Li Ying, Zhong Hai-Rong, Feng Ri-Luo, Wang Tao, Luo Jiang, Yang Zheng-Ming, Chen Chen, Yan Xin-Jia, Bao Xiao-Ming, Li Wen-Bing, Liu Yuan
College of Pharmacy, Southwest Minzu University Chengdu 610225, China Tibetan Plateau Ethnic Medicinal Resources Protection and Utilization Key Laboratory of National Ethnic Affairs Commission of China, Sichuan Provincial Qiang-Yi Medicinal Resources Protection and Utilization Technology and Engineering Laboratory Chengdu 610225, China.
Tibetan Plateau Ethnic Medicinal Resources Protection and Utilization Key Laboratory of National Ethnic Affairs Commission of China, Sichuan Provincial Qiang-Yi Medicinal Resources Protection and Utilization Technology and Engineering Laboratory Chengdu 610225, China Sichuan College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Mianyang 621000, China.
Zhongguo Zhong Yao Za Zhi. 2023 Mar;48(5):1218-1228. doi: 10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20221210.101.
In this study, ultra-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole/time-of-flight mass spectrometry(UPLC-Q-TOF-MS) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry(GC-MS) were combined with non-targeted metabonomic analysis based on multivariate statistics analysis, and the content of five indicative components in nardosinone was determined and compared by UPLC. The main chemical components of Nardostachyos Radix et Rhizoma with imitative wild cultivation and wild Nardostachyos Radix et Rhizoma were comprehensively analyzed. The results of multivariate statistical analysis based on liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry(LC-MS) and GC-MS were consistent. G1 and G2 of the imitative wild cultivation group and G8-G19 of the wild group were clustered into category 1, while G7 of the wild group and G3-G6 of the imitative wild cultivation group were clustered into category 2. After removing the outlier data of G1, G2, and G7, G3-G6 of the imitative wild cultivation group were clustered into one category, and G8-G19 of the wild group were clustered into the other category. Twenty-six chemical components were identified according to the positive and negative ion modes detected by LC-MS. The content of five indicative components(VIP>1.5) was determined using UPLC, revealing that chlorogenic acid, isochlorogenic acid A, isochlorogenic acid C, linarin, nardosinone, and total content in the imitative wild cultivation group were 1.85, 1.52, 1.26, 0.90, 2.93, and 2.56 times those in the wild group, respectively. OPLS-DA based on GC-MS obtained 10 diffe-rential peaks. Among them, the relative content of α-humulene and aristolene in the imitative wild cultivation group were extremely significantly(P<0.01) and significantly(P<0.05) higher than that in the wild group, while the relative content of 7 components such as 5,6-epoxy-3-hydroxy-7-megastigmen-9-one, γ-eudesmol, and juniper camphor and 12-isopropyl-1,5,9-trimethyl-4,8,13-cyclotetrade-catriene-1,3-diol was extremely significantly(P<0.01) and significantly(P<0.05) lower than that in the wild group, respectively. Therefore, the main chemical components of the imitative wild cultivation group and wild group were basically the same. However, the content of non-volatile components in the imitative wild cultivation group was higher than that in the wild group, and the content of some volatile components was opposite. This study provides scientific data for the comprehensive evaluation of the quality of Nardostachyos Radix et Rhizoma with imitative wild cultivation and wild Nardostachyos Radix et Rhizoma.
本研究将超高效液相色谱-四极杆/飞行时间质谱联用仪(UPLC-Q-TOF-MS)和气相色谱-质谱联用仪(GC-MS)相结合,基于多元统计分析进行非靶向代谢组学分析,并采用UPLC测定和比较了木香酮中5种指示性成分的含量。对仿野生栽培甘松和野生甘松的主要化学成分进行了综合分析。基于液相色谱-质谱联用仪(LC-MS)和GC-MS的多元统计分析结果一致。仿野生栽培组的G1和G2以及野生组的G8-G19聚为第1类,而野生组的G7和仿野生栽培组的G3-G6聚为第2类。去除G1、G2和G7的离群数据后,仿野生栽培组的G3-G6聚为一类,野生组的G8-G19聚为另一类。根据LC-MS检测的正、负离子模式鉴定出26种化学成分。采用UPLC测定了5种指示性成分(VIP>1.5)的含量,结果表明仿野生栽培组中绿原酸、异绿原酸A、异绿原酸C、蒙花苷、木香酮及其总含量分别是野生组的1.85倍、1.52倍、1.26倍、0.90倍、2.93倍和2.56倍。基于GC-MS的OPLS-DA获得了10个差异峰。其中,仿野生栽培组中α-葎草烯和亚里士多德烯的相对含量极显著(P<0.01)和显著(P<0.05)高于野生组,而5,6-环氧-3-羟基-7-大柱香波龙-9-酮、γ-桉叶醇、桧脑等7种成分以及12-异丙基-1,5,9-三甲基-4,8,13-环十四碳三烯-1,3-二醇的相对含量分别极显著(P<0.01)和显著(P<0.05)低于野生组。因此,仿野生栽培组和野生组的主要化学成分基本相同。然而,仿野生栽培组中不挥发性成分含量高于野生组,部分挥发性成分含量则相反。本研究为仿野生栽培甘松和野生甘松质量的综合评价提供了科学数据。