| Literature DB >> 29244753 |
Ju-Han Liu1,2, Yung-Yi Cheng3, Chen-Hsi Hsieh4,5,6, Tung-Hu Tsai7,8,9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Commercial pharmaceutical herbal products have enabled people to take traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in a convenient and accessible form. However, the quantity and quality should be additionally inspected. To address the issue, a combination of chemical and physical inspection methods were developed to evaluate the amount of an herbal formula, Xiang-Sha-Liu-Jun-Zi-Tang (XSLJZT), in clinical TCM practice.Entities:
Keywords: Congo red stained; LC–MS; SEM; Xiang-Sha-Liu-Jun-Zi-Tang; herbal medicines; iodine–KI stained
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29244753 PMCID: PMC6150010 DOI: 10.3390/molecules22122242
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1The product ion mass spectra of six marker compounds, including (a) guanosine; (b) atractylenolide III; (c) glycyrrhizic acid; (d) dehydrocostus lactone; (e) hesperidin; (f) oleanolic acid; and (g) carvedilol (internal standard).
The high-performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS) conditions for identification of the six constituents and one internal standard.
| Constituents | Molecular Weight | RT (min) | Ion Mode | CE | Precursor Ion (amu) | Product Ion (amu) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guanosine | 283.24 | 1.50 | + | −15 | 284.2 [M + H]+ | 152.0 |
| Atractylenolide III | 248.32 | 6.35 | + | −9 | 249.1 [M + H]+ | 231.1 |
| Glycyrrhizic acid | 822.94 | 8.42 | + | −30 | 823.4 [M + H]+ | 453.3 |
| Dehydrocostus lactone | 230.3 | 9.42 | + | −11 | 231.1 [M + H]+ | 185.1 |
| Hesperidin | 610.56 | 1.87 | − | 25 | 609.3 [M − H]− | 301.1 |
| Oleanolic acid | 456.7 | 13.0 | − | 46 | 455.5 [M − H]− | 455.0 |
| Carvedilol (IS) | 406.4 | 2.36 | + | −35 | 407.4 [M + H]+ | 100.1 |
RT: retention time (unit: minute); CE: collision energy (unit: electron volt); IS: internal standard.
Figure 2Typical multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) chromatograms of analytes: (a) peak two: guanosine (250 ng/mL); (b) peak three: atractylenolide III (50 ng/mL); (c) peak four: glycyrrhizic acid (1000 ng/mL); (d) peak five: dehydrocostus lactone (50 ng/mL); (e) peak six: hesperidin (1000 ng/mL); and (f) peak seven: oleanolic acid (1000 ng/mL). Peak one: the internal standard is carvedilol (10 ng/mL).
Linear ranges, calibration curves, correlation coefficients (r2), and detection limits of six constituents using HPLC–MS.
| Constituents | Linear Range (ng/mL) | Calibration Curve | LLOQ (ng/mL) | LOD (ng/mL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guanosine | 100–2500 | 0.9998 | 100 | 1 | |
| Atractylenolide III | 50–1000 | 0.9990 | 50 | 0.5 | |
| Glycyrrhizic Acid | 50–1000 | 0.9997 | 50 | 5 | |
| Dehydrocostus lactone | 50–1000 | 0.9998 | 50 | 1 | |
| Hesperidin | 50–1000 | 0.9997 | 50 | 10 | |
| Oleanolic acid | 50–1000 | 0.9996 | 50 | 5 |
LLOQ: lower limit of quantification; LOD: limit of detection was determined at a signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of 3.
Intra-day and inter-day precision and accuracy for the six active components of Xiang-Sha-Liu-Jun-Zi-Tang (XSLJZT). RSD: relative standard deviation.
