Chromatographia

, Volume 67, Issue 1–2, pp 163–167 | Cite as

Efficient and Sensitive Method for Quantitative Determination and Validation of Umbelliferone, Carvone and Myristicin in Anethum graveolens and Carum carvi Seed

  • Kamlesh Dhalwal
  • Vaibhav M. Shinde
  • Kakasaheb R. Mahadik
Full Short Communication

Abstract

An efficient HPTLC method for the analysis of umbelliferone, carvone and myristicin in Anethum graveolens and Carum carvi seed was developed. The method employed HPTLC plates precoated with silica gel 60 F254 as the stationary phase. Methanol extracts of seeds from three different sources were used. The calibration plot for umbelliferone, carvone and myristicin were linear with the correlation coefficient of 0.997 ± 0.016, 0.999 ± 0.009 and 0.999 ± 0.013, respectively, which were indicative of good linear dependence of peak area on concentration. The method permits reliable quantification of umbelliferone, carvone and myristicin and showed good resolution and separation. The method was validated as per ICH guidelines. To study the accuracy of the method, recovery studies were performed by the method of standard addition at three different levels and the average percentage recovery was found to be 99.05% for umbelliferone, 100.28% for carvone and 99.8% for myristicin. The proposed HPTLC method for quantitative monitoring of umbelliferone, carvone and myristicin in A. graveolens and C. carvi seed can be used for routine quality testing of these extracts.

Keywords

Umbelliferones carvone and myristicin Thin layer chromatography Anethum graveolens and Carum carvi Seed 

References

  1. 1.
    Lin G, Li P, Li SL, Chan SW (2001) J Chromatogr A 935:321–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang LW, Wu DH, Tang X, Pang W, Wang XR, Ma Y, Su WW (2005) J Chromatogr A 1070:35–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rajpal V (2002) Standardization of botanicals, vol 1. Eastern Publishers, pp 83–91Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Wealth of India (Raw Materials) (1950) Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Delhi, India, pp 313–115Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Singh G, Maurya S, De Lampasona MP, Catalan C (2005) J Food Sci 70:208–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hosseinzadeh H, Karimi GR, Ameri M (2002) BMC Pharmacol 2:21–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bouwmeester HJ, Davies JAR, Toxopeus H (1995) J Agric Food Chem 43:3057–3064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mahran GH, Kadry HA, Thabet CK, Al-Azizi MM, Liv N (1992) Int J Pharmacog 30:139–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kamaleeswari M, Nalini N (2006) J Pharmacy Pharmacol 58:1121–1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fleming T (2000) PDR for herbal medicines. Medical Economics Company, New Jersy, pp 252–253Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    O’kennedy R, Thornes RD (1997) Coumarins—biology, applications and mode of action. Wiley, Chichester, pp 312–314Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wohaieb SA, Godin DV (1987) Diabetes 36:1014–1018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tatsuya M, Keiko J, Hirokazu K, Yasushi A, Hiroyuki S, Takahiro I, Kimio S (2003) J Agric Food Chem 51:1560–1565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Raphael TJ, Kuttan G (2003) Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol 25:285–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlag/GWV Fachverlage GmbH 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kamlesh Dhalwal
    • 1
  • Vaibhav M. Shinde
    • 1
  • Kakasaheb R. Mahadik
    • 1
  1. 1.Poona College of PharmacyBharati Vidyapeeth UniversityPuneIndia

Personalised recommendations