Premium
Probing the degradation mechanism of forsythiaside A and simultaneous determination of three forsythiasides in Forsythia preparations by a single marker
Author(s) -
Qi Minghui,
Zhao Shiyi,
Zhou Bin,
Zhang Min,
Zhang Hongyang,
Wang Yuerong,
Hu Ping
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of separation science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.72
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1615-9314
pISSN - 1615-9306
DOI - 10.1002/jssc.201900521
Subject(s) - forsythia , chemistry , caffeic acid , chromatography , analytical chemistry (journal) , medicine , honeysuckle , biochemistry , alternative medicine , pathology , traditional chinese medicine , antioxidant
Forsythiaside A is the major component of Forsythia suspensa . This study investigated the degradation mechanism of forsythiaside A. Eight degraded components including forsythiaside I, forsythiaside H, forsythiaside E, caffeic acid, suspensaside A, β‐hydroxy forsythiaside I, β‐hydroxy forsythiaside H, and β‐hydroxy forsythiaside A were identified by using ultra‐high performance liquid chromatography quadrupole time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry. Then, the quantitative analysis of multi‐components by a single‐marker was performed with ultra‐high performance liquid chromatography to simultaneously determine forsythiaside A, forsythiaside H, and forsythiaside I in Forsythia suspensa preparations. The result showed good linear relationships within 2.871–287.1, 0.231–23.1, and 0.983–98.3 μg/mL (r > 0.9998), with average recoveries of 97.7, 95.7, and 95.8% and relative standard deviations of 1.4, 2.4, and 1.8%, respectively. Using forsythiaside A as an internal reference, the relative retention values of forsythiaside H and forsythiaside I to forsythiaside A were calculated to be 0.89 and 0.61, respectively, and the relative correction factors were 0.816 and 0.799, respectively. The method for quantitative analysis of multi‐components by a single‐marker was applied to evaluate the overall quality of forsythia preparations. There was no significant difference in the measurement results of the method developed and the method of external standard.