| Literature DB >> 29435384 |
Xiang Zhang1, Caimei Gu1, Bashir Ahmad2, Linfang Huang1.
Abstract
The present study aimed to evaluate the quality of Cynomorium songaricum Rupr. from different producing areas, which is an edible, holoparasitic, and desert plant that has been used in traditional medicine for improving immunity and kidney function and treating constipation. We optimized the extract conditions by response surface methodology (RSM) and determined the content of gallic acid, protocatechuic acid, and catechin of C. songaricum simultaneously from different producing areas by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). It is the first study in which the RSM was used to optimize the extract condition of C. songaricum with multiple evaluation factors, ensuring the efficiency and accuracy of the study. The results were analyzed by principal component analysis, and they showed that the quality of C. songaricum from Qinghai Province was the best, while the quality of C. songaricum from Gansu Province was the worst. For the first time, the two ecotypes of C. songaricum, including Outside Great Wall type and Inside Great Wall type, were discovered and identified by the chemical marker protocatechuic acid. This study is the scientific basis for quality evaluation, especially for food safety.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29435384 PMCID: PMC5757168 DOI: 10.1155/2017/6153802
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anal Methods Chem ISSN: 2090-8873 Impact factor: 2.193
Figure 1The sampling points of C. songaricum.
The sample list of C. songaricum.
| Number | Name | Origin | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NAE-1 | Ejin Banner, Inner Mongolia, China | May, 2015 |
| 2 | NAE-2 | Ejin Banner, Inner Mongolia, China | May, 2015 |
| 3 | NAE-3 | Ejin Banner, Inner Mongolia, China | May, 2015 |
| 4 | NAZ-1 | Alashan Left Banner, Inner Mongolia, China | May, 2015 |
| 5 | NAZ-2 | Alashan Left Banner, Inner Mongolia, China | May, 2015 |
| 6 | NAZ-3 | Alashan Left Banner, Inner Mongolia, China | May, 2015 |
| 7 | XH-1 | Hetian, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 8 | XH-2 | Hetian, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 9 | XH-3 | Hetian, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 10 | XT-1 | Tacheng, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 11 | XT-2 | Tacheng, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 12 | XT-3 | Tacheng, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 13 | XK-1 | Kashi, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 14 | XK-2 | Kashi, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 15 | XK-3 | Kashi, Xinjiang, China | May, 2016 |
| 16 | QH-1 | Haixi, Qinghai, China | May, 2015 |
| 17 | QH-2 | Haixi, Qinghai, China | May, 2015 |
| 18 | QH-3 | Haixi, Qinghai, China | May, 2015 |
| 19 | NG-1 | Guyuan, Ningxia, China | May, 2015 |
| 20 | NG-2 | Guyuan, Ningxia, China | May, 2015 |
| 21 | NG-3 | Guyuan, Ningxia, China | May, 2015 |
| 22 | GJG-1 | Guazhou, Gansu, China | May, 2015 |
| 23 | GJG-2 | Guazhou, Gansu, China | May, 2015 |
| 24 | GJG-3 | Guazhou, Gansu, China | May, 2015 |
| 25 | GY-1 | Zhangye, Gansu, China | May, 2015 |
| 26 | GY-2 | Zhangye, Gansu, China | May, 2015 |
| 27 | GY-3 | Zhangye, Gansu, China | May, 2015 |
Independent and dependent variables used in the Box-Behnken design for the optimization of C. songaricum extraction.
| Factor | Level used, actual coded | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Independent variables | Low (−1) | Medium (0) | High (+1) |
|
| 1/10 | 1/20 | 1/30 |
|
| 20 | 40 | 60 |
|
| 60 | 80 | 100 |
|
| |||
| Dependent variables | Goal | ||
|
| |||
|
| Maximize | ||
|
| Maximize | ||
|
| Maximize | ||
The parameter optimization of method validation.
| Compounds | Concentrations (mg/L) | Linear equations |
| RSD of interday and intraday | RSD of stability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gallic acid | 0.04–0.4 |
| 0.9992 | 0.36 | 1.1 |
| Protocatechuic acid | 0.03–0.3 |
| 0.9992 | 0.57 | 2.0 |
| Catechin | 0.02–0.2 |
| 0.9994 | 0.31 | 1.9 |
Observed response in the Box-Behnken design for optimization of C. songaricum extraction formulations with predicted values generated by Design-Expert software (three variables: X 1: material-to-solvent ratio, X 2: ultrasonic time, and X 3: ultrasonic power. D: desirability function).
| Formulations | Independent variables | Actual value | Predicted value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 1 | 1/10 | 20 | 80 | 0.46 | 0.50 |
| 2 | 1/30 | 20 | 80 | 0.00 | 0.02 |
| 3 | 1/10 | 60 | 80 | 0.39 | 0.37 |
| 4 | 1/30 | 60 | 80 | 0.12 | 0.078 |
| 5 | 1/10 | 40 | 60 | 0.71 | 0.66 |
| 6 | 1/30 | 40 | 60 | 0.25 | 0.23 |
| 7 | 1/10 | 40 | 100 | 0.49 | 0.51 |
| 8 | 1/30 | 40 | 100 | 0.14 | 0.18 |
| 9 | 1/20 | 20 | 60 | 0.52 | 0.53 |
| 10 | 1/20 | 60 | 60 | 0.29 | 0.35 |
| 11 | 1/20 | 20 | 100 | 0.35 | 0.29 |
| 12 | 1/20 | 60 | 100 | 0.40 | 0.40 |
| 13 | 1/20 | 40 | 80 | 0.95 | 0.89 |
| 14 | 1/20 | 40 | 80 | 0.88 | 0.89 |
| 15 | 1/20 | 40 | 80 | 0.87 | 0.89 |
| 16 | 1/20 | 40 | 80 | 0.81 | 0.89 |
| 17 | 1/20 | 40 | 80 | 0.94 | 0.89 |
Figure 2(a) 3D graphic surface optimization of D versus ultrasonic time and material-to-solvent ratio; (b) 3D graphic surface optimization of D versus ultrasonic power and ultrasonic time; (c) 3D graphic surface optimization of D versus ultrasonic power and material-to-solvent ratio.
Figure 3The HPLC chromatogram of C. songaricum; A: crude drugs; B: reference standard; 1: gallic acid; 2: protocatechuic acid; and 3: catechin.
Figure 4Comparison of content determination of C. songaricum between different producing areas from China.
Figure 5The score plot of PCA of C. songaricum.