Comprehensive quality evaluation of Polygoni Orientalis Fructus and its processed product: chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses
Introduction Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (POF) is a clinically effective Chinese medicine. Raw POF (RPOF) and POF Tostus (POFT) are used separately in clinics. However, incomplete progress has been made on quality control. Objective To establish a comprehensive method for quality assessment of RPOF...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Phytochemical analysis 2021-04, Vol.32 (2), p.141-152 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 152 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 141 |
container_title | Phytochemical analysis |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Ba, Yinying Xiao, Ran Chen, Qi‐Jun Xie, Li‐Yuan Xu, Rong‐Rong Yu, Ping Chen, Xiao‐Qing Wu, Xia |
description | Introduction
Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (POF) is a clinically effective Chinese medicine. Raw POF (RPOF) and POF Tostus (POFT) are used separately in clinics. However, incomplete progress has been made on quality control.
Objective
To establish a comprehensive method for quality assessment of RPOF and POFT and to discriminate these two varieties.
Methodology
High‐performance liquid chromatography combined with the diode array detector (HPLC‐DAD) methods were developed for fingerprinting and quantitative analysis of seven major compounds in RPOF and POFT, and the main components were determined by HPLC‐DAD coupled with Fourier‐transform ion cyclotron resonance‐mass spectrometry. Chemometric approaches were performed to discriminate RPOF and POFT and to screen discriminatory components.
Results
Fingerprints were established and 12 common peaks were identified, cannabisin G and cannabisin E were firstly identified from POF. In quantitative analysis, all analytes showed good regression (R > 0.9996) within test ranges and the recovery of the method was in the range 96.6–104.3%. Fingerprints in conjunction with similarity analysis and hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA) demonstrated the consistent quality of RPOF and showed a clear discrimination between RPOF and POFT. Principal component analysis, partial least‐squares discriminant analysis, and heatmap‐HCA on quantitative data not only gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT, but they also suggested that quercetin, 3,5,7‐trihydroxychromone, and N‐trans‐feruloyltyramine acted as the main factors responsible for the sample differences.
Conclusions
Chromatographic analysis in combination with chemometric analysis provides a simple and reliable method of comparing and evaluating the qualities of RPOF and POFT.
The purpose of this work is to establish a simple and acceptable method for quality assessment of raw Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (RPOF) and Polygoni Orientalis Fructus Tostus (POFT) and to discriminate these two varieties by using chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses. The chromatographic methods were established. The chromatographic analysis gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT and filtered out three components which acted as the main factors responsible for the samples differences. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/pca.2890 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2289573696</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2489114891</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3490-e9e7c34c6cb23c814b6e54f399e4f84f359efad09bbd3cc0cb82b784e5c04ed53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhi0EoktB4gmQJS5cUuzEzsbcqhUFpErtAc6R40y6Xjl2ajtb5SH7TszuliIhcbF_aX5_M-OfkPecXXDGys-T0Rdlo9gLsuJMqYLLWr4kK6ZkU7BKiDPyJqUdY1hT9WtyVnHJy6qsV-RxE8YpwhZ8snug97N2Ni8U9trNOtvgaRjobXDLXfCW3kQLPqMl0as4mzwnqn1PbU50isFAStAfVI-1L9RsYbRGOzpYfwdxitZnVMcnyY6zy9pDQEYPGeJo_XPDBHvwdNS7EKnBAYPHtgnlPDns8GDz9kgPI-RoDRK1WxKkt-TVoF2Cd0_3Ofl19fXn5ntxffPtx-byujCVUKwABWtUpjZdWZmGi64GKYZKKRBDg0IqGHTPVNf1lTHMdE3ZrRsB0jABvazOyacTF3e9nyHldrTJgHOnhdoSw5DrqlY1Wj_-Y92FOeK86BKN4vxw_AWaGFKKMLT4W6OOS8tZe4i4xYjbQ8Ro_fAEnLsR-mfjn0zRUJwMD9bB8l9Qe7u5PAJ_A7ogtzY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2489114891</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comprehensive quality evaluation of Polygoni Orientalis Fructus and its processed product: chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Ba, Yinying ; Xiao, Ran ; Chen, Qi‐Jun ; Xie, Li‐Yuan ; Xu, Rong‐Rong ; Yu, Ping ; Chen, Xiao‐Qing ; Wu, Xia</creator><creatorcontrib>Ba, Yinying ; Xiao, Ran ; Chen, Qi‐Jun ; Xie, Li‐Yuan ; Xu, Rong‐Rong ; Yu, Ping ; Chen, Xiao‐Qing ; Wu, Xia</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction
Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (POF) is a clinically effective Chinese medicine. Raw POF (RPOF) and POF Tostus (POFT) are used separately in clinics. However, incomplete progress has been made on quality control.
