| Literature DB >> 29439421 |
Chunyu Yang1, Fengqian Guo2, Chen Zang3, Cui Li4, Hui Cao5, Baoxian Zhang6.
Abstract
Rhizoma coptidis (RC) has been used as an herbal medicine in China for over one thousand years, and it was subjected to specific processing before use as materia medica. Processing is a pharmaceutical technique that aims to enhance the efficacy and/or reduce the toxicity of crude drugs according to traditional Chinese medicine theory. In this study, the chemical profiles of RC, ginger juice processed RC (GRC), and water processed RC (WRC) was determined to reveal the mechanism of processing of RC. UPLC-QTOF-MS analysis of methanol extract of RC, GRC, and WRC has been conducted to investigate the effect of processing on the composition of RC. HPLC-PDA was used to determine the variance of total alkaloids and seven alkaloids of RC during the processing. The volatiles of RC, GRC and ginger juice were separated by distillation, the change of volatiles content was recorded and analyzed, and the qualitative analysis of the volatiles was carried out using GC-MS. The microstructures of RC, GRC and WRC were observed using a light microscope. Results showed that ginger juice/water processing had limited influence on the composition of RC's methanol extract, but significant influence on the content of some alkaloids in RC. Ginger juice processing significantly increased (p < 0.05) the volatiles content of RC and changed the volatiles composition obviously. Processing also had an influence on the microstructure of RC. This research comprehensively revealed the mechanism of ginger juice processing of RC.Entities:
Keywords: Rhizoma coptidis; alkaloid; giner juice; processing; volatiles
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29439421 PMCID: PMC6017751 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23020380
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Chemical structure of the studied seven alkaloid in extracts of processed and unprocessed Rhizoma coptidis.
Figure 2UPLC-QTOF-MS total ion current chromatogram of a methanol extract of Rhizoma coptidis (A), ginger juice-processed Rhizoma coptidis (B) and water-processed Rhizoma coptidis (C).
Figure 3HPLC chromatogram of methanol extract of Rhizoma coptidis (A), ginger juice-processed Rhizoma coptidis (B), water-processed Rhizoma coptidis (C), and the mixture of reference substances (D). 1. Groenlandicine 2. Jatrorrhizine 3. Columbamine 4. Epiberberine 5. Coptisine 6. Palmatine 7. Berberine.
Alkaloid content of unprocessed and processed Rhizoma coptidis. RC: Rhizoma coptidis, GRC: ginger processed Rhizoma coptidis, WRC:water processed Rhizoma coptidis. For each column, values followed by the same letter did not share significant differences at p < 0.05 (Duncan’s test).
| Content of alka%loids (%) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groenlandicine | Jatrorrhizine | Columbamine | Epiberberine | Coptisine | Palmatine | Berberine | Total | |
| RC | 0.50 ± 0.01a | 0.38 ± 0.01a | 0.54 ± 0.01a | 0.79 ± 0.01a | 2.19 ± 0.05a | 1.33 ± 0.03a | 6.25 ± 0.13a | 11.99 ± 0.23a |
| WRC | 0.51 ± 0.01a | 0.38 ± 0.00a | 0.51 ± 0.01b | 0.60 ± 0.01b | 1.84 ± 0.01b | 1.30 ± 0.00a | 5.6 ± 0.01b | 10.73 ± 0.03b |
| GRC | 0.52 ± 0.00b | 0.41 ± 0.01b | 0.55 ± 0.02a | 0.79 ± 0.03a | 2.25 ± 0.09a | 1.42 ± 0.05b | 6.53 ± 0.25a | 12.47 ± 0.46a |
Figure 4Seven alkaloids content of Rhizoma coptidis (RC), water-processed Rhizoma coptidis (WRC) and ginger juice-processed Rhizoma coptidis (GRC). Values are means ± SD, n = 3. * p < 0.05 of processed RC against RC.
Figure 5The total ion chromatogram of volatiles in ginger juice (A), Rhizoma coptidis (B), and ginger juice-processed Rhizoma coptidis (C) by GC-MS.
Volatiles compositions of RC, GRC and ginger juice.
