Cited by 73Phytochemistry and biological activity of medicinal plantsChromatography in Natural ProductsTraditional Chinese Medicine Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Identification and quantification of the constituents of madder root by gas chromatography and high-performance liquid chromatography

Boldizsár, I., Szűcs, Z., Füzfai, Zs., Molnár-Perl, I.·2006·Journal of Chromatography A

Abstract

The possibilities in the identification and quantitation of the constituents of Rubia tinctorum L.'s root, called also madder root, was described and compared by gas chromatography (GC)-MS, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-UV/photodiode array detection (DAD) and HPLC-MS: chromatographic analyses were carried out in parallel, from the same samples/extracts/hydrolyzates. Anthraquinone glycosides, anthraquinones, carboxylic acids and sugars were determined directly in the presence of the matrix and in its extracts without and subsequently to hydrolyses. Hydrolyses were performed as a function of time, with hydrochloric and trifluoroacetic acids, as well as enzymatically. Data revealed that as hydrolyzing agent trifluoroacetic acid is to be preferred. Madder root's anthraquinones (pseudopurpurin/purpurin, alizarin, lucidin, munjistin, nordamnacanthal) were identified on the basis of their absorption spectra (HPLC-DAD) and fragmentation patterns by GC-MS and HPLC-MS, equally. Reproducibility of anthraquinone's quantitation, by HPLC-DAD and GC-MS, in the concentration ranges of 4 x 10(-5) to 3 x 10(-2)g/g dried sample, provided an average reproducibility of 4.2% (varying between 0.9 and 9.4% relative standard deviation (RSD percentages)). Carboxylic acids (malic, citric, quinic, rosmarinic acids) and saccharides (xylose, ribose, fructose, glucose, sucrose, primverose) were quantified as their trimethylsilyl (oxime) ether/ester derivatives by GC-MS, in the concentration ranges of 10(-5)g to 10(-2)g/g dried sample, with an average reproducibility of 4.7% RSD.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chroma.2006.08.021

