| Literature DB >> 34268859 |
Jiayi Hu1,2, He Cheng1,2, Jun Xu1,2, Junlin Liu1,2, Lihua Xing1,2, Suying Shi1,2, Rui Wang1,2, Zhendong Wu3, Nianjun Yu1,2, Daiyin Peng1,2.
Abstract
We wanted to explore a new method for the determination of monosaccharides in Polygonatum cyrtonema Hua polysaccharide using the ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography quadrupole trap tandem mass spectrometry. In this study, hydrochloric acid was used instead of trifluoroacetic acid to hydrolyze polysaccharides, and hydrolysis time was greatly reduced from 5-9 h to 1 h. The 1-phenyl-3-methyl-5-pyrazolone was used for pre-column derivatization of monosaccharides. The parameters of linearity (R2 > 0.999), stability (1.63-2.52%), intra-day and inter-day precision (0.69-0.95%, 1.81-2.77%), repeatability (1.89-2.65%), and recovery (97.63-102.24%) of the method were verified. Satisfactory validation results showed this method could be used to determine the target components. The results indicated the polysaccharide contained glucose, mannose, rhamnose, galactose, ribose, and arabinose. Technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution and principal component analysis were used to build an evaluation model based on the monosaccharide composition. The evaluation results showed that the samples from the Qingyang County of Anhui Province were the best when the monosaccharides were used as the evaluation index. Therefore, a new method was established to detect the monosaccharide content of polysaccharides from Polygonatum cyrtonema Hua and comprehensively evaluate the quality of Chinese medicines with polysaccharides as the main active ingredient.Entities:
Keywords: Polygonatum cyrtonema Hua; component analysis; monosaccharide composition; precolumn derivatization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34268859 PMCID: PMC9292008 DOI: 10.1002/jssc.202100263
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Sep Sci ISSN: 1615-9306 Impact factor: 3.614
The information of samples from different regions
|
|
|
|---|---|
| S1 | Yanzihe Town, Jinzhai County, Anhui |
| S2 | Changling Township, Jinzhai County, Anhui |
| S3 | Wuwei City, Anhui |
| S4 | Tongcheng City, Anhui |
| S5 | Shitai County, Anhui |
| S6 | Qimen County, Anhui |
| S7 | Jingde County, Anhui |
| S8 | Baishan village, Jing County, Anhui |
| S9 | Mayuan village, Jing County, Anhui |
| S10 | Huoshan County, Anhui |
| S11 | Kuaiyuan village, Qingyang County, Anhui |
| S12 | Yangchong village, Qingyang County, Anhui |
| S13 | Shexian County, Anhui |
| S14 | Huizhou District, Huangshan City, Anhui |
FIGURE 1Multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) chromatograms of six monosaccharides were derivatized by 1‐phenyl‐3‐methyl‐5‐pyrazolone (PMP). Note: The six monosaccharides were 1, Mannose; 2, Ribose; 3, Rhamnose; 4, Glucose; 5, Galactose; and 6, Arabinose
The optimized mass spectrometry condition parameters in the determination of six monosaccharides were derivatized by 1‐phenyl‐3‐methyl‐5‐pyrazolone (PMP)
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| D‐Galactose | 11.334 | 180.16 | 511.22 | 175.10/217.10 | 35 | 171 |
| D‐Arabinose | 12.534 | 150.13 | 481.21 | 175.10/217.10 | 33 | 163 |
| D‐Mannose | 5.050 | 180.16 | 511.22 | 175.10/217.10 | 35 | 171 |
| D‐Rhamnose | 6.713 | 164.16 | 495.22 | 175.10/217.10 | 33 | 174 |
| D‐Ribose | 6.363 | 150.13 | 481.21 | 175.10/217.11 | 33 | 163 |
| D‐Glucose | 9.956 | 180.16 | 511.22 | 175.10/217.10 | 35 | 171 |
Abbreviations: CE, collision voltage; DP, de‐cluster voltage; MRM, multiple reaction monitoring; t R, retention time
Method linearity, LOD, LOQ, precision, stability, repeatability, recovery, and repeatability (n = 6) of six monosaccharides
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| D‐Galactose |
| 0.25–27.49 | 0.9998 | 0.079 | 0.28 | 0.82 | 2.27 | 2.37 | 2.48 | 99.57 | 1.75 |
| D‐Arabinose |
| 0.29–31.85 | 0.9997 | 0.063 | 0.25 | 0.95 | 1.81 | 2.12 | 2.24 | 98.35 | 2.37 |