Objective
To establish a comprehensive method for quality assessment of RPOF and POFT and to discriminate these two varieties.
Methodology
High‐performance liquid chromatography combined with the diode array detector (HPLC‐DAD) methods were developed for fingerprinting and quantitative analysis of seven major compounds in RPOF and POFT, and the main components were determined by HPLC‐DAD coupled with Fourier‐transform ion cyclotron resonance‐mass spectrometry. Chemometric approaches were performed to discriminate RPOF and POFT and to screen discriminatory components.
Results
Fingerprints were established and 12 common peaks were identified, cannabisin G and cannabisin E were firstly identified from POF. In quantitative analysis, all analytes showed good regression (R > 0.9996) within test ranges and the recovery of the method was in the range 96.6–104.3%. Fingerprints in conjunction with similarity analysis and hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA) demonstrated the consistent quality of RPOF and showed a clear discrimination between RPOF and POFT. Principal component analysis, partial least‐squares discriminant analysis, and heatmap‐HCA on quantitative data not only gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT, but they also suggested that quercetin, 3,5,7‐trihydroxychromone, and N‐trans‐feruloyltyramine acted as the main factors responsible for the sample differences.
Conclusions
Chromatographic analysis in combination with chemometric analysis provides a simple and reliable method of comparing and evaluating the qualities of RPOF and POFT.
The purpose of this work is to establish a simple and acceptable method for quality assessment of raw Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (RPOF) and Polygoni Orientalis Fructus Tostus (POFT) and to discriminate these two varieties by using chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses. The chromatographic methods were established. The chromatographic analysis gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT and filtered out three components which acted as the main factors responsible for the samples differences.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0958-0344</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1099-1565</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/pca.2890</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31512326</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Chemical fingerprinting ; chemometric analysis ; Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid ; Cluster analysis ; Clustering ; Cyclotron resonance ; Discriminant analysis ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal ; fingerprint ; Fingerprinting ; Fruit ; Herbal medicine ; High performance liquid chromatography ; Ions ; Liquid chromatography ; Mass spectrometry ; Mass spectroscopy ; Polygoni Orientalis Fructus ; Principal Component Analysis ; Principal components analysis ; Quality assessment ; Quality Control ; Quantitative analysis ; Quercetin ; Regression analysis ; simultaneous determination ; Test ranges</subject><ispartof>Phytochemical analysis, 2021-04, Vol.32 (2), p.141-152</ispartof><rights>2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>2021 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3490-e9e7c34c6cb23c814b6e54f399e4f84f359efad09bbd3cc0cb82b784e5c04ed53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3490-e9e7c34c6cb23c814b6e54f399e4f84f359efad09bbd3cc0cb82b784e5c04ed53</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7525-2905 ; 0000-0002-2056-8344</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fpca.2890$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fpca.2890$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31512326$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ba, Yinying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiao, Ran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Qi‐Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xie, Li‐Yuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Rong‐Rong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Ping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xiao‐Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Xia</creatorcontrib><title>Comprehensive quality evaluation of Polygoni Orientalis Fructus and its processed product: chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses</title><title>Phytochemical analysis</title><addtitle>Phytochem Anal</addtitle><description>Introduction
Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (POF) is a clinically effective Chinese medicine. Raw POF (RPOF) and POF Tostus (POFT) are used separately in clinics. However, incomplete progress has been made on quality control.
Objective
To establish a comprehensive method for quality assessment of RPOF and POFT and to discriminate these two varieties.
Methodology
High‐performance liquid chromatography combined with the diode array detector (HPLC‐DAD) methods were developed for fingerprinting and quantitative analysis of seven major compounds in RPOF and POFT, and the main components were determined by HPLC‐DAD coupled with Fourier‐transform ion cyclotron resonance‐mass spectrometry. Chemometric approaches were performed to discriminate RPOF and POFT and to screen discriminatory components.
Results
Fingerprints were established and 12 common peaks were identified, cannabisin G and cannabisin E were firstly identified from POF. In quantitative analysis, all analytes showed good regression (R > 0.9996) within test ranges and the recovery of the method was in the range 96.6–104.3%. Fingerprints in conjunction with similarity analysis and hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA) demonstrated the consistent quality of RPOF and showed a clear discrimination between RPOF and POFT. Principal component analysis, partial least‐squares discriminant analysis, and heatmap‐HCA on quantitative data not only gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT, but they also suggested that quercetin, 3,5,7‐trihydroxychromone, and N‐trans‐feruloyltyramine acted as the main factors responsible for the sample differences.
