Advertisement

Drug Safety

, Volume 39, Issue 12, pp 1211–1227 | Cite as

Estimating Herbal Product Authentication and Adulteration in India Using a Vouchered, DNA-Based Biological Reference Material Library

  • Dhivya Shanmughanandhan
  • Subramanyam Ragupathy
  • Steven G. NewmasterEmail author
  • Saravanan Mohanasundaram
  • Ramalingam SathishkumarEmail author
Original Research Article

Abstract

Introduction

India is considered the ‘medicinal garden’ of the world, with 8000 medicinal plants of which 960 are commercial species that are traded nationally and globally. Although scientific studies estimate herbal product adulteration as 42–66 % in North America, India does not have any published marketplace studies and subsequent estimates of adulteration in an industry facing considerable supply demands.

Objectives

The goal of this project is to provide an initial assessment of herbal product authentication and adulteration in the marketplace in India by (1) developing a biological reference material (BRM) herbal DNA library for Indian herbal species using DNA barcode regions (ITS2 and rbcL) in order to facilitate accurate species resolution when testing the herbal products; and (2) assessing herbal product identification using our BRM library; and (3) comparing the use of our BRM library to identify herbal products with that of GenBank.

Methods

A BRM herbal DNA library consisting of 187 herbal species was prepared to authenticate the herbal products within India. Ninty-three herbal products representing ten different companies were procured from local stores located at Coimbatore, India. These samples were subjected to blind testing for authenticity using the DNA barcode regions rbcL and ITS2.

Results

The results indicate that 40 % of the products tested are authentic, and 60 % of the products may be adulterated (i.e. contained species of plants not listed on the product labels). The adulterated samples included contamination (50 %), substitution (10 %) and fillers (6 %). Our BRM library provided a 100 % Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) match for all species, whereas the GenBank match was 64 %.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that most Indian herbal medicinal products are essentially mixed with one or a few other herbs that could lessen the therapeutic activity of the main ingredients. We do not recommend the use of GenBank to identify herbal products because the use of this non-curated and/or vouchered database will result in inaccurate species identification. These DNA-based tools provide a scientific foundation for herbal pharmacovigilance to ensure the safety and efficacy of natural drugs. This study provides curated BRMs that will underpin innovations in molecular diagnostic biotechnology, which will soon provide more robust estimates of adulteration and commercial tools that will strengthen due diligence in quality assurance within the herbal industry.

Keywords

rbcL Basic Local Alignment Search Tool Herbal Product Herbal Species United States Pharmacopeia 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Author contributions

RS, SGN, SR and DS conceived and designed the study; DS and SM carried out the wet lab analysis; DS, RS, SGN and SR contributed in writing the manuscript; SGN, RS and SR carried out the final edits and submission; all authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This work was supported in India by the Bharathiar University, University Grants Commission—Special Assistance Programme, Department of Science and Technology—Funds for Improvement of Science and Technology (DST-FIST) funds and Department of Biotechnology India (to RS), and in Canada by the International Science and Technology Partnership Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Employment (MEDI) (to SGN).

Conflict of interest

Dhivya Shanmughanandhan, Subramanyam Ragupathy, Steven G. Newmaster, Saravanan Mohanasundaram and Ramalingam Sathishkumar have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this study.