| Nominal Conc. (ng/mL) | Intra-Day | Inter-Day | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observed Conc. (ng/mL) | RSD (%) | Bias (%) | Observed Conc. (ng/mL) | RSD (%) | Bias (%) | |
| Guanosine | ||||||
| 100 | 93.86 ± 1.95 | 2.08 | −6.14 | 95.15 ± 11.2 | 11.8 | −4.85 |
| 250 | 241.5 ± 16.1 | 6.66 | −3.38 | 239.4 ± 17.0 | 7.08 | −4.23 |
| 500 | 494.2 ± 17.0 | 3.44 | −1.16 | 521.3 ± 19.6 | 3.76 | 4.26 |
| 1000 | 1024 ± 26.9 | 2.63 | 2.40 | 999.1 ± 14.5 | 1.45 | −0.09 |
| 2500 | 2483 ± 24.0 | 0.97 | −0.69 | 2491 ± 16.9 | 0.68 | −0.37 |
| Atractylenolide III | ||||||
| 50 | 49.20 ± 2.86 | 5.81 | −1.60 | 49.15 ± 2.27 | 4.62 | −1.70 |
| 100 | 97.27 ± 2.42 | 2.49 | −2.73 | 98.65 ± 4.26 | 4.32 | −1.35 |
| 250 | 255.4 ± 4.77 | 1.87 | 2.17 | 256.5 ± 8.28 | 3.23 | 2.60 |
| 500 | 504.0 ± 9.92 | 1.97 | 0.80 | 505.1 ± 6.22 | 1.23 | 1.21 |
| 1000 | 1004 ± 12.6 | 1.26 | 0.38 | 999.1 ± 8.97 | 0.90 | −0.08 |
| Glycyrrhizic Acid | ||||||
| 50 | 47.55 ± 2.87 | 6.03 | −4.90 | 50.87 ± 3.99 | 7.84 | 1.75 |
| 100 | 102.5 ± 4.02 | 3.93 | 2.46 | 104.9 ± 5.51 | 5.25 | 4.87 |
| 250 | 255.0 ± 6.67 | 2.62 | 2.00 | 259.6 ± 6.72 | 2.59 | 3.85 |
| 500 | 502.3 ± 15.7 | 3.12 | 0.46 | 502.3 ± 29.92 | 6.00 | −0.29 |
| 1000 | 1008 ± 22.5 | 2.23 | 0.84 | 1022 ± 29.50 | 2.89 | 2.15 |
| Dehydrocostus lactone | ||||||
| 50 | 43.47 ± 1.90 | 4.36 | −13.1 | 42.37 ± 1.76 | 4.15 | −15.3 |
| 100 | 100.3 ± 3.31 | 3.29 | 0.34 | 100.5 ± 3.97 | 3.95 | 0.48 |
| 250 | 260.2 ± 7.22 | 2.77 | 4.08 | 253.9 ± 4.64 | 1.83 | 1.55 |
| 500 | 501.2 ± 10.2 | 2.04 | 0.24 | 508.7 ± 12.7 | 2.50 | 1.74 |
| 1000 | 1002 ± 9.75 | 0.97 | 0.22 | 995.9 ± 4.70 | 0.47 | −0.41 |
| Hesperidin | ||||||
| 50 | 49.93 ± 1.03 | 2.06 | −0.13 | 47.77 ± 3.84 | 8.04 | −4.46 |
| 100 | 104.5 ± 3.39 | 3.24 | 4.47 | 103.0 ± 5.11 | 4.96 | 3.04 |
| 250 | 257.0 ± 4.66 | 1.81 | 2.81 | 256.1 ± 9.05 | 3.53 | 2.45 |
| 500 | 474.9 ± 6.22 | 1.31 | −5.02 | 490.4 ± 8.06 | 1.64 | −1.93 |
| 1000 | 1003 ± 6.96 | 0.69 | 0.33 | 999.5 ± 30.6 | 3.06 | −0.05 |
| Oleanolic acid | ||||||
| 50 | 47.47 ± 1.98 | 4.16 | −5.05 | 44.14 ± 1.02 | 2.32 | −11.7 |
| 100 | 106.4 ± 2.67 | 2.51 | 6.43 | 107.3 ± 2.13 | 1.98 | 7.26 |
| 250 | 240.4 ± 7.14 | 2.97 | −3.83 | 251.3 ± 3.99 | 1.59 | 0.53 |
| 500 | 498.5 ± 17.5 | 3.52 | −0.30 | 492.2 ± 7.03 | 1.43 | −1.56 |
| 1000 | 992.2 ± 21.64 | 2.18 | −0.78 | 998.7 ± 8.55 | 0.86 | −0.13 |
Data are expressed as the means ± SD. Precision (%RSD) = (S.D./Cobs) × 100. Accuracy (%Bias) = [(Cobs − Cnom)/Cnom] × 100.
