| Literature DB >> 35159454 |
Xuan Yu1, Yuan Gao1, Ying Xu1, Xian Guo1, Lan Guo1,2, Ting Tan2, Fan Liu2, Yiqun Wan1,2.
Abstract
In this study, a new and simple method was established for the simultaneous determination of analogues of aristolochic acids (aristolochic acid I, aristolochic acid II, aristolactam I and aristolactam AII) in Houttuynia cordata by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole/time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UHPLC-Q/TOF-MS). The samples were ultrasonically extracted with methanol, purified with HC-C18, and then separated on a C18 column (75 × 2.1 mm, 2.0 μm) at 35 °C. Under the optimized conditions, aristolochic acid I (AA-I), aristolochic acid II (AA-II), aristolactam I (AL-I) and aristolactam AII (AL-AII) all showed good linear regression (not less than 0.9987). The average recoveries of the four analytes were within the range of 72.3-105.5%, with the relative standard deviations (RSDs) being ≤7.6%. The proposed method was then applied to the determination of Houttuynia cordata samples collected from different regions in China. The results showed that none of the three carcinogenic substances (aristolochic acid I, aristolochic acid II and aristolactam I) were detected in any of the 22 samples collected from 22 different regions of China, while aristolactam AII, which has not been reported to have genotoxicity, was detected in all samples. This study provides a valuable reference for the further safety assessment of Houttuynia cordata.Entities:
Keywords: Houttuynia cordata; UHPLC-Q/TOF-MS; aristolochic acid analogues; detection
Year: 2022 PMID: 35159454 PMCID: PMC8834043 DOI: 10.3390/foods11030302
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Molecular structures of aristolochic acids and their analogues.
Mobile phase gradient elution condition.
| Time (min) | A (%) | B (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 60 | 40 |
| 7 | 50 | 50 |
| 7.1 | 10 | 90 |
| 9 | 10 | 90 |
| 9.1 | 60 | 40 |
| 12 | 60 | 40 |
Mass spectrometric parameters of target compounds.
| No. | Compounds | Mode | Precursor Ions | Product Ions | DP b | CE c |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AA-I | - a | 340.047 | 296.056 | 80 | 15 |
| 2 | AA-II | - | 310.036 | 250.027 | 80 | 14 |
| 3 | AL-I | - | 292.062 | 249.044 | 85 | 25 |
| 4 | AL-AII | - | 264.066 | 221.049 | 80 | 21 |
* The most abundant and stable product ion for the quantification. - a: The negative ion mode. DP b: Declustering potential. CE c: Collision energy.
Figure 2The effect of extraction solvents (volume of extraction solvent, 20 mL; extraction time, 30 min).
Figure 3The effect of solvent volume (extraction solvent, methanol; extraction time, 30 min).
Figure 4The effect of extraction time (extraction solvent, methanol; volume of extraction solvent, 15 mL).
Calibration curves, LODs (the limits of detection) and LOQs (the limits of quantification) of investigated compounds.
| Compounds | Linear Range (mg/L) | Calibration Curves | R2 | LOD a | LOQ b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA-I | 0.08–2 | y = 3288.1x + 247.99 | 0.9994 | 0.19 | 0.47 |
| AA-II | 0.04–2 | y = 4919.3x + 93.775 | 0.9997 | 0.09 | 0.28 |
| AL-I | 0.04–2 | y = 15946x−183.82 | 0.9987 | 0.09 | 0.38 |
| AL-AII | 0.004–2 | y = 3.0 × 106x + 5714.9 | 0.9999 | 9.0 × 10−4 | 2.8 × 10−3 |
LOD a: the limits of detection. LOQ b: the limits of quantification.
Recovery and precision for the determination of the investigated compounds (n = 6).
| Sample | Compounds | Original | Added | Average Recovery | RSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| AA-I | a ND | 1.50 | 87.1 | 6.2 |
| 4.70 | 105.5 | 3.1 | |||
| 9.40 | 98.4 | 3.0 | |||
| AA-II | ND | 1.50 | 72.3 | 2.4 | |
| 4.70 | 101.4 | 4.3 | |||
| 9.40 | 92.1 | 4.2 | |||
| AL-I | ND | 1.50 | 80.7 | 4.4 | |
| 4.70 | 99.6 | 3.4 | |||
| 9.40 | 91.9 | 4.0 | |||
| AL-AII | 8.8 | 4.0 | 81.7 | 7.6 | |
| 8.0 | 99.3 | 3.2 | |||
| 12.0 | 81.0 | 3.7 |
a ND: not detected or lower than LOD.
Analytical results of aristolochic acids and their analogues in Houttuynia cordata collected from 22 different regions in China (n = 3).
| Place of Origin | Concentration (mg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA-I | AA-II | AL-I | AL-AII | |
| Lu’an, Anhui | a ND | ND | ND | 1.13 ± 0.01 |
| Wuxi County, Chongqing | ND | ND | ND | 3.21 ± 0.11 |
| Yajiang Town, Chongqing | ND | ND | ND | 8.16 ± 0.13 |
| Longyan, Fujian | ND | ND | ND | 3.93 ± 0.13 |
| Yongtai, Fujian | ND | ND | ND | 4.86 ± 0.04 |
| Zhaoqing, Guangdong | ND | ND | ND | 0.67 ± 0.02 |
| Qingyuan, Guangdong | ND | ND | ND | 2.95 ± 0.08 |
| Yulin, Guangxi | ND | ND | ND | 17.24 ± 0.13 |
| Guiyang, Guizhou | ND | ND | ND | 4.73 ± 0.03 |
| Changshun County, Guizhou | ND | ND | ND | 0.98 ± 0.02 |
| Xinyang, Henan | ND | ND | ND | 3.37 ± 0.09 |
| Yichang, Hubei | ND | ND | ND | 0.93 ± 0.02 |
| Zhangjiajie, Hunan | ND | ND | ND | 5.69 ± 0.07 |
| Chenzhou, Hunan | ND | ND | ND | 1.43 ± 0.04 |
| Wanzai County, Jiangxi | ND | ND | ND | 4.37 ± 0.11 |
| Ji’an County, Jiangxi | ND | ND | ND | 2.10 ± 0.06 |
| Shanggao County, Jiangxi | ND | ND | ND | 3.35 ± 0.10 |
| Linyi, Shandong | ND | ND | ND | 2.34 ± 0.09 |
| Mianyang, Sichuan | ND | ND | ND | 2.68 ± 0.09 |
| Bazhong, Sichuan | ND | ND | ND | 1.03 ± 0.01 |
| Dazhou, Sichuan | ND | ND | ND | 1.88 ± 0.04 |
| Lishui, Zhejiang | ND | ND | ND | 4.20 ± 0.06 |
a ND: not detected or lower than LOD.