| Literature DB >> 34885827 |
Hongmei Sun1,2, Yini Cai3, Jie Shen3, Enyao Ma4, Zhimin Zhao3, Depo Yang3, Xiuwei Yang1, Xinjun Xu3.
Abstract
A method based on high performance liquid chromatography with evaporative light scattering detection (HPLC-ELSD) was developed for the quantitative analysis of three active compounds and chemical fingerprint analyses of saccharides in Morindae officinalis radix. Ten batches of Morindae officinalis radix were collected from different plantations in the Guangdong region of China and used to establish the fingerprint. The samples were separated with a COSMOIL Sugar-D column (4.6 mm × 250 mm, 5 μm) by using gradient elution with water (A) and acetonitrile (B). In addition, Trapped-Ion-Mobility (tims) Time-Of-Flight (tims TOF) was used to identify saccharides of Morindae officinalis radix. Fingerprint chromatogram presented 26 common characteristic peaks in the roots of Morinda officinalis How, and the similarities were more than 0.926. In quantitative analysis, the three compounds showed good regression (r = 0.9995-0.9998) within the test ranges, and the recoveries of the method were in the range of 96.7-101.7%. The contents of sucrose, kestose and nystose in all samples were determined as 1.21-7.92%, 1.02-3.37%, and 2.38-6.55%, respectively. The developed HPLC fingerprint method is reliable and was validated for the quality control and identification of Morindae officinalis radix and can be successfully used to assess the quality of Morindae officinalis radix.Entities:
Keywords: HPLC-ELSD; Morindae officinalis radix; TIM-TOF-MS; fingerprint; saccharides
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34885827 PMCID: PMC8659033 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26237242
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Effects of extraction conditions on the contents of sucrose, kestose, and nystose: (A) extraction time; (B) temperature; (C) solvent–solid ratio; (D) ethanol concentration.
Orthogonal array design.
| Level | Factor | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | |
| 1 | 80 | 20 | 40 |
| 2 | 90 | 25 | 50 |
| 3 | 100 | 30 | 60 |
Orthogonal test results.
| No. | A | B | C | Sucrose (%) | Kestose (%) | Nystose (%) | Overall Desirability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1.57 | 0.76 | 2.11 | 0.91 |
| 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1.17 | 0.64 | 1.91 | 0.51 |
| 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1.68 | 0.71 | 2.07 | 0.85 |
| 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0.84 | 0.62 | 1.85 | 0.30 |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.73 | 0.58 | 1.71 | 0.08 |
| 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1.08 | 0.77 | 2.06 | 0.66 |
| 7 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1.09 | 0.61 | 1.61 | 0.13 |
| 8 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1.09 | 0.52 | 1.72 | 0.13 |
| 9 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1.11 | 0.65 | 1.78 | 0.42 |
| k1 | 0.45 | 0.37 | 0.35 | ||||
| k2 | 0.69 | 0.40 | 0.36 | ||||
| k3 | 0.19 | 0.55 | 0.63 | ||||
| R | 0.51 | 0.18 | 0.28 |
Figure 2The chromatogram of blank (A), standards (B) and sample (C): 1 sucrose; 2 kestose; 3 nystose.
Linear regression data, LODs and LOQs of sucrose, kestose, and nystose.
| Compo-nent | Regression Equation | r | Linear Range (mg/mL) | LOQ (μg/mL) | LOD (μg/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sucrose | LgY = 1.127 lgX + 3.114 | 0.9995 | 0.67–9.36 | 2.5 | 1.1 |
| Kestose | LgY = 1.102 lgX + 3.2269 | 0.9998 | 0.64–9.01 | 3.1 | 1.4 |
| Nystose | LgY = 0.962 lgX + 3.7433 | 0.9995 | 0.64–8.93 | 4.8 | 2.1 |
System adaptability, repeatability, stability, and recovery of sucrose, kestose, and nystose.
| Component | System Adaptability ( | Repeatability ( | Stability ( | Recovery ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RSD (%) | RSD (%) | RSD (%) | Mean (%) | RSD (%) | |
| Sucrose | 2.53 | 1.09 | 3.06 | 99.12 | 3.59 |
| Kestose | 1.57 | 2.94 | 2.75 | 101.72 | 1.26 |
| Nystose | 1.21 | 2.75 | 2.25 | 96.70 | 2.24 |
Figure 3Total ion chromatogram of the root of Morinda officinalis How.
