Analysis of Medicinal Plants by Hplc: Recent Approaches

Cîmpan, Gabriela; Gocan, Simion

doi:10.1081/jlc-120014003

Cited by 37 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most suitable tool for chemical characterization of phenolic compounds from natural products is the HPLC analysis 24 , therefore in present study crude methanol extract and different solvent fractions (Hexane, chloroform, ethyl acetate and aqueous) of H. strigosum were analyzed for presence of eleven different phenolic compounds including chromotropic acid, quercetin, Trans 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy cinamic acid, vanillic acid, gallic acid, caffeic acid, m-coumaric acid, p-coumaric acid, syringic acid, sinapic acid, ferulic acid and chlorogenic acid using reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC). The results are shown in Table. 2.…”

Section: Reverse Phase High Performance Liquid Chromatographic (Rp-hpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phenolic Composition and Biological (Anti Diabetic and Antioxidant) Activities of Different Solvent Extracts of an Endemic Plant (Heliotropium Strigosum)

Qayyum

Sarfraz

Ashraf

et al. 2016

J. Chil. Chem. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heliotropium strigosum plant is widely used in traditional medicines for treatment of various ailments. In current study, an effort was made to evaluate phenolic profile as well as antidiabetic and antioxidant activities of crude methanol extract and different solvent (n-hexane, ethyl acetate, chloroform and aqueous) fractions of H. strigosum. Total phenolic contents were determined by spectrophotometric assay. Polyphenolic compounds in crude methanol extract and each solvent fraction were identified by reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC). Antioxidant and antidiabetic activities were determined using DPPH and α-amylase inhibition assays, respectively. The outcome of spectrophotometric assay showed that methanol extract had higher amount of total phenolic (84.50 ± 0.06 µg GAE/ mg of plant extract) contents than aqueous, ethyl acetate, chloroform and n-hexane fractions, respectively. The RP-HPLC analysis revealed the maximum number of phenolic (chromotropic acid, quercetin, trans-4-hydroxy-3-methoxy cinnamic acid, vanillic acid, gallic acid, caffeic acid, m-coumaric acid, p-coumaric acid, syringic acid, sinapic acid and ferulic acid) compounds in methanol extract. Methanol extract (IC 50 = 8.97 µg/mL) exhibited the maximum antidiabetic activity followed by aqueous (IC 50 = 20.04 µg/mL), ethyl acetate (IC 50 = 27.79 µg/mL), chloroform (IC 50 = 56.87 µg/mL) and hexane (IC 50 = 32.16 µg/mL) fractions, respectively. The outcome of antioxidant assay revealed that methanol extract was the leading one with regard to antioxidant activity at different doses (10 to 250 µg/mL). The current study concludes that H. strigosum solvents extracts with significant phenolic profile and potent biological activities could be explored for potential uses in neutraceutical and pharmaceutical industries.

show abstract

Section: Reverse Phase High Performance Liquid Chromatographic (Rp-hpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phenolic Composition and Biological (Anti Diabetic and Antioxidant) Activities of Different Solvent Extracts of an Endemic Plant (Heliotropium Strigosum)

Qayyum

Sarfraz

Ashraf

et al. 2016

J. Chil. Chem. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Identification of phenolic compounds is a complex task in food matrices compared to enriched supplements or drugs, due to the wide variety of structures present in nature and the lack of standard polyphenols commercially available. Several methods have been used for the determination of polyphenols, such as capillary electrophoresis (CE),3 gas chromatography (GC),4, 5 nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR),6 and, most commonly, high‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled to ultraviolet (UV)7, 8 and mass spectrometry (MS) 9–11…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Improved characterization of tomato polyphenols using liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization linear ion trap quadrupole Orbitrap mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry

Vallverdú‐Queralt

Jáuregui

Medina‐Remón

et al. 2010

Rapid Comm Mass Spectrometry

162

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) is the second most important fruit crop worldwide. Tomatoes are a key component in the Mediterranean diet, which is strongly associated with a reduced risk of chronic degenerative diseases. In this work, we use a combination of mass spectrometry (MS) techniques with negative ion detection, liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization linear ion trap quadrupole-Orbitrap-mass spectrometry (LC/ESI-LTQ-Orbitrap-MS) and liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry (LC/ESI-MS/MS) on a triple quadrupole, for the identification of the constituents of tomato samples. First, we tested for the presence of polyphenolic compounds through generic MS/MS experiments such as neutral loss and precursor ion scans on the triple quadrupole system. Confirmation of the compounds previously identified was accomplished by injection into the high-resolution system (LTQ-Orbitrap) using accurate mass measurements in MS, MS(2) and MS(3) modes. In this way, 38 compounds were identified in tomato samples with very good mass accuracy (<2 mDa), three of them, as far as we know, not previously reported in tomato samples.

show abstract

“…Nowadays, the best analytical tool to quantify and characterize phenolic compounds is considered to be liquid chromatography coupled with ultraviolet-photodiode array detection (UV-DAD) Crozier et al, 1997;Epriliati et al, 2010;Fang et al, 2009;Kerem et al, 2004;Liu et al, 2008;Sakakibara et al, 2003;Sun et al, 2007;Wang et al, 2009) or mass spectrometry (MS) (Cao et al, 2009;Chiva-Blanch et al, 2011;Cimpan and Gocan, 2002;Gruz et al, 2008;Han et al, 2008;Martinez-Huelamo et al, 2012;Sanchez-Rabaneda et al, 2003a;Tsao and Deng, 2004;Tulipani et al, 2012;Urpi-Sarda et al, 2009;Vallverdú-Queralt et al, 2010;Volpi and Bergonzini, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%