The contents of guanosine, atractylenolide III, glycyrrhizic acid, hesperidin, dehydrocostus lactone, and oleanolic acid in a lab-prepared herbal extract, and six brands (A–F), of XSLJZT herbal pharmaceutical products.
| Components (ng/g) | Lab Extraction | A | B | C | D | E | F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guanosine | 0.09 ± 0.03 | 0.04 ± 0.01 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.08 ± 0.01 |
| Atractylenolide III | 0.11 ± 0.02 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.15 ± 0.02 | 0.22 ± 0.01 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.16 ± 0.01 | 0.14 ± 0.01 |
| Glycyrrhizic acid | 0.81 ± 0.28 | 0.34 ± 0.07 | 0.30 ± 0.05 | 0.84 ± 0.04 | 0.30 ± 0.03 | 0.85 ± 0.08 | 0.71 ± 0.10 |
| Dehydrocostus lactone | 0.37 ± 0.23 | 0.34 ± 0.09 | 0.21 ± 0.01 | 0.45 ± 0.11 | 0.05 ± 0.02 | 0.13 ± 0.02 | 0.24 ± 0.26 |
| Hesperidin | 4.06 ± 1.99 | 6.56 ± 1.37 | 7.60 ± 1.73 | 8.64 ± 1.36 | 5.25 ± 0.86 | 10.35 ± 1.44 | 11.62 ± 1.83 |
| Oleanolic acid | 0.02 ± 0.01 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
Each value is expressed as the mean ± SD (n = 3), and the unit is mg/g. ND: no detection. The sample brands A–F represent XSLJZT herbal pharmaceutical products that were purchased from six different manufacturers.
Figure 3Scanning electron microscope photographs of the (a) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand A; (b) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand B; (c) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand C; (d) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand D; (e) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand E; (f) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand F; (g) cornstarch; (h) raw herbal powder; and (i) raw herbal extraction (×500).
Figure 4Light microscopy photographs of Congo red staining: (a) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand A; (b) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand B; (c) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand C; (d) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand D; (e) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand E; (f) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand F; (g) cornstarch; (h) raw herbal powder; and (i) raw herbal extraction (×100).
Figure 5Light microscopy photographs of iodine–KI staining: (a) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand A; (b) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand B; (c) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand C; (d) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand D; (e) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand E; (f) herbal pharmaceutical product XSLJZT of brand F; (g) cornstarch; (h) raw herbal powder; and (i) raw herbal extraction (×100).
Congo red and Iodine–KI staining analysis of total raw herbal powder numbers, total cornstarch numbers, and average size.
| Congo Red Staining | Iodine–KI Staining | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | Total Raw Herbal Powder (Number) | Average Size (μm) | Total Cornstarch (Number) | Average Size (μm) |
| A | 84.00 ± 11.53 | 34.45 ± 1.18 | 338.0 ± 12.53 | 13.75 ± 0.65 |
| B | 42.67 ± 14.19 | 22.87 ± 6.56 | 36.00 ± 3.61 | 14.81 ± 0.22 |
| C | 79.67 ± 80.50 | 44.35 ± 1.12 | 279.6 ± 5.86 | 13.06 ± 0.61 |
| D | 145.0 ± 15.13 | 31.49 ± 0.88 | 205.3 ± 12.86 | 13.73 ± 0.35 |
| E | 114.6 ± 09.71 | 37.44 ± 0.46 | 610.3 ± 2.52 | 13.19 ± 0.07 |
| F | 86.00 ± 13.11 | 35.68 ± 0.58 | 57.33 ± 8.74 | 13.47 ± 0.06 |
| G | 00.00 ± 0.000 | 00.00 ± 0.000 | 979.3 ± 14.98 | 12.91 ± 0.09 |
| H | 31.33 ± 10.02 | 52.16 ± 11.28 | 00.00 ± 0.000 | 00.00 ± 0.000 |
| I | 00.00 ± 0.000 | 00.00 ± 0.000 | 00.00 ± 0.000 | 00.00 ± 0.000 |
Each value is expressed as the mean ± SD (n = 3). The sample brands A–F represent the XSLJZT herbal pharmaceutical products purchased from six different manufacturers; G: cornstarch; H: raw herbal powder; I: raw herbal extraction.
Solubility analysis of herbal pharmaceutical products at different temperatures.
| Solubility (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | 55 °C | 65 °C | 75 °C | 85 °C | 95 °C |
| A | 33.69 ± 2.08 | 32.62 ± 2.16 | 40.62 ± 9.29 | 39.14 ± 2.61 | 41.98 ± 1.38 |
| B | 31.21 ± 0.35 | 32.56 ± 5.54 | 33.55 ± 5.46 | 32.87 ± 0.25 | 33.91 ± 1.28 |
| C | 33.22 ± 3.04 | 35.91 ± 5.66 | 35.69 ± 5.06 | 36.99 ± 4.17 | 40.13 ± 7.26 |
| D | 29.38 ± 5.14 | 33.05 ± 1.67 | 34.15 ± 2.05 | 36.34 ± 1.34 | 38.02 ± 1.61 |
| E | 34.12 ± 4.86 | 33.92 ± 3.04 | 39.10 ± 2.93 | 43.95 ± 2.81 | 49.38 ± 0.70 |
| F | 32.94 ± 0.43 | 32.52 ± 2.18 | 34.30 ± 2.37 | 35.24 ± 2.19 | 36.52 ± 1.30 |
| G | 36.59 ± 1.53 | 37.98 ± 1.64 | 44.53 ± 3.28 | 52.37 ± 5.67 | 67.96 ± 4.65 |
| H | 29.06 ± 9.48 | 32.86 ± 0.96 | 32.13 ± 2.40 | 31.72 ± 3.49 | 32.05 ± 1.47 |
| I | 35.50 ± 5.02 | 32.48 ± 1.11 | 39.48 ± 6.15 | 37.53 ± 4.34 | 41.59 ± 8.16 |
Each value is expressed as the mean ± SD (n = 3). Solubility = (the weight of residue/pharmaceutical herbal powder weight) × 100%. The sample brands A–F represent the XSLJZT herbal pharmaceutical products purchased from six different manufacturers; G: cornstarch; H: raw herbal powder; I: raw herbal extraction.
Swelling analysis of herbal pharmaceutical products at different temperatures.
| Swelling (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | 55 °C | 65 °C | 75 °C | 85 °C | 95 °C |
| A | 2.01 ± 0.16 | 3.46 ± 0.29 | 5.17 ± 0.64 | 8.06 ± 0.60 | 10.6 ± 0.96 |
| B | 1.90 ± 0.22 | 3.45 ± 0.25 | 2.50 ± 0.87 | 4.22 ± 0.36 | 4.19 ± 0.45 |
| C | 2.80 ± 0.61 | 3.45 ± 0.39 | 6.16 ± 0.66 | 6.71 ± 0.32 | 8.55 ± 0.55 |
| D | 3.50 ± 0.54 | 3.60 ± 0.28 | 5.07 ± 0.17 | 6.10 ± 0.29 | 7.73 ± 0.40 |
| E | 2.81 ± 0.29 | 3.25 ± 0.19 | 6.41 ± 0.45 | 9.23 ± 0.26 | 13.9 ± 1.37 |
| F | 2.19 ± 0.57 | 3.00 ± 0.27 | 3.35 ± 0.51 | 4.69 ± 0.14 | 5.56 ± 0.44 |
| G | 5.48 ± 0.46 | 8.55 ± 0.26 | 12.2 ± 0.36 | 14.2 ± 1.04 | 19.6 ± 1.97 |
| H | 0.50 ± 0.13 | 0.69 ± 0.23 | 0.79 ± 0.21 | 0.84 ± 0.09 | 1.13 ± 0.07 |
| I | 1.10 ± 0.24 | 1.36 ± 0.23 | 1.65 ± 0.21 | 1.82 ± 0.32 | 2.04 ± 0.17 |
Each value is expressed as the mean ± SD (n = 3). Swelling power = the residue precipitate in the centrifuge tube/[powder weight × (1 − Solubility/100)]. The sample brands A–F represent the XSLJZT herbal pharmaceutical products purchased from six different manufacturers; G: cornstarch; H: raw herbal powder; I: raw herbal extraction.