| D‐Mannose |
| 0.62–67.79 | 0.9998 | 0.21 | 0.51 | 0.69 | 2.44 | 1.78 | 2.39 | 99.84 | 1.89 |
| D‐Rhamnose |
| 0.26–27.44 | 0.9996 | 0.27 | 0.69 | 0.71 | 1.89 | 2.52 | 2.35 | 101.47 | 1.96 |
| D‐Ribose |
| 0.23–25.96 | 0.9999 | 0.23 | 0.66 | 0.77 | 2.77 | 2.43 | 1.89 | 97.63 | 2.71 |
| D‐Glucose |
| 0.26–27.97 | 0.9999 | 0.21 | 0.72 | 0.86 | 2.14 | 1.63 | 2.65 | 102.24 | 2.15 |
Determination and content of six monosaccharides in Polygonatum cyrtonema Hua
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| S1 | 2.7867 | 0.0162 | 0.0117 | 0.3238 | 0.2280 | 0.1156 | 80.03 | 0.46 | 0.34 | 9.30 | 6.55 | 3.32 |
| S2 | 2.5861 | 0.0179 | 0.0244 | 0.3451 | 0.2794 | 0.1456 | 76.10 | 0.53 | 0.72 | 10.15 | 8.22 | 4.28 |
| S3 | 0.4808 | 0.0058 | 0 | 0.2777 | 0.0227 | 0.0168 | 59.82 | 0.72 | 0 | 34.56 | 2.82 | 2.09 |
| S4 | 0.5389 | 0.0038 | 0 | 0.3171 | 0.0263 | 0.0186 | 59.57 | 0.42 | 0 | 35.05 | 2.90 | 2.06 |
| S5 | 1.0498 | 0.0041 | 0.0097 | 0.2325 | 0.1297 | 0.0776 | 69.83 | 0.27 | 0.64 | 15.46 | 8.63 | 5.16 |
| S6 | 0.9979 | 0.0036 | 0.0052 | 0.2787 | 0.0861 | 0.0388 | 70.76 | 0.26 | 0.37 | 19.76 | 6.11 | 2.75 |
| S7 | 0.5129 | 0 | 0 | 0.3344 | 0.0603 | 0.0341 | 54.46 | 0 | 0 | 35.51 | 6.40 | 3.63 |
| S8 | 3.3261 | 0.0063 | 0.0164 | 0.2676 | 0.3025 | 0.1339 | 82.07 | 0.16 | 0.40 | 6.60 | 7.46 | 3.30 |
| S9 | 2.2211 | 0.0046 | 0.0143 | 0.3016 | 0.2694 | 0.1469 | 75.09 | 0.16 | 0.48 | 10.20 | 9.11 | 4.97 |
| S10 | 0.4875 | 0.0036 | 0.0024 | 0.2616 | 0.0335 | 0.0213 | 60.19 | 0.45 | 0.29 | 32.30 | 4.14 | 2.63 |
| S11 | 1.9745 | 0.0174 | 0.0475 | 1.1308 | 0.2548 | 0.0339 | 57.09 | 0.50 | 1.37 | 32.69 | 7.37 | 0.98 |
| S12 | 2.4760 | 0.0114 | 0.0310 | 1.5800 | 0.1665 | 0.0221 | 57.76 | 0.27 | 0.72 | 36.86 | 3.88 | 0.52 |
| S13 | 1.6400 | 0 | 0.0094 | 0.3238 | 0.3220 | 0.2310 | 64.92% | 0% | 0.37 | 12.82 | 12.75 | 9.14 |
| S14 | 1.3410 | 0.0023 | 0.0069 | 0.2357 | 0.0593 | 0.0244 | 80.32% | 0.14% | 0.41 | 14.12 | 3.55 | 1.46 |
The quality of samples was sorted by technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) method
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | 0.849110960 | 0.717434465 | 0.457972334 | 4 |
| S2 | 0.930204412 | 0.782569992 | 0.456901966 | 5 |
| S3 | 1.271828347 | 0.169707273 | 0.117726729 | 11 |
| S4 | 1.274048736 | 0.116901388 | 0.084044270 | 13 |
| S5 | 1.086773053 | 0.298493603 | 0.215477361 | 8 |
| S6 | 1.216034220 | 0.168087743 | 0.121439980 | 10 |
| S7 | 1.278729447 | 0.083896007 | 0.061569382 | 14 |
| S8 | 0.858530763 | 0.712162700 | 0.453406547 | 6 |
| S9 | 0.807636762 | 0.687112348 | 0.459684066 | 3 |
| S10 | 1.248791537 | 0.126865735 | 0.092221906 | 12 |
| S11 | 0.605983607 | 1.028654198 | 0.629285702 | 1 |
| S12 | 0.680241946 | 0.902884369 | 0.570317327 | 2 |
| S13 | 0.977235632 | 0.740476037 | 0.431082847 | 7 |
| S14 | 1.199897424 | 0.181822426 | 0.131591383 | 9 |
FIGURE 2Dendrogram of cluster analysis for comprehensive evaluation of samples from different areas
Principal component analysis results of the samples
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| |
| F1 | 3.222 | 53.699 | 53.699 | |
| F2 | 1.763 | 29.388 | 83.087 | |
|
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||
| Mannose | 0.905 | –0.187 | ||
| Ribose | 0.703 | 0.318 | ||
| Rhamnose | 0.744 | 0.467 | ||
| Glucose | 0.531 | 0.756 | ||
| Galactose | 0.892 | –0.421 | ||
| Arabinose | 0.527 | –0.813 | ||
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| S1 | 0.8831 | –0.4062 | 0.3548 | 3 |
| S2 | 0.9050 | ‐0.8410 | 0.2388 | 4 |
| S3 | –1.1032 | 0.3875 | –0.4785 | 12 |
| S4 | –1.1273 | 0.3449 | –0.5040 | 13 |
| S5 | –0.4507 | –0.2359 | –0.3113 | 8 |
| S6 | –0.8190 | –0.0151 | –0.4443 | 10 |
| S7 | –1.1390 | 0.0791 | –0.5884 | 14 |
| S8 | 0.9722 | –1.0077 | 0.2259 | 5 |
| S9 | 0.7226 | –0.7277 | 0.1742 | 6 |
| S10 | –1.0734 | 0.3358 | –0.4777 | 11 |
| S11 | 1.4688 | 1.7517 | 1.3035 | 1 |
| S12 | 1.0784 | 1.9689 | 1.1577 | 2 |
| S13 | 0.4545 | ‐1.7810 | –0.2794 | 7 |
| S14 | –0.7718 | 0.1468 | –0.3713 | 9 |