| Literature DB >> 22511890 |
Megan L Coghlan1, James Haile, Jayne Houston, Dáithí C Murray, Nicole E White, Paula Moolhuijzen, Matthew I Bellgard, Michael Bunce.
Abstract
Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been practiced for thousands of years, but only within the last few decades has its use become more widespread outside of Asia. Concerns continue to be raised about the efficacy, legality, and safety of many popular complementary alternative medicines, including TCMs. Ingredients of some TCMs are known to include derivatives of endangered, trade-restricted species of plants and animals, and therefore contravene the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) legislation. Chromatographic studies have detected the presence of heavy metals and plant toxins within some TCMs, and there are numerous cases of adverse reactions. It is in the interests of both biodiversity conservation and public safety that techniques are developed to screen medicinals like TCMs. Targeting both the p-loop region of the plastid trnL gene and the mitochondrial 16S ribosomal RNA gene, over 49,000 amplicon sequence reads were generated from 15 TCM samples presented in the form of powders, tablets, capsules, bile flakes, and herbal teas. Here we show that second-generation, high-throughput sequencing (HTS) of DNA represents an effective means to genetically audit organic ingredients within complex TCMs. Comparison of DNA sequence data to reference databases revealed the presence of 68 different plant families and included genera, such as Ephedra and Asarum, that are potentially toxic. Similarly, animal families were identified that include genera that are classified as vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered, including Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus) and Saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica). Bovidae, Cervidae, and Bufonidae DNA were also detected in many of the TCM samples and were rarely declared on the product packaging. This study demonstrates that deep sequencing via HTS is an efficient and cost-effective way to audit highly processed TCM products and will assist in monitoring their legality and safety especially when plant reference databases become better established.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22511890 PMCID: PMC3325194 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002657
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Genet ISSN: 1553-7390 Impact factor: 5.917
Figure 1Photographs of four TCM samples genetically audited in this study using high-throughput sequencing.
See Table 1 for a detailed list of all samples and listed package ingredients. From left to right; (A) Bear Bile crystals (TCM-015), (B) Saiga Antelope Horn powder (TCM-011), (C) Yatong Yili Wan capsules (TCM-016), and (D) Babao Ching Hsin San powder (TCM-026).
Analysed TCM samples, including sample ID, brand names, and listed package ingredients.
| Sample ID | Sample Name | Packet Ingredients (as they appear in English) | Packet Ingredients (Translated from Chinese) |
| TCM-001 | Mongnan Tianbao Pills |
|
|
| TCM-002 | Kai Yeung Pills |
|
|
| TCM-003 | Ling Yang Ge Gen Cold Remedy |
|
|
| TCM-004 | Capsulae Bearbile |
|
|
| TCM-006 | Laryngitis Pills - A |
|
|
| TCM-011 | Saiga Antelope Horn Powder |
|
|
| TCM-013 | Lingxin Mingmu Shangging Wan |
|
|
| TCM-015 | Bear Bile Powder |
|
|
| TCM-016 | Yatong Yili Wan |
|
|
| TCM-018 | Qingxuan Pian |
|
|
| TCM-020 | Zhen Zhu plus Hou Zao San Powder |
|
|
| TCM-021 | Laryngitis Pills - B |
|
|
| TCM-024 | Powder in 2 vials kept in red box with bear outline |
|
|
| TCM-026 | Babao Ching Hsin San powder |
|
|
| TCM-027 | Chu pak hou tsao san powder |
|
|
The descriptions listed in the table are taken verbatim, from the respective TCM. The taxonomy, scientific nomenclature, and format are also exactly as listed, including any inaccuracies.
Selected plant families and genera identified in 13 TCM samples using HTS.
| Sample ID | TCM-001 | TCM-002 | TCM-003 | TCM-004 | TCM-006 | TCM-011 | TCM-013 | TCM-016 | TCM-018 | TCM-020 | TCM-021 | TCM-026 | TCM-027 |
| Number of DNA sequences | 7444 | 563 | 3964 | 4944 | 7619 | 4445 | 4421 | 2123 | 2112 | 850 | 7454 | 912 | 1831 |
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||
| - | ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
| - | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
| - | ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
| - | ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
| - | ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ||||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
|
| ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||||
| - | ✓ |
*: indicates top BLAST match ≥98%. A comprehensive audit is shown in Figure S1A–S1N.
Animal genera identified in the TCM samples using HTS.
| Sample ID | Number of DNA sequences (excluding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| TCM-001 | 48 | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| TCM-003 | 59 | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| TCM-006 | 124 | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| TCM-011 | 24 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
| TCM-015 | 29 | ✓ | |||||||
| TCM-016 | 32 | ✓ | |||||||
| TCM-021 | 52 | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
| TCM-024 | 98 | ✓ | |||||||
| TCM-027 | 73 | ✓ |
*: indicates top BLAST match ≥98%. The symbol # denotes that the species are CITES listed [24].
Figure 2MEGAN phylogram of plant components in Yatong Yili Wan capsules (TCM-016).
The data was generated using trnL c/h fusion primers and HTS using the Roche GS Junior. 2123 reads were queried against GenBank and parsed through MEGAN, SAP and QIIME (see Methods). The assignments of both MEGAN and SAP (with posterior support) are shown. Size of red node labels is proportional to number of sequence reads at each taxonomic level.