| Literature DB >> 26925295 |
Xian-En Li1, Yu-Xia Wang1, Peng Sun1, Deng-Qun Liao1.
Abstract
Zhejiang and Sichuan are regarded as two genuine producing areas of Ophiopogonis radix in China. To study the difference in the quality of Ophiopogonis radix from these two places, the contents of three reported bioactive saponins, that is, ophiopogonins B, D, and D', in tubers and fibrous roots of Ophiopogon japonicus from Cixi city of Zhejiang and Santai county of Sichuan were quantified using HPLC-ELSD method and compared. Ophiopogonin B and ophiopogonin D' content in tubers of HMD were higher than those in radix of CMD, whereas ophiopogonin D in HMD was about twice lower than that of CMD. Three ophiopogonins were all detected in fibrous roots of both HMD and CMD. Their averaged content in fibrous roots of CMD was about twice higher than that in tubers of CMD. Ophiopogonin D in fibrous roots of CMD was about five times higher than that of HMD. Our biochemical assay revealed that fibrous roots and tubers of CMD can be of an important saponin source, especially for ophiopogonin D.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26925295 PMCID: PMC4748090 DOI: 10.1155/2016/7214607
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anal Methods Chem ISSN: 2090-8873 Impact factor: 2.193
The content of three saponins in tubers of HMD and CMD (μg/g).
| Origin# | Ophiopogonin B | Ophiopogonin D | Ophiopogonin D′ | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangming | 10.97 ± 2.23 | 75.29 ± 2.95 | 13.89 ± 6.29 | 100.15 |
| Laoma | 21.28 ± 2.72 | 82.87 ± 2.10 | 24.64 ± 9.67 | 128.79 |
| Licheng | 10.67 ± 1.70 | 94.43 ± 2.52 | 14.25 ± 9.94 | 119.35 |
| Zhengsheng | 8.64 ± 1.82 | 68.51 ± 4.57 | 15.73 ± 9.29 | 92.88 |
| Xinde | 7.10 ± 2.84 | 91.98 ± 2.03 | 18.56 ± 12.25 | 117.64 |
| Lingxin | 13.10 ± 1.13 | 84.61 ± 3.41 | 16.83 ± 4.40 | 114.54 |
| Liuying | 11.14 ± 2.63 | 64.38 ± 2.73 | 18.26 ± 11.99 | 93.78 |
| Luxi | 15.24 ± 3.21 | 36.33 ± 2.58 | 18.59 ± 12.39 | 70.16 |
| Yongming | 27.71 ± 3.72 | 90.03 ± 4.66 | 14.31 ± 8.12 | 132.05 |
|
| 13.98 ± 6.60 | 76.49 ± 18.29 | 17.23 ± 3.36 | 107.71 |
|
| ||||
| Xiaolin | 42.41 ± 3.97 | 59.40 ± 5.08 | 37.23 ± 6.74 | 139.04 |
| Xingxing | 57.03 ± 7.85 | 40.38 ± 0.27 | 23.42 ± 5.97 | 120.83 |
| Qinchunbao | 26.25 ± 0.74 | 23.66 ± 0.31 | 22.89 ± 1.71 | 82.8 |
|
| 41.90 ± 15.40 | 41.15 ± 17.88 | 27.85 ± 8.13 | 114.22 |
#Town name, Santai county, Sichuan province; farm name and company name (3rd), Cixi city, Zhejiang province.
P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 mean significant difference in the content between HMD and CMD, calculated by SPSS.
Figure 1HPLC-ELSD chromatographs of standard mixture (a) and maidong extract (b).
The content of three saponins in fibrous roots of HMD and CMD (μg/g).