| Peak Number | RT | RIa | RIb | Identified Compounds | RC | GRC | Ginger Juice |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.28 | 800 | 800 [ | Hexanal | - | - | 0.19% |
| 2 | 7.09 | 924 | 925 [ | Tricyclene | - | - | 0.05% |
| 3 | 7.45 | 935 | 939 [ | α-Pinene | - | - | 2.91% |
| 4 | 8.00 | 952 | 953 [ | Camphene | - | - | 14.85% |
| 5 | 9.24 | 989 | 980 [ | β-Pinene | - | - | 2.32% |
| 6 | 9.64 | 1001 | 1003 [ | α-Phellandrene | - | - | 1.23% |
| 7 | 10.38 | 1025 | 1018 [ | β-Phellandrene | - | - | 12.89% |
| 8 | 12.04 | 1079 | 1088 [ | p-Mentha-1,4(8)-diene | - | - | 0.32% |
| 9 | 12.61 | 1097 | 1098 [ | β-Linalool | - | - | 0.91% |
| 10 | 13.35 | 1122 | 1126 [ | - | - | 0.15% | |
| 11 | 14.09 | 1148 | 1148 [ | Citronellal | - | - | 0.86% |
| 12 | 14.42 | 1159 | 1138 [ | - | - | 0.07% | |
| 13 | 14.68 | 1168 | 1165 [ | endo-Borneol | - | - | 3.75% |
| 14 | 14.92 | 1177 | 1183 [ | Terpinen-4-ol | - | - | 0.89% |
| 15 | 15.40 | 1193 | 1189 [ | α-Terpineol | - | - | 1.39% |
| 16 | 16.70 | 1241 | 1228 [ | Neral | - | - | 8.87% |
| 17 | 17.55 | 1272 | 1270 [ | Geranial | - | - | 10.31% |
| 18 | 18.01 | 1289 | 1291 [ | 2-Undecanone | - | - | 0.30% |
| 19 | 19.06 | 1328 | 1337 [ | δ-Elemene | - | - | 0.06% |
| 20 | 19.97 | 1362 | 1374 [ | Cyclosativene | - | - | 0.10% |
| 21 | 20.23 | 1371 | 1377 [ | α-Copaene | - | - | 0.16% |
| 22 | 20.52 | 1382 | 1391 [ | β-Elemene | - | 0.34% | 0.30% |
| 23 | 21.29 | 1413 | 1418 [ | Caryophyllene | - | - | 0.04% |
| 24 | 21.52 | 1424 | 1433 [ | γ-Elemene | - | 0.16% | 0.22% |
| 25 | 22.15 | 1452 | 1458 [ | β-Farnesene | - | - | 0.21% |
| 26 | 22.83 | 1483 | 1486 [ | α-Curcumene | - | 4.27% | 4.32% |
| 27 | 23.22 | 1501 | 1502 [ | Zingiberene | - | 15.73% | 8.40% |
| 28 | 23.41 | 1507 | 1509 [ | α-Farnesene | - | 4.03% | 3.40% |
| 29 | 23.49 | 1510 | 1509 [ | β-Bisabolene | - | 4.95% | 2.59% |
| 30 | 23.71 | 1518 | 1513 [ | γ-Cadinene | - | 0.73% | - |
| 31 | 23.90 | 1525 | 1532 [ | β-Sesquiphellandrene | - | 9.28% | 5.36% |
| 32 | 24.57 | 1548 | 1549 [ | Elemol | - | 0.94% | 1.18% |
| 33 | 24.83 | 1557 | 1564 [ | Nerolidol | - | 2.99% | 0.85% |
| 34 | 25.65 | 1586 | 1543 [ | - | - | 0.56% | |
| 35 | 25.86 | 1593 | 1586 [ | - | - | 0.07% | |
| 36 | 26.30 | 1609 | 1621 [ | γ-Eudesmol | - | 2.52% | 0.19% |
| 37 | 26.51 | 1616 | 1613 [ | Isoaromadendrene epoxide | - | - | 1.87% |
| 38 | 27.06 | 1655 | 1649 [ | Eudesm-4(14)-en-11-ol | - | 4.93% | 2.45% |
| 39 | 27.37 | 1673 | 1681 [ | β-Bisabolol | - | 1.01% | - |
| 40 | 28.44 | 1724 | 1715 [ | Pentadecanal | 0.14% | - | - |
| 41 | 29.80 | 1782 | 1763 [ | Tetradecanoic acid | 3.17% | 1.01% | - |
| 42 | 32.59 | 1921 | 1926 [ | Hexadecanoic acid, methyl ester | 0.54% | 0.23% | - |
| 43 | 33.23 | 1947 | 1946 [ | Geranyl-p-cymene | - | - | 0.05% |
| 44 | 33.56 | 1960 | 1951 [ | Palmitoleic acid | 1.31% | 1.24% | - |
| 45 | 34.25 | 1987 | 1983 [ | n-Hexadecanoic acid | 34.00% | 19.54% | |
| 46 | 35.48 | 2069 | - | 0.75% | - | - | |
| 47 | 35.75 | 2090 | 2094 [ | Linoleic acid, methyl ester | 2.02% | 0.69% | - |
| 48 | 37.21 | 2173 | 2159 [ | 40.80% | 11.70% | - | |
| Total | 82.73% | 86.29% | 94.64% |
RIa: Retention index calculated from retention times relative to that of n-alkanes (C6–C26) on the the DB-5 column. RIb: literature retention index. RC: Rhizoma coptidis, GRC: ginger juice-processed Rhizoma coptidis. “-” means not detected or not available.
Figure 6The microscopic image of Rhizoma coptidis (A), ginger juice processed-Rhizoma coptidis (B) and water-processed Rhizoma coptidis (C) slices. Scale bar: 50 μm.
Gradient table of the UPLC elution program.
| Time (Min) | Flow Rate | %A | %B | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | 0.3 | 10 | 90 | |
| 3 | 0.3 | 10 | 90 | |
| 35 | 0.3 | 100 | 0 | |
| 40 | 0.3 | 100 | 0 | |
| 40.1 | 0.3 | 10 | 90 | |
| 45 | 0.3 | 10 | 90 |