Supplementary material

40264_2016_459_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 20 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Joy PP, Thomas J, Mathew S, Skaria PB. Medicinal plants. Kerala Agricultural University. Aromatic and Medicinal Plants Research Station. 1998;2:1–211.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mukherjee PK, Venkatesh M, Kumar V. An overview on the development in regulation and control of medicinal and aromatic plants in the Indian system of medicine. Bol Latinoam Caribe Plant Med Aromat. 2007;6:129–36.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization. Traditional medicine. 2003. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/2003/fs134/en/. Accessed 11 July 2016.
  4. 4.
    Meena AK, Bansal P, Kumar S. Plants-herbal wealth as a potential source of ayurvedic drugs. Asian J Tradit Med. 2009;4(4):152–70.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kamboj VP. Herbal medicine. Curr Sci India. 2000;78(1):35–8.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dubey NK, Kumar R, Tripathi P. Global promotion of herbal medicine: India’s opportunity. Curr Sci. 2004;86(1):37–41.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    National Medicinal Plants Board, Government of India. 2000. http://nmpb.nic.in. Accessed 11 July 2016.
  8. 8.
    Isola OI. The “relevance” of the African traditional medicine (alternative medicine) to health care delivery system in Nigeria. J Dev Areas. 2013;47:319–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schippmann U, Leaman DJ, Cunningham AB. Impact of cultivation and gathering of medicinal plants on biodiversity: global trends and issues. Biodiversity and the ecosystem approach in agriculture, forestry and fisheries. 2002. http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4586e/y4586e00.html. Accessed 14 May 2016.
  10. 10.
    Environmental Information System (ENVIS) Centre on Floral Diversity. 1994. http://bsienvis.nic.in/Database/RedlistedPlants_3940.aspx. Accessed 11 July 2016.
  11. 11.
    Hassali MA, Thambyappa J, Nambiar S, Shafie AA, Löfgren H. TRIPS, free trade agreements and the pharmaceutical industry in Malaysia. In: The new political economy of pharmaceuticals: production, innovation and TRIPS in the Global South. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2013. p. 152–66.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dixit S, Pandey RC, Das M, Khanna SK. Food quality surveillance on colours in eatables sold in rural markets of Uttar Pradesh. J Food Sci Tech. 1995;32(5):373–6.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kannan K, Tanabe S, Giesy JP, Tatsukawa R. Organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls in foodstuffs from Asian and oceanic countries. In: Reviews of environmental contamination and toxicology. New York: Springer; 1997. p. 1–55.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jonnalagadda PR, Bhat RV. Quality of shrimp sold in the markets of Hyderabad. India. J Food Quality. 2004;27:163–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aneesh TP, Hisham M, Sekhar MS, Madhu M, Deepa TV. International market scenario of traditional Indian herbal drugs—India declining. Int J Green Pharm. 2009;3:184–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lalitha S, Adams SJ, Deepthi PM, Krishnamurthy KV, Padma V. Comparative pharmacognosy of medicinal plant species used as Prsniparni. Int J Green Pharm. 2012;6:303–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Venkatasubramanian P, Kumar SK, Nair VS. Cyperus rotundus, a substitute for Aconitum heterophyllum: studies on the Ayurvedic concept of Abhava Pratinidhi Dravya (drug substitution). J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2010;1:33–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seethapathy GS, Ganesh D, Kumar JUS, Senthilkumar U, Newmaster SG, Ragupathy S, et al. Assessing product adulteration in natural health products for laxative yielding plants, Cassia, Senna, and Chamaecrista, in Southern India using DNA barcoding. Int J Legal Med. 2015;129(4):693–700.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Swetha VP, Parvathy VA, Sheeja TE, Sasikumar B. DNA barcoding for discriminating the economically important Cinnamomum verum from its adulterants. Food Biotechnol. 2014;28:183–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Garlic A. The impediments preventing India from becoming a herbal giant. Curr Sci. 2004;87(3):275.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Selvaraj D, Shanmughanandhan D, Sarma RK, Joseph JC, Srinivasan RV, Ramalingam S. DNA barcode ITS effectively distinguishes the medicinal plant Boerhavia diffusa from its adulterants. Genomics Proteomics Bioinform. 2012;10:364–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mahadani P, Ghosh SK. DNA barcoding: a tool for species identification from herbal juices. DNA Barcodes. 2013;1:35–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Posadzki P, Watson L, Ernst E. Contamination and adulteration of herbal medicinal products (HMPs): an overview of systematic reviews. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69:295–307.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    World Health Organization. WHO guidelines on good agricultural and collection practices (GACP) for medicinal plants. Geneva: WHO; 2003.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gad HA, El-Ahmady SH, Abou-Shoer MI, Al-Azizi MM. Application of chemometrics in authentication of herbal medicines: a review. Phytochem Anal. 2013;24:1–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jiangang F, Ling D, Zhang L, Hongmei L. Houttuyniacordata Thunb: a review of phytochemistry and pharmacology and quality control. Chin Med. 2013;4:101–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Revathy SS, Rathinamala R, Murugesan M. Authentication methods for drugs used in Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani Systems of medicine: an overview. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2012;38:2352–61.