PDF
Full
Outline
To establish a quality evaluation method of Erdi Xiaoke mixture based on HPLC fingerprint, multi-component determination and chemometric analysis.
The separation was performed on a 30 ℃ thermostatic Acutfex PW-C18 (250 mm×4.6 mm, 5 μm) column, with the mobile phase comprising of acetonitrile -0.1% phosphoric acid flowing at 1.0 mL·min-1 in a gradient elution manner, and the detection wavelength was set at 285 nm to establish HPLC fingerprint of Erdi Xiaoke mixture. Contents of 11 components [5-hydroxymethyl furfural(5-HMF), salvianic acid A, chlorogenic acid, caffeic acid, calycosin-7-glucoside, acteoside, isochlorogenic acid B, isochlorogenic acid C, rosmarinic acid, salvianolic acid B and formononetin] in 12 batches of Erdi Xiaoke mixture were determined, and similarity evaluation, cluster analysis, principal component analysis and orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis were used to comprehensively evaluate the quality of Erdi Xiaoke mixture.
The 11 constituents showed good linear relationships within their respective ranges(r≥0.999 6), with average recovery rates of 95.3%-101.5%, and the RSDs were in the range of 1.1%-2.3%. There were 18 common peaks in the fingerprints for 12 batches of samples with the similarities above 0.960. The range of the content of the above 11 components in the 12 batches of samples were as follows as 43.40-65.70, 219.43-274.70, 119.00-164.78, 11.87-18.17, 42.80-56.86, 10.01-20.71, 8.21-14.73, 40.15-57.39, 43.29-60.29, 755.22-1 208.50, 2.47-4.44 μg·mL-1. And 12 batches of Erdi Xiaoke mixture could be clustered into three categories with some differences in sample quality among different batches. In addition, 5-HMF, isochlorogenic acid B and chlorogenic acid were the main potential markers affecting the quality of Erdi Xiaoke mixture.
This method is stable, reliable, accurate and sensitive, and can be used to control and comprehensively evaluate the quality of Erdi Xiaoke mixture.
PDF
88
39
| 科 Family | 属数 Number of genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) | 属 Genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae | 2 | 11 | 5.26 | 鹅膏菌属 Amanita | 10 | 4.78 |
| 小菇科 Mycenaceae | 2 | 12 | 5.74 | 丝盖伞属 Inocybe | 5 | 2.39 |
| 多孔菌科 Polyporaceae | 8 | 14 | 6.70 | 蜡蘑属 Laccaria | 5 | 2.39 |
| 红菇科 Russulaceae | 3 | 23 | 11.00 | 小皮伞属 Marasmius | 6 | 2.87 |
| 小菇属 Mycena | 11 | 5.26 | ||||
| 光柄菇属 Pluteus | 5 | 2.39 | ||||
| 红菇属 Russula | 17 | 8.13 | ||||
| 栓菌属 Trametes | 5 | 2.39 |
关闭全屏
No. 86 Xueyuan South Road, Haidian District, Beijing
010-62199257
qkjq@cast.org.cn
Copyright © 2025 China Association for Science and Technology. All rights reserved. For all open access content, the relevant licensing terms apply.
Sponsored by the Office of the Leading Group for Cybersecurity and Informatization of CAST, and supported by Science and Technology Review Publishing House
