| Literature DB >> 32273809 |
Ajaz Ahmad1, Mohd Amir2, Abdulrahman A Alshadidi3, Muhammad Delwar Hussain4, Anzarul Haq5, Mohsin Kazi3.
Abstract
The current study was executed for method development, validation and to estimate the concentration of protopine in methanolic extract of Fumaria indica by high-performance thin-layer chromatography (HPTLC). Isolation of bioactive compounds was carried out using the mobile phase, toluene:ethyl acetate:diethyl amine (8:2.5:0.5 v/v/v), and detected at wavelength 290 nm. This method was validated for precision, specificity, linearity, limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), etc. The calibration range was found to be 500-5000 ng/spot for the bioactive compound. Protopine was separated with an Rf value of 0.22 ± 0.03. The method was validated for linearity (r2 ≥ 0.996 ± 0.082), accuracy 98.75-102.12%), and RSD of precision (0.49-2.07) with a calibration curve range of 500.00-5000.00 ng/spot. The LOD and LOQ were found to be 83.92 ng/spot and 254.30 ng/spot., respectively. The Central Composite design expert was applied for the validation of robustness. Three independent variables such as the volume of toluene in solvent system, chamber saturation time and wavelength were investigated. The results indicated that a slight change in these variables had no significant effect on the peak response. This developed HPTLC method is simple, precise, robust, specific, rapid, and cost effective. It could be used for quality control study and quantification of protopine in the plant extract and different herbal formulations containing the plant species.Entities:
Keywords: Central composite design; DPPH; Fumaria indica; HPTLC; Protopine
Year: 2020 PMID: 32273809 PMCID: PMC7132833 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2020.02.011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi Pharm J ISSN: 1319-0164 Impact factor: 4.330
Fig. 1Chemical structure of protopine, MW: 353.4 g/mol.
Fig. 2(A) Densitogram of standard Protopine (1000 ng; Rf = 0.22 ± 0.03); (B): sample extract (Rf = 0.22 ± 0.06).
Fig. 3Calibration plot with respect to peak area by HPTLC at different concentration levels of standard protopine.
Inter-day and intra-day precision of the HPTLC method (n = 6) for protopine (mean ± SD).
| Amount (ng/spot) | Inter-day precision | Intra-day precision | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean peak area ± SD | %RSD | Mean peak area ± SD | %RSD | |
| 2000 | 2476.08 ± 47.61 | 1.923175 | 2461.35 ± 51.07 | 2.07 |
| 3000 | 3474.35 ± 17.14 | 0.49335 | 3459.60 ± 26.23 | 0.75 |
| 4000 | 4876.58 ± 70.17 | 1.438938 | 4887.93 ± 52.84 | 1.08 |
RSD: Regressed Standard Deviation.
Accuracy of the HPTLC method (n = 6) for Protopine (mean ± SD).
| % Of standard spiked to the sample | Theoretical content (ng) | Amount of drug recovered ng ± SD | % of drug recovered | % RSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2500 | 2539.35 ± 19.24 | 101.57 | 0.75 |
| 50 | 3750 | 3746.03 ± 24.18 | 99.89 | 0.64 |
| 100 | 5000 | 5106.14 ± 98.66 | 102.12 | 1.93 |
| 150 | 6250 | 6172.22 ± 65.99 | 98.75 | 1.06 |
RSD: Regressed Standard Deviation.
Chromatographic factors for central composite response surface methodology.
| Run | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| A:Toluene volume (mL) | B:Chamber saturation time (minute) | C:Wavelength (nm) | |
| 1 | 8 | 26.63 | 290 |
| 2 | 6 | 32 | 280 |
| 3 | 8 | 30 | 273.18 |
| 4 | 8 | 33.36 | 290 |
| 5 | 4.63 | 30 | 290 |
| 6 | 8 | 30 | 306.81 |
| 7 | 10 | 28 | 280 |
| 8 | 8 | 30 | 290 |
| 9 | 8 | 30 | 290 |
| 10 | 10 | 32 | 300 |
| 11 | 10 | 32 | 280 |
| 12 | 11.36 | 30 | 290 |
| 13 | 6 | 32 | 300 |
| 14 | 6 | 28 | 300 |
| 15 | 8 | 30 | 290 |
| 16 | 6 | 28 | 280 |
| 17 | 10 | 28 | 300 |
Fig. 4Response-surface 3D graphs showing the effect of (A) Chamber saturation time (min) versus toluene volume (ml) and wavelength remains constant (B) wavelength (nm) versus toluene volume (ml) percentage and Chamber saturation time (min) remains constant (C) wavelength (nm) versus Chamber saturation time (min) and toluene volume (ml) remains constant.