Identification of oligosaccharides from the root of Morinda officinalis How.
| No. | tR (min) | [M-H]−/[M-2H]2− | Error (ppm) | Molecular Weight | Molecular Formula | Identification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.8 | 341.1090 | 0.29 | 342.1162 | C12H22O11 | Sucrose |
| 2 | 2.4 | 503.1618 | 0.00 | 504.1690 | C18H32O16 | Kestose |
| 3 | 3.1 | 665.2155 | 1.35 | 666.2218 | C24H42O21 | Nystose |
| 4 | 3.9 | 827.2675 | 0.12 | 828.2747 | C30H52O26 | Fructofuranosylnystose |
| 6 | 4.6 | 989.3186 | −1.62 | 990.3275 | C36H62O31 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP6) |
| 8 | 5.5 | 1151.3694 | −3.21 | 1152.3803 | C42H72O36 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP7) |
| 9 | 6.2 | 1313.4215 | −3.35 | 1314.4332 | C48H82O41 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP8) |
| 10 | 6.9 | 1475.4748 | −2.64 | 1476.4860 | C54H92O46 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP9) |
| 11 | 7.6 | 1637.5290 | −1.53 | 1638.5388 | C60H102O51 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP10) |
| 12 | 8.2 | 1799.5829 | −0.78 | 1800.5916 | C66H112O56 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP11) |
| 13 | 8.7 | 980.3144 | −0.51 | 1962.6444 | C72H122O61 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP12) |
| 14 | 9.2 | 1061.3396 | −1.70 | 2124.6973 | C78H132O66 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP13) |
| 15 | 9.7 | 1142.3656 | −1.93 | 2286.7501 | C84H142O71 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP14) |
| 16 | 10.1 | 1223.3907 | −2.86 | 2448.8029 | C90H152O76 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP15) |
| 17 | 10.5 | 1304.4175 | −2.38 | 2610.8557 | C96H162O81 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP16) |
| 18 | 10.9 | 1385.4434 | −2.60 | 2772.9085 | C102H172O86 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP17) |
| 19 | 11.2 | 1466.4713 | −1.43 | 2934.9613 | C108H182O91 | Fructooligosaccharide (DP18) |
Figure 4HPLC chromatographic fingerprints of 10 Morindae officinalis radix samples.
The contents of sucrose, kestose, and nystose in 10 samples of Morindae officinalis radix (n = 3).
| Sample | Sucrose (%) | Kestose (%) | Nystose (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 1.21 ± 0.03 | 1.02 ± 0.02 | 2.38 ± 0.02 |
| C2 | 1.50 ± 0.03 | 1.37 ± 0.02 | 3.45 ± 0.05 |
| C3 | 1.21 ± 0.03 | 1.24 ± 0.03 | 3.10 ± 0.04 |
| C4 | 1.71 ± 0.04 | 1.50 ± 0.03 | 3.72 ± 0.10 |
| C5 | 3.44 ± 0.06 | 2.44 ± 0.05 | 4.99 ± 0.14 |
| C6 | 3.84 ± 0.10 | 1.74 ± 0.05 | 4.51 ± 0.05 |
| C7 | 2.86 ± 0.05 | 1.97 ± 0.04 | 4.45 ± 0.11 |
| C8 | 4.56 ± 0.02 | 1.83 ± 0.00 | 3.98 ± 0.04 |
| C9 | 3.32 ± 0.06 | 2.22 ± 0.01 | 4.89 ± 0.04 |
| C10 | 2.91 ± 0.06 | 1.55 ± 0.03 | 3.93 ± 0.03 |
Figure 5Loading plot of PCA.
Eigenvalue and variance contribution rate of three main component factors.
| Eigenvalue | Variance Contribution Rate, % | Cumulative Variance Contribution Rate, % | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PC1 | 16.429 | 65.715 | 65.715 |
| PC2 | 5.215 | 20.859 | 86.574 |
| PC3 | 1.813 | 7.250 | 93.824 |
Scores of three principal component factors.
| Sample | Score of PC1 | Score of PC2 | Score of PC3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 4.658 | 1.298 | −2.573 |
| C2 | 6.104 | 0.426 | 1.164 |
| C3 | 3.438 | −2.970 | −0.059 |
| C4 | 4.254 | 0.648 | 1.732 |
| C5 | −3.067 | 3.312 | 0.432 |
| C6 | −2.442 | −1.801 | −0.844 |
| C7 | −3.232 | 0.183 | −0.638 |
| C8 | −4.302 | −1.791 | 1.798 |
| C9 | −2.816 | 3.358 | −0.127 |
| C10 | −2.595 | −2.664 | −0.886 |
Figure 6Scores plot of PCA.
Sources of samples.
| Source | Collected Date | The Roots |
|---|---|---|
| Gaoliang village | 2018.10 | R1 |
| Dazhai village | 2018.10 | R2 |
| Zhongxiong village | 2018.10 | R3 |
| Luoyang village | 2018.10 | R4 |
| Guancun village | 2018.10 | R5 |
| Shashui village | 2018.10 | R6 |
| Dajiang village | 2018.10 | R7 |
| Jinshan village | 2018.10 | R8 |
| Wanxing village | 2018.10 | R9 |
| Yunli village | 2018.10 | R10 |