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sahoo N, Manchikanti P. Herbal drug regulation and commercialization: an Indian industry perspective. J Altern Complement Med. 2013;19:957–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Galimberti A, Labra M, Sandionigi A, Bruno A, Mezzasalma V, De Mattia F. DNA barcoding for minor crops and food traceability. Adv Agric. 2014;2014:8. doi: 10.1155/2014/831875.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yip PY, Chau CF, Mak CY, Kwan HS. DNA methods for identification of Chinese medicinal materials. Chin Med J. 2007;2:9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hebert PD, Cywinska A, Ball SL. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc Biol Sci. 2003;270:313–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chase MW, Salamin N, Wilkinson M, Dunwell JM, Kesanakurthi RP, Haidar N, et al. Land plants and DNA barcodes: short-term and long-term goals. Philos Trans R Soc London Biol Sci. 2005;360:1889–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Srirama R, Senthilkumar U, Sreejayan N, Ravikanth G, Gurumurthy BR, Shivanna MB, et al. Assessing species admixtures in raw drug trade of Phyllanthus, a hepato-protective plant using molecular tools. J Ethnopharmacol. 2010;130:208–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stoeckle MY, Gamble CC, Kirpekar R, Young G, Ahmed S, Little DP. Commercial teas highlight plant DNA barcode identification successes and obstacles. Nat Sci Rep. 2011;1:42.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dhanya K, Sasikumar B. Molecular marker based adulteration detection in traded food and agricultural commodities of plant origin with special reference to spices. Curr Trends Biotechnol Pharm. 2010;4:454–89.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kumar A, Sharma S. An evaluation of multipurpose oil seed crop for industrial uses (Jatropha curcas L.): a review. Ind Crops. Prod. 2008;28:1–10.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kool A, de Boer HJ, Krüger Å, Rydberg A, Abbad A, Björk L, et al. Molecular identification of commercialized medicinal plants in Southern Morocco. PLoS One. 2012;7:e39459.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gismondi A, Fanali F, Labarga JMM, Caiola MG, Canini A. Crocus sativus L. genomics and different DNA barcode applications. Plant Syst Evol. 2013;299:1859–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hussain A, Wahab S, Rizvi A, Hussain MS. Macroscopical, anatomical and physico-chemical studies on leaves of Coccinia indica Wight & Arn., growing wildly in eastern Uttar Pradesh region of India. Ind J Nat Prod Resour. 2011;2:74–80.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Halde UK, Wake R, Patil N. Genus Sida—the plants with ethno medicinal and therapeutic potential. Golden Res Thoughts. 2011;1:1–4.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Parvathy VA, Swetha VP, Sheeja TE, Leela NK, Chempakam B, Sasikumar B. DNA barcoding to detect chilli adulteration in traded black pepper powder. Food Biotechnol. 2014;28:25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Baker DA. DNA barcode identification of black cohosh herbal dietary supplements. J AOAC Int. 2012;95:1023–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wallace LJ, Boilard SM, Eagle SH, Spall JL, Shokralla S, Hajibabaei M. DNA barcodes for everyday life: routine authentication of natural health products. Food Res Int. 2012;49:446–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Newmaster SG, Grguric M, Shanmughanandhan D, Ramalingam S, Ragupathy S. DNA barcoding detects contamination and substitution in North American herbal products. BMC Med. 2013;11:222.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Newmaster SG, Fazekas AJ, Ragupathy S. DNA barcoding in land plants: evaluation of rbcL in a multigene tiered approach. Can J Bot. 2006;84:335–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Chen S, Yao H, Han J, Liu C, Song J, Shi L, et al. Validation of the ITS2 region as a novel DNA barcode for identifying medicinal plant species. PLoS One. 2010;5:e8613.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Fazekas AJ, Kuzmina ML, Newmaster SG, Hollingsworth PM. DNA barcoding methods for land plants. In: Kress WJ, Erickson DL, editors. DNA barcodes—methods in molecular biology. New York: Humana Press; 2012. p. 223–52.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. MEGA6: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30(12):2725–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Parasuraman S, Thing GS, Dhanaraj SA. Polyherbal formulation: concept of ayurveda. Pharmacogn Rev. 2014;8:73–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ekor M. The growing use of herbal medicines: issues relating to adverse reactions and challenges in monitoring safety. Front Pharmacol. 2013;4:177.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ndhlala AR, Ncube B, Okem A, Mulaudzi RB, Van Staden J. Toxicology of some important medicinal plants in southern Africa. Food Chem Toxicol. 2013;62:609–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Adepoju-Bello AA, Issa OA, Oguntibeju OO, Ayoola GA, Adejumo OO. Analysis of some selected toxic metals in registered herbal products manufactured in Nigeria. Afr J Biotechnol. 2014;11(26):6918–22.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ernst E. Toxic heavy metals and undeclared drugs in Asian herbal medicines. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2002;23:136–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Chan K. Some aspects of toxic contaminants in herbal medicines. Chemosphere. 2003;52:1361–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Saper RB, Kales SN, Paquin J, Burns MJ, Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, et al. Heavy metal content of ayurvedic herbal medicine products. JAMA. 2004;292:2868–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Gair R. Heavy metal poisoning from ayurvedic medicines. B C Med J. 2008;50:105.