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 41

  1. Derksen, 2002, vol. 26, 629
  2. Singh, 2005, J. Chromatogr. A, 1077, 202, 10.1016/j.chroma.2005.03.130 · DOI
  3. Nakanishi, 2005, Plant Phys. Biochem., 43, 921, 10.1016/j.plaphy.2005.08.005 · DOI
  4. Wijnsmar, 1986, Prog. Chem Org. Nat. Prod., 49, 79
  5. Koblitz, 1988, Cell Cult. Som. Cell, 5, 113
  6. Ding, 2000, Chromatographia, 52, 285, 10.1007/BF02491018 · DOI
  7. Terrill, 1970, J. Chromatogr. Sci., 8, 604, 10.1093/chromsci/8.10.604 · DOI
  8. van Eijk, 1976, J. Chromatogr., 124, 66, 10.1016/S0021-9673(00)87839-5 · DOI
  9. Husain, 1994, J. Chromatogr. A, 685, 356, 10.1016/0021-9673(94)00703-9 · DOI
  10. Henriksen, 1983, J. Chromatogr., 258, 252, 10.1016/S0021-9673(00)96420-3 · DOI
  11. van Eijk, 1984, J. Chromatogr., 295, 497, 10.1016/S0021-9673(01)87653-6 · DOI
  12. Nakamura, 1990, J. Chromatogr., 509, 377, 10.1016/S0021-9673(01)93095-X · DOI
  13. Bakola-Christianopoulou, 1993, J. Chromatogr., 645, 293, 10.1016/0021-9673(93)83389-A · DOI
  14. Fabbri, 2000, J. Anal. Appl. Pyrol., 56, 167, 10.1016/S0165-2370(00)00092-9 · DOI
  15. Itoh, 2006, Anal. Chim. Acta, 555, 201, 10.1016/j.aca.2005.09.027 · DOI
  16. Mosi, 1997, Talanta, 44, 985, 10.1016/S0039-9140(96)02172-8 · DOI
  17. Mueller, 1999, Food Chem. Toxicol., 37, 481, 10.1016/S0278-6915(99)00027-7 · DOI
  18. Sato, 1991, Phytochemistry, 30, 1507, 10.1016/0031-9422(91)84198-2 · DOI
  19. Tóth, 1993, J. Chromatogr., 630, 423, 10.1016/0021-9673(93)80482-N · DOI
  20. Masawaki, 1996, J. Ferm. Bioeng., 81, 567, 10.1016/0922-338X(96)81483-8 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Krizsán, 1996, J. Liq. Chromatogr. Rel. Technol., 19, 2295, 10.1080/10826079608017158 · DOI
  22. Derksen, 1998, J. Chromatogr. A, 816, 277, 10.1016/S0021-9673(98)00492-0 · DOI
  23. Derksen, 2002, J. Chromatogr. A, 978, 119, 10.1016/S0021-9673(02)01412-7 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Derksen, 2003, Phytochem. Anal., 14, 137, 10.1002/pca.694 · DOI
  25. Bányai, 2006, Chromatographia, 63, 111, 10.1365/s10337-006-0792-z · DOI
  26. Jäger, 2006, Mut. Res., 605, 22, 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2006.01.007 · DOI
  27. Hirose, 1963, Chem. Phar. Bull. (Tokyo), 11, 531, 10.1248/cpb.11.531 · DOI
  28. Molnár-Perl, 1997, Chromatographia, 45, 321, 10.1007/BF02505578 · DOI
  29. Horváth, 1997, Chromatographia, 45, 28, 10.1007/BF02505579 · DOI
  30. Molnár-Perl, 1998, Chromatographia, 48, 101, 10.1007/BF02467525 · DOI
  31. Molnár-Perl, 1998, Chromatographia, 48, 111, 10.1007/BF02467526 · DOI
  32. Horváth, 1998, Chromatographia, 48, 120, 10.1007/BF02467527 · DOI
  33. Boldizsár, 1998, Chromatographia, 47, 413, 10.1007/BF02466472 · DOI
  34. Molnár-Perl, 1999, J. Chromatogr. A, 847, 93
  35. Molnár-Perl, 2000, Chromatographia, 51, S-227, 10.1007/BF02492811 · DOI
  36. Molnár-Perl, 2000, J. Chromatogr. A, 891, 1, 10.1016/S0021-9673(00)00598-7 · DOI
  37. Füzfai, 2004, Chromatographia, 60, S145, 10.1365/s10337-004-0236-6 · DOI
  38. Füzfai, 2004, J. Agr. Food Chem., 52, 7444, 10.1021/jf040118p · DOI
  39. Molnár-Perl, 2005, J. Chromatogr. A, 1073, 201, 10.1016/j.chroma.2004.10.068 · DOI
  40. Kakasy, 2006, Chromatographia, 63, 17, 10.1365/s10337-006-0741-x · DOI
  41. Sanz, 2002, Chromatographia, 56, 617, 10.1007/BF02497679 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Boldizsár, I., Szűcs, Z., Füzfai, Z., & Molnár-Perl, I.
Affiliations
Eötvös Loránd University (HU)
Corresponding author
Molnár-Perl, I.
Venue
Journal of Chromatography A
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-11
Volume
1133
Issue
1-2
Pages
259-274
ISSN
0021-9673 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2010206204
Cited by
73
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
7.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Chromatography A (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Magyar Tudományos Akadémia
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Phytochemistry and biological activity of medicinal plants
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Chromatography in Natural Products
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Traditional Chinese Medicine Analysis
Keywords
madder root, Rubia tinctorum, anthraquinone glycosides, anthraquinones, purpurin, alizarin, lucidin, nordamnacanthal, carboxylic acids, sugar, acid hydrolysis, trifluoroacetic acid, enzymatic hydrolysis, quantification, reproducibility, trimethylsilyl derivatives
MeSH terms
Anthraquinones, Chromatography, Gas, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Reproducibility of Results, Molecular Structure, Plant Roots, Rubia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review