| Origin# | Ophiopogonin B | Ophiopogonin D | Ophiopogonin D′ | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangming | 15.42 ± 0.18 | 147.57 ± 0.87 | 26.90 ± 1.23 | 189.89 |
| Laoma | 12.08 ± 1.01 | 172.97 ± 4.10 | 90.01 ± 6.95 | 275.06 |
| Licheng | 14.96 ± 1.61 | 136.78 ± 2.59 | 30.02 ± 5.79 | 181.76 |
| Zhengsheng | 41.48 ± 5.11 | 144.56 ± 7.11 | 68.05 ± 8.77 | 254.09 |
| Xinde | 11.88 ± 2.12 | 171.69 ± 4.83 | 28.72 ± 10.98 | 212.29 |
| Lingxin | 16.04 ± 1.79 | 146.29 ± 2.85 | 31.65 ± 7.70 | 193.98 |
| Liuying | 31.34 ± 1.34 | 168.27 ± 4.95 | 69.51 ± 3.48 | 269.12 |
| Luxi | 27.28 ± 1.45 | 167.37 ± 4.55 | 30.08 ± 3.63 | 224.73 |
| Yongming | 65.94 ± 4.34 | 208.91 ± 4.82 | 93.8 ± 6.81 | 368.65 |
|
| 26.27 ± 17.99 | 162.71 ± 22.00 | 52.08 ± 28.08 | 241.06 |
|
| ||||
| Xiaolin | 20.99 ± 4.25 | 15.27 ± 1.64 | 23.49 ± 10.82 | 59.75 |
| Xingxing | 21.97 ± 3.08 | 79.71 ± 3.33 | 41.78 ± 8.25 | 143.46 |
| Qinchunbao | 54.92 ± 2.53 | 21.26 ± 0.55 | 64.12 ± 3.43 | 140.30 |
|
| 32.63 ± 19.31 | 38.75 ± 35.60 | 43.13 ± 20.35 | 114.50 |
#Town name, Santai county, Sichuan province; farm name and company name (3rd), Cixi city, Zhejiang province.
P < 0.01 means significant difference in the content between HMD and CMD, calculated by SPSS.
Soil characteristics in HMD- and CMD-growing places.
| Origin# | Available P (mg·kg−1) | pH value | EC ( | Available K (mg·kg−1) | Organic matter (%) | Total N (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangming | 53.25 | 6.87 | 158.90 | 68.51 | 2.06 | 0.09 |
| Huayuan | 92.52 | 5.27 | 126.00 | 59.76 | 1.70 | 0.10 |
| Laoma | 47.59 | 5.25 | 127.20 | 143.49 | 1.95 | 0.12 |
| Laoma | 118.19 | 5.26 | 122.20 | 113.50 | 1.77 | 0.13 |
| Licheng | 104.60 | 6.04 | 148.20 | 78.51 | 1.89 | 0.12 |
| Licheng | 47.77 | 6.30 | 165.50 | 93.50 | 1.66 | 0.12 |
| Zhengsheng | 44.75 | 6.43 | 259.00 | 168.48 | 1.83 | 0.12 |
| Zhengsheng | 47.59 | 6.57 | 162.10 | 261.32 | 1.75 | 0.12 |
| Xinde | 37.01 | 6.64 | 122.30 | 101.00 | 2.57 | 0.15 |
| Xinde | 22.47 | 6.81 | 91.80 | 61.01 | 1.29 | 0.11 |
| Lingxin | 46.26 | 6.92 | 138.90 | 73.51 | 1.60 | 0.10 |
| Lingxin | 53.06 | 6.91 | 134.20 | 101.00 | 1.55 | 0.11 |
| Luxi | 45.32 | 6.97 | 140.00 | 58.51 | 1.54 | 0.13 |
| Yongming | 111.02 | 6.85 | 276.00 | 180.98 | 2.12 | 0.13 |
|
| 62.24 ± 30.50 | 6.36 ± 0.65 | 155.16 ± 51.40 | 111.65 ± 58.51 | 1.81 ± 0.31 | 0.12 ± 0.02 |
|
| ||||||
| Xiaolin1 | 46.07 | 7.24 | 406.00 | 292.56 | 1.77 | 0.11 |
| Xiaolin2 | 24.74 | 7.26 | 113.20 | 173.48 | 0.96 | 0.08 |
| Xingxing1 | 26.07 | 7.63 | 110.90 | 87.25 | 1.52 | 0.07 |
| Xingxing2 | 16.63 | 7.01 | 236.00 | 88.50 | 4.41 | 0.13 |
|
| 28.38 ± 12.51 | 7.29 ± 0.26 | 216.53 ± 139.18 | 160.45 ± 96.88 | 2.17 ± 1.53 | 0.10 ± 0.03 |
#Town name, Santai county, Sichuan province; farm name, Cixi city, Zhejiang province. 1Two years after plantation. 2Three years after plantation.
P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 mean significant difference in the content between HMD and CMD, calculated by SPSS.