difference between SL and CR chromatograms except the relative amount of some compounds, suggesting that SL and CR might have very close relationship in terms of chemotaxonomy. Ferulic acid and Z-ligustilide were unequivocally determined whilst senkyunolide 1, senkyunolide H, coniferyl ferulate, senkyunolide A, butylphthalide, E-ligustilide, E-butylidenephthatide, Z-butylidenephthalide and levistolide A were tentatively identified in chromatograms based on their atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI) MS data and the comparison of their UV spectra with those published in literatures. (c) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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