Conclusions
Chromatographic analysis in combination with chemometric analysis provides a simple and reliable method of comparing and evaluating the qualities of RPOF and POFT.
The purpose of this work is to establish a simple and acceptable method for quality assessment of raw Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (RPOF) and Polygoni Orientalis Fructus Tostus (POFT) and to discriminate these two varieties by using chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses. The chromatographic methods were established. The chromatographic analysis gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT and filtered out three components which acted as the main factors responsible for the samples differences.</description><subject>Chemical fingerprinting</subject><subject>chemometric analysis</subject><subject>Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid</subject><subject>Cluster analysis</subject><subject>Clustering</subject><subject>Cyclotron resonance</subject><subject>Discriminant analysis</subject><subject>Drugs, Chinese Herbal</subject><subject>fingerprint</subject><subject>Fingerprinting</subject><subject>Fruit</subject><subject>Herbal medicine</subject><subject>High performance liquid chromatography</subject><subject>Ions</subject><subject>Liquid chromatography</subject><subject>Mass spectrometry</subject><subject>Mass spectroscopy</subject><subject>Polygoni Orientalis Fructus</subject><subject>Principal Component Analysis</subject><subject>Principal components analysis</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quality Control</subject><subject>Quantitative analysis</subject><subject>Quercetin</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>simultaneous determination</subject><subject>Test ranges</subject><issn>0958-0344</issn><issn>1099-1565</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhi0EoktB4gmQJS5cUuzEzsbcqhUFpErtAc6R40y6Xjl2ajtb5SH7TszuliIhcbF_aX5_M-OfkPecXXDGys-T0Rdlo9gLsuJMqYLLWr4kK6ZkU7BKiDPyJqUdY1hT9WtyVnHJy6qsV-RxE8YpwhZ8snug97N2Ni8U9trNOtvgaRjobXDLXfCW3kQLPqMl0as4mzwnqn1PbU50isFAStAfVI-1L9RsYbRGOzpYfwdxitZnVMcnyY6zy9pDQEYPGeJo_XPDBHvwdNS7EKnBAYPHtgnlPDns8GDz9kgPI-RoDRK1WxKkt-TVoF2Cd0_3Ofl19fXn5ntxffPtx-byujCVUKwABWtUpjZdWZmGi64GKYZKKRBDg0IqGHTPVNf1lTHMdE3ZrRsB0jABvazOyacTF3e9nyHldrTJgHOnhdoSw5DrqlY1Wj_-Y92FOeK86BKN4vxw_AWaGFKKMLT4W6OOS8tZe4i4xYjbQ8Ro_fAEnLsR-mfjn0zRUJwMD9bB8l9Qe7u5PAJ_A7ogtzY</recordid><startdate>20210401</startdate><enddate>20210401</enddate><creator>Ba, Yinying</creator><creator>Xiao, Ran</creator><creator>Chen, Qi‐Jun</creator><creator>Xie, Li‐Yuan</creator><creator>Xu, Rong‐Rong</creator><creator>Yu, Ping</creator><creator>Chen, Xiao‐Qing</creator><creator>Wu, Xia</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7525-2905</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2056-8344</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210401</creationdate><title>Comprehensive quality evaluation of Polygoni Orientalis Fructus and its processed product: chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses</title><author>Ba, Yinying ; Xiao, Ran ; Chen, Qi‐Jun ; Xie, Li‐Yuan ; Xu, Rong‐Rong ; Yu, Ping ; Chen, Xiao‐Qing ; Wu, Xia</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3490-e9e7c34c6cb23c814b6e54f399e4f84f359efad09bbd3cc0cb82b784e5c04ed53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Chemical fingerprinting</topic><topic>chemometric analysis</topic><topic>Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid</topic><topic>Cluster analysis</topic><topic>Clustering</topic><topic>Cyclotron resonance</topic><topic>Discriminant analysis</topic><topic>Drugs, Chinese Herbal</topic><topic>fingerprint</topic><topic>Fingerprinting</topic><topic>Fruit</topic><topic>Herbal medicine</topic><topic>High performance liquid chromatography</topic><topic>Ions</topic><topic>Liquid chromatography</topic><topic>Mass spectrometry</topic><topic>Mass spectroscopy</topic><topic>Polygoni Orientalis Fructus</topic><topic>Principal Component Analysis</topic><topic>Principal components analysis</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quality Control</topic><topic>Quantitative analysis</topic><topic>Quercetin</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>simultaneous determination</topic><topic>Test ranges</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ba, Yinying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiao, Ran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Qi‐Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xie, Li‐Yuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Rong‐Rong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Ping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xiao‐Qing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Xia</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Phytochemical analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ba, Yinying</au><au>Xiao, Ran</au><au>Chen, Qi‐Jun</au><au>Xie, Li‐Yuan</au><au>Xu, Rong‐Rong</au><au>Yu, Ping</au><au>Chen, Xiao‐Qing</au><au>Wu, Xia</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comprehensive quality evaluation of Polygoni Orientalis Fructus and its processed product: chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses</atitle><jtitle>Phytochemical analysis</jtitle><addtitle>Phytochem Anal</addtitle><date>2021-04-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>141</spage><epage>152</epage><pages>141-152</pages><issn>0958-0344</issn><eissn>1099-1565</eissn><abstract>Introduction
Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (POF) is a clinically effective Chinese medicine. Raw POF (RPOF) and POF Tostus (POFT) are used separately in clinics. However, incomplete progress has been made on quality control.
