OBJECTIVE: To compare the difference between Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root using HPLC fingerprint analysis and active components determination. METHODS: Three main characteristic components including tenuifolin, polygalaxanthone III, and 3, 6'-disinapoly sucrose in different Polygala tenuifolia samples were determined by HPLC. The fingerprint methods were optimized. Then, the similarity evaluation and multivariate statistical analysis were applied in the post-processing data analysis. RESULTS: There was a high similarity in 15 batches of Polygala tenuifolia samples and its similarity coefficient was greater than 0. 9. The Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root could be clearly separated by the cluster analysis and/or the principal component analysis due to significant differences of the contents of polygalaxanthone III and 3 ,6'-disinapoly sucrose. In addition, the result of scatter plot showed that there was a high variation of tenuifolin content among all samples. The contents range of polygalaxanthone III and 3,6'-disinapoly sucrose in root bark varied relatively slight,while the content range of polygalaxanthone III in roots varied largely. Moreover,the stacked plots suggested that it was not reasonable to evaluate the quality of Polygala tenuifolia only by a single ingredient. Conclusion: The content of 3 ,6'-disinapoly sucrose varies more largely than the other two active components in Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root. Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root should be selected for different clinical treatment to ensure the accuracy of its clinical use.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the difference between Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root using HPLC fingerprint analysis and active components determination. METHODS: Three main characteristic components including tenuifolin, polygalaxanthone III, and 3, 6'-disinapoly sucrose in different Polygala tenuifolia samples were determined by HPLC. The fingerprint methods were optimized. Then, the similarity evaluation and multivariate statistical analysis were applied in the post-processing data analysis. RESULTS: There was a high similarity in 15 batches of Polygala tenuifolia samples and its similarity coefficient was greater than 0. 9. The Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root could be clearly separated by the cluster analysis and/or the principal component analysis due to significant differences of the contents of polygalaxanthone III and 3 ,6'-disinapoly sucrose. In addition, the result of scatter plot showed that there was a high variation of tenuifolin content among all samples. The contents range of polygalaxanthone III and 3,6'-disinapoly sucrose in root bark varied relatively slight,while the content range of polygalaxanthone III in roots varied largely. Moreover,the stacked plots suggested that it was not reasonable to evaluate the quality of Polygala tenuifolia only by a single ingredient. Conclusion: The content of 3 ,6'-disinapoly sucrose varies more largely than the other two active components in Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root. Polygala tenuifolia root bark and root should be selected for different clinical treatment to ensure the accuracy of its clinical use.