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    de Boer HJ, Ichim MC, Newmaster SG. DNA barcoding and pharmacovigilance of herbal medicines. Drug Saf. 2015;38(7):611–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jamil SS, Nizami Q, Salam M. Centella asiatica (Linn.) Urban: a review. Nat Prod Radiance. 2007;6(2):158–70.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rameshkumar A. Profiling of phenolic compound through UPLC-MS/MS and study on pharmaceutical properties of Merremia emarginata (Burm. F.) [PhD thesis]. Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India 2013.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gohil KJ, Patel JA, Gajjar AK. Pharmacological review on Centella asiatica: a potential herbal cure-all. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2010;72:546.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Subramanian S, Subramanian MP. Merremia emarginata (Burm. F.) Hall. F.: a substituted market source for Centella asiatica (L.) Urban: an observation from Salem district, Tamil Nadu. Anc Sci Life. 2013;33(2):139–40.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Purushothaman N, Newmaster SG, Ragupathy S, Stalin N, Suresh D, Arunraj DR, et al. A tiered barcode authentication tool to differentiate medicinal Cassia species in India. Genet Mol Res. 2014;13:2959–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kumar JUS, Krishna V, Seethapathy GS, Senthilkumar U, Ragupathy S, Ganeshaiah KN, et al. DNA barcoding to assess species adulteration in raw drug trade of “Bala” (genus: Sida L.) herbal products in South India. Biochem Syst Ecol. 2015;61:501–9. doi: 10.1016/j.bse.2015.07.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Peesa JP. Nephroprotective potential of herbal medicines: a review. Asian J Pharm Tech. 2013;3(3):115–8.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Malhotra SP, Dutta BK, Gupta RK, Gaur YD. Medicinal plants of the Indian arid zone. J Agric Trop Bot Appl. 1966;13:247–88.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mary DA, Franco FM, Babu V. Assessing the contribution of local and traded biodiversity in community health care: a case study from Keelakodankulam village, South India. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2011;9:275–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Namita P, Mukesh R. Medicinal plants used as antimicrobial agents: a review. Int Res J Pharm. 2012;3(1):31–40.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Brandon DL. Detection of ricin contamination in ground beef by electrochemiluminescence immunosorbent assay. Toxins. 2012;3:398–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rodriguez-Saona LE, Allendorf ME. Use of FTIR for rapid authentication and detection of adulteration of food. Annu Rev Food Sci Technol. 2011;2:467–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Omaye ST. Food and nutritional toxicology. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Morris CA, Avorn J. Internet marketing of herbal products. JAMA. 2003;290:1505–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Fazekas AJ, Burgress KS, Kesanakurti PR, Percy DM, Hajibabaei M, Graham SW, et al. Assessing the utility of coding and non-coding genomic regions for plant DNA barcoding. PLoS One. 2008;3:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Yao H, Song J, Liu C, Luo K, Han J, Li Y, et al. Use of ITS2 region as the universal DNA barcode for plants and animals. PLoS One. 2010;5:e13102.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Hollingsworth PM, Graham SW, Little DP. Choosing and using a plant DNA barcode. PLoS One. 2011;6:e19254.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    China Plant BOL Group, Li D-Z, Gao L-M, Li H-T, Wang H, Ge X-J, et al. Comparative analysis of a large dataset indicates that internal transcribed spacer (ITS) should be incorporated into the core barcode for seed plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:19641–6.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Cimino MT. Successful isolation and PCR amplification of DNA from National Institute of Standards and Technology herbal dietary supplement standard reference material powders and extracts. Planta Med. 2010;76:495–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Fazekas AJ, Kesanakurti PR, Burgess KS, Percy DM, Graham SW, Barrett SCH, et al. Are plant species inherently harder to discriminate than animal species using DNA barcoding markers? Mol Ecol Resour. 2009;9:130–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Shokralla S, Spall JL, Gibson JF, Hajibabaei M. Next-generation sequencing technologies for environmental DNA research. Mol Ecol. 2012;21:1794–805.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Verma N. Herbal medicines: regulation and practice in Europe, United States and India. Int J Herb Med. 2013;1:1–5.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    UNESCO. Report of the International Bioethics Committee on Traditional Medicine Systems and their ethical implications. 2013. SHS/EGC/IBC-19/12/3 Rev. Paris: UNESCO; 2013.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gupta AK. Quality standards of Indian medicinal plants, vol. 1. New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR); 2003.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    WHO. WHO traditional medicine strategy 2002–2005. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/who_edm_trm_2002.1.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2016.
  83. 83.
    Sucher NJ, Carles MC. Genome-based approaches to the authentication of medicinal plants. Planta Med. 2008;74:603–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dhivya Shanmughanandhan
    • 1
    • 2
  • Subramanyam Ragupathy
    • 2
  • Steven G. Newmaster
    • 2
    Email author
  • Saravanan Mohanasundaram
    • 1
  • Ramalingam Sathishkumar
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Plant Genetic Engineering Laboratory, Department of BiotechnologyBharathiar UniversityCoimbatoreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Integrative Biology, Office 208, Centre for Biodiversity Genomics, Biodiversity Institute of Ontario (BIO)University of GuelphGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations