Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative Analysis of the Major Constituents in the Traditional Tibetan Medicinal Plants Saussurea laniceps and S. medusa by LC–DAD–MS

  • Full Short Communication
  • Published:
Chromatographia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Liquid chromatography coupled with diode array detector and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry was developed for the qualitative and quantitative comparison of the main constituents in Saussurea laniceps (SL) and S. medusa (SM), two species of plants used under the name “Xuelianhua” in traditional Tibetan medicine. A method validation including linearity, limit of detection, precision and recovery was performed. The results showed that a good linearity with R 2 > 0.99 was achieved, and the limit of detection of the quantified constituents was reported to be between 0.8 and 3.3 ng. The relative standard deviation value was below 3.82% for repeatability, and recovery studies for the quantified compounds were found to be within the range 90.92–103.12%. The unique properties of the present method were evaluated by analyzing twelve related herbal samples including five S. laniceps samples and seven S. medusa samples. Twenty-two compounds including phenolic acids, cumarins, lignanoids and flavonoids were identified by online ESI–MS and by comparison with literature data and standard compounds, and seven of them were quantified by LC–DAD simultaneously. The results demonstrated that the common constituents in the two herbs were protocatechuic acid, syringoside, chlorogenic acid, isoquercitroside, 1,5-dicaffeoylquinic acid, apigenin 7-O-β-d-glucoside, chrysoeriol 7-O-β-d-glucoside, acacetin 7-O-β-d-glucoside, apigenin and chrysoeriol. In the present study, it was found that the characteristic constituents were umbelliferone, scopoletin and their glucosides in S. laniceps, as well as arctiin and arctigenin in S. medusa. It was feasible to choose these characteristic compounds for the quality evaluation as well as chemical authentication of the two related herbs. The results also support discrimination between the two species when using them in folk medicine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Yi T, Leung KSY, Lu GH, Zhang H (2007) Planta Med 73:392–398. doi:10.1055/s-2007-967139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Yi T, Chen HB, Zhao ZZ, Jiang ZZ, Cai SQ, Wang TM (2009) Chromatographia 69:537–542. doi:10.1365/s10337-008-0923-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Qinghai Institute for the Control of Pharmaceutical and Biological Products (1996) Tibetan Medicine of China, vol 1. Shanghai, pp 323–326

  4. Luo DS (1997) Materia medica of Tibet of China. The Ethnic Publishing House, Beijing, pp 261–263

  5. The Editorial Committee of Ethnomedicine of China (1984) Ethnomedicine of China, vol 1. Beijing, pp 444–447

  6. The Editorial Committee of Materia Medica of China (1999) Materia Medica of China, vol 7. Shanghai, pp 931–934

  7. Wu ZY (1985) The flora of Tibet, vol 4. Beijing, pp 865–881

  8. Zhu JY (2002) Chin J Ethnomed Ethnopharm 11:295–296

    Google Scholar 

  9. Li YH, Ge FH, Su WW (2004) Chin Tradit Herbal Drugs 27:297–299

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang Q, Wu H, Zhang C (1997) West China J Pharm Sci 12:145–148

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Xu ZW, Lan HM, Li Q (2006) China Pharm 15:64–65

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. He YJ, Zhen F (1999) Chin J Ethnomed Ethnopharm 8:47–48

    Google Scholar 

  13. Su WW, Zhao J, Lin JM (2005) J First Mil Med Univ 25:119–120

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Takasaki M, Konoshima T, Komatsu K, Tokuda H, Nishino H (2000) Cancer Lett 158:53–59. doi:10.1016/S0304-3835(00)00499-7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Duan HQ, Takaishi Y, Momota H, Ohmoto Y, Takao Taki (2002) Phytochemistry 59:85–90. doi:10.1016/S0031-9422(01)00429-0

  16. Jia ZJ, Fei HM, Li Y, Zhu ZQ (1986) Chem J Chin Univ 7:789–792

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jia ZJ, Gong LC, Du M (1989) Chem J Chin Univ 10:202–204

    Google Scholar 

  18. Markham KR, Ternai B, Stanley R, Geiger H, Mabry TJ (1978) Tetrahedron 34:1389–1397. doi:10.1016/0040-4020(78)88336-7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bohlmann F, Singh P, Jakupovic J, Huneck S (1985) Planta Med 51:74–75. doi:10.1055/s-2007-969403

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhou ZW, Yin S, Wang XN, Fan CQ, Li H, Yu JM (2007) Helv Chim Acta 90:951–956. doi:10.1002/hlca.200790096

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This research was funded by the Faculty Research Grant of Hong Kong Baptist University (FRG/07-08/II-38).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hu-Biao Chen.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 50 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yi, T., Chen, HB., Zhao, ZZ. et al. Comparative Analysis of the Major Constituents in the Traditional Tibetan Medicinal Plants Saussurea laniceps and S. medusa by LC–DAD–MS. Chroma 70, 957–962 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-009-1240-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-009-1240-7

Keywords

Navigation