Objective
To establish a comprehensive method for quality assessment of RPOF and POFT and to discriminate these two varieties.
Methodology
High‐performance liquid chromatography combined with the diode array detector (HPLC‐DAD) methods were developed for fingerprinting and quantitative analysis of seven major compounds in RPOF and POFT, and the main components were determined by HPLC‐DAD coupled with Fourier‐transform ion cyclotron resonance‐mass spectrometry. Chemometric approaches were performed to discriminate RPOF and POFT and to screen discriminatory components.
Results
Fingerprints were established and 12 common peaks were identified, cannabisin G and cannabisin E were firstly identified from POF. In quantitative analysis, all analytes showed good regression (R > 0.9996) within test ranges and the recovery of the method was in the range 96.6–104.3%. Fingerprints in conjunction with similarity analysis and hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA) demonstrated the consistent quality of RPOF and showed a clear discrimination between RPOF and POFT. Principal component analysis, partial least‐squares discriminant analysis, and heatmap‐HCA on quantitative data not only gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT, but they also suggested that quercetin, 3,5,7‐trihydroxychromone, and N‐trans‐feruloyltyramine acted as the main factors responsible for the sample differences.
Conclusions
Chromatographic analysis in combination with chemometric analysis provides a simple and reliable method of comparing and evaluating the qualities of RPOF and POFT.
The purpose of this work is to establish a simple and acceptable method for quality assessment of raw Polygoni Orientalis Fructus (RPOF) and Polygoni Orientalis Fructus Tostus (POFT) and to discriminate these two varieties by using chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses. The chromatographic methods were established. The chromatographic analysis gave a clear differentiation between RPOF and POFT and filtered out three components which acted as the main factors responsible for the samples differences.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>31512326</pmid><doi>10.1002/pca.2890</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7525-2905</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2056-8344</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0958-0344 |
ispartof | Phytochemical analysis, 2021-04, Vol.32 (2), p.141-152 |
issn | 0958-0344 1099-1565 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2289573696 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | Chemical fingerprinting chemometric analysis Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid Cluster analysis Clustering Cyclotron resonance Discriminant analysis Drugs, Chinese Herbal fingerprint Fingerprinting Fruit Herbal medicine High performance liquid chromatography Ions Liquid chromatography Mass spectrometry Mass spectroscopy Polygoni Orientalis Fructus Principal Component Analysis Principal components analysis Quality assessment Quality Control Quantitative analysis Quercetin Regression analysis simultaneous determination Test ranges |
title | Comprehensive quality evaluation of Polygoni Orientalis Fructus and its processed product: chemical fingerprinting and simultaneous determination of seven major components coupled with chemometric analyses |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T18%3A04%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comprehensive%20quality%20evaluation%20of%20Polygoni%20Orientalis%20Fructus%20and%20its%20processed%20product:%20chemical%20fingerprinting%20and%20simultaneous%20determination%20of%20seven%20major%20components%20coupled%20with%20chemometric%20analyses&rft.jtitle=Phytochemical%20analysis&rft.au=Ba,%20Yinying&rft.date=2021-04-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=141&rft.epage=152&rft.pages=141-152&rft.issn=0958-0344&rft.eissn=1099-1565&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/pca.2890&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2489114891%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2489114891&rft_id=info:pmid/31512326&rfr_iscdi=true |