| Literature DB >> 27478482 |
Jingxiang Pang1, Xiaoyan Zhu2, Yanli Liu3, Jialei Fu4, Xiaolei Zhao1, Meina Yang1, Eduard van Wijk5, Mei Wang5, Xiaoyan Nie1, Jinxiang Han1.
Abstract
Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) plays a critical role in healthcare; however, it lacks scientific evidence to support the multidimensional therapeutic effects. These effects are based on experience, and, to date, there is no advanced tool to evaluate these experience based effects. In the current study, Chinese herbal materials classified with different cold and heat therapeutic properties, based on Chinese medicine principles, were investigated using spectral distribution, as well as the decay probability distribution based on delayed luminescence (DL). A detection system based on ultraweak biophoton emission was developed to determine the DL decay kinetics of the cold and heat properties of Chinese herbal materials. We constructed a mathematical model to fit the experimental data and characterize the properties of Chinese medicinal herbs with different parameters. The results demonstrated that this method has good reproducibility. Moreover, there is a significant difference (p < 0.05) in the spectral distribution and the decay probability distribution of Chinese herbal materials with cold and heat properties. This approach takes advantage of the comprehensive nature of DL compared with more reductionist approaches and is more consistent with TCM principles, in which the core comprises holistic views.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27478482 PMCID: PMC4958485 DOI: 10.1155/2016/8469024
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Hardware setup of spectral photon-counting system.
Nomenclature of selected cold and heat Chinese medicinal herbs.
| Pharmaceutical name | Chinese Pin Yin |
| Plant part used | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Classification as cold | Radix Pulsatillae | Bai Tou Weng |
| Root |
| Radix Dichroae | Chang Shan |
| Root | |
| Radix Stephaniae Tetrandrae | Fang Ji |
| Root | |
| Radix Scutellariae | Huang Qin |
| Root | |
| Radix Rhapontici | Lou Lu |
| Root | |
| Radix Changii | Ming Dang Shen |
| Root | |
| Radix Curcumae | Yu Jin |
| Root | |
| Radix Arnebiae | Zi Cao |
| Root | |
| Radix Scrophulariae | Xuan Shen |
| Root | |
| Radix Paeoniae Alba | Bai Shao |
| Root | |
| Radix Trichosanthis | Tian Hua Fen |
| Root | |
| Radix Puerariae | Ge Gen |
| Root | |
| Radix Panacis Quinquefolii | Xi Yang Shen |
| Root | |
| Radix Paeoniae Rubra | Chi Shao |
| Root | |
| Radix Peucedani | Qian Hu |
| Root | |
| Radix Stellariae | Yin Chai Hu |
| Root | |
| Radix Sophorae Flavescentis | Ku Shen |
| Root | |
| Radix Ophiopogonis | Mai Dong |
| Root | |
| Radix Adenophorae | Nan Sha Shen |
| Root | |
| Rhizoma Phragmitis | Lu Gen |
| Rhizome | |
| Rhizoma Anemarrhenae | Zhi Mu |
| Rhizome | |
| Rhizoma Belamcandae | She Gan |
| Rhizome | |
| Radix et Rhizome Polygoni Cuspidati | Hu Zhang |
| Rhizome and root | |
|
| ||||
| Classification as heat | Radix Morindae Officinalis | Ba Ji Tian |
| Root |
| Radix Angelicae Dahuricae | Bai Zhi |
| Root | |
| Radix Vladimiriae | Chuan Mu Xiang |
| Root | |
| Radix Angelicae Sinensis | Dang Gui |
| Root | |
| Radix Linderae | Wu Yao |
| Root | |
| Radix Polygalae | Yuan Zhi |
| Root | |
| Radix Stemonae | Bai Bu |
| Root | |
| Radix Angelicae Pubescentis | Du Huo |
| Root | |
| Radix Saposhnikoviae | Fang Feng |
| Root | |
| Radix Astragali | Hunag Qi |
| Root | |
| Rhizoma Atractylodis Macrocephalae | Bai Zhu |
| Rhizome | |
| Rhizome Galanga | Gao Liang Jiang |
| Rhizome | |
| Radix et Rhizome Ginseng Rubra | Hong Shen |
| Rhizome and root | |
| Radix et Rhizome Asteris | Zi Wan |
| Rhizome and root | |
Figure 2DL decay curve of Radix Sophorae Flavescentis (cold) and Radix et Rhizome Ginseng Rubra (heat) with no filter. Each sample was prepared in triplicate and analysis repeated three times. The noise of the empty dish is far lower than the signal.
Figure 3(a) The decay probability distribution in heat (red) and cold (black) herbs. (b) Comparison of the average of γ max (23 cold herbs versus 14 heat herbs), the cold herbs average of γ max is 3.28 ± 0.70, and the heat herbs average of γ max is 2.54 ± 0.25; p < 0.05. (c) Comparison of the average of P max (23 cold versus 14 heat herbs), the average of P max is 0.18 ± 0.03 of the cold herbs, and the average of P max is 0.25 ± 0.06; p value < 0.05.
Figure 4Spectral distribution of DL emission of 37 peaks found in the herbs normalized to their sum.