HPLC/UV Analysis of Polyacetylenes, Phenylpropanoid and Pyrrolidine Alkaloids in Medicinally UsedCodonopsisSpecies

Abstract

HPLC/UV is an efficient and accurate method of analysis for simultaneous quantitation of seven components in Codonopsis Radix.

The genus Codonopsis (Campanulaceae): a review of phytochemistry, bioactivity and quality control

“…Currently, HPLC coupled with UV, evaporating light scattering detector (ELSD) and electrospray ionization (ESI)–mass spectrometry (MS) have become the usual analytical techniques for separation and quantification of markers from complicated Chinese medicinal material extracts. HPLC methods for quantitation of specific chemicals in Codonopsis are summarized in Table 2 [ 27 , 39 , 101 – 111 ]. It is found that lobetyolin was mostly used as a marker compound for quantitative analysis of Codonopsis Radix.…”

“…However, Qiao et al [ 109 ] have reported that lobetyolin was widely found not only in the three Codonopsis taxa used as Codonopsis Radix, but also in other species of the same genus and even in species of other genera from the family Campanulaceae, indicating that it was not characteristic for Codonopsis species. Therefore, HPLC methods on the basis of multiple components having potential bioactivities, including polyacetylenes, phenylpropanoids, alkaloids and saponins, were used to compare and assess the quality of Codonopsis species [ 39 , 110 , 111 ]. In addition, chemical fingerprint analysis, which shows not only the bioactive and characteristic components present but also their relative ratios, is also recognized as a reliable means for the identification and qualification of herbal medicines.…”

“…modesta , C. tangshen , C. tubulosa , C. subglobosa , C. clematidea , C. canescens and C. lanceolata Refluxing extraction with methanol XBD-C18 (Agilent ZORBAX, 4.6 mm × 250 mm, 5 μm) Acetonitrile–water (17:83) with gradient elution; flow rate: 1.0 mL/min 40 UV 267 nm [ 109 ] Lobetyolin, lobetyol and tangshenoside I C. pilosula Ultrasonic extraction with 70 % (v/v) ethanol aqueous solution C18 (Kromasil, 4.6 mm × 250 mm, 5 μm) Acetonitrile and 1.0 % aqueous solution of 0.1 M phosphoric acid–water–1.0 % aqueous solution of 0.1 M phosphoric acid (10:90) with gradient elution; flow rate: 1.0 mL/min 60 UV 267 nm [ 110 ] Lancemasides A, B, C, E, G, foetidissimoside A, and aster saponin Hb C. lanceolata Shaken extraction with 50 % (v/v) methanol aqueous solution Pro-C18 RS (YMC-Pack, 3.0 mm × 100 mm, 3 μm) Acetonitrile–0.1 % formic acid (33:67); flow rate: 0.2 mL/min 5 MS [ 39 ] Codonopyrrolidiums A and B, tangshenoside I, cordifolioidyne B, lobetyolinin, lobetyolin and lobetyol C. pilosula , C. pilosula var. modesta and C. tangshen Ultrasonic extraction with methanol Pro-C18 (YMC-Pack, 4.6 mm × 250 mm, 5 μm) Acetonitrile–0.1 % phosphoric acid (2:98) with gradient elution; flow rate: 1.0 mL/min 65 UV 215 nm [ 111 ] UV ultraviolet, ELSD evaporating light scattering detector, MS mass spectrometry …”

Rapid quantification of multi-components in alcohol precipitation liquid of Codonopsis Radix using near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)

“…Due to the complicated ingredients in Codonopsis Radix, it is insufficient to realize quality control only through a single indicator. Lobetyolin is chosen as a marker compound for the identification of Codonopsis Radix in the Chinese Pharmacopeia (National Commission of Chinese Pharmacopoeia, 2015) and it is found that lobetyolin is frequently chosen as a quantitative indicator in practice (Qiao et al, 2007;He et al, 2014;Kim et al, 2014). Flavonoids are compounds with potential bioactivity (He et al, 2004).…”

“…Therefore, in this study, lobetyolin, total flavonoids, pigments, and total solid contents were taken into consideration and defined as critical quality attributes (CQAs) of the alcohol precipitation liquid. With the aim of accurately measuring these quality indices, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) (Qiao et al, 2007;He et al, 2014;Kim et al, 2014), colorimetric assay (Han et al, 2013;Gong et al, 2014a), and gravimetric assay (Li et al, 2013) are most commonly adopted as standard quantitative methods. However, these methods are tedious and somewhat time-consuming, failing to satisfy the demand for real-time monitoring.…”