文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：HPLC指纹图谱结合化学模式识别的盘叶金银花及金银花质量评价

英文题名：HPLC Fingerprint Combined with Chemical Pattern Recognition for Quality Evaluation of Lonicerae Tragophyllae Flos and Lonicerae Japonicae Flos

作者：金月[1];梁艳[2];徐杰[2];贾国芳[3];靳子明[1];史巧霞[1]

第一作者：金月

机构：[1]甘肃中医药大学附属医院靳子明全国老药工传承工作室,甘肃兰州730020;[2]甘肃省药品监督管理局审核查验中心(甘肃省疫苗检查中心),甘肃兰州730020;[3]嘉峪关市食品药品和医疗器械检验检测中心,甘肃嘉峪关735100

第一机构：甘肃中医药大学第二附属医院

年份：2025

卷号：44

期号：8

起止页码：19

中文期刊名：中国野生植物资源

外文期刊名：Chinese Wild Plant Resources

基金：国家自然基金项目(82360944);甘肃省自然科学基金(24JRRA1033);甘肃省药品科研项目(2022GSMPA0073);甘肃省中药炮制传承基地建设项目(2015);甘肃中医药大学附属医院科研项目(gzfy-2021-07)。

语种：中文

中文关键词：盘叶金银花;金银花;指纹图谱;聚类分析;偏最小二乘法-判别分析

外文关键词：Lonicerae Tragophyllae Flos;Lonicerae Japonicae Flos;Fingerprint spectrum;Cluster analysis;Orthogonal partial least squares-discriminant analysis

摘要：目的:建立盘叶金银花与金银花HPLC指纹图谱并进行对比研究,比较不同花期及干燥方式的异同,为盘叶金银花和金银花的质量评价提供依据。方法:利用HPLC法建立盘叶金银花与金银花的指纹图谱,通过相似度评价结合聚类分析(CA)和正交偏最小二乘法-判别分析(OPLS-DA),系统比较两者在不同花期及干燥方式下的成分含量差异。结果:指纹图谱共标定10个色谱共有峰,通过CA分析分为2类。OPLS-DA结果表明,盘叶金银花与金银花药材存在明显差异,木犀草苷(9号峰)、异绿原酸A(10号峰)、4号峰及莫诺苷(3号峰)可作为区分二者的特征性成分,CA、OPLS-DA两种分析方法所得结论基本一致。不同花期、不同干燥方式样品中指标性成分含量对比研究结果表明,不同花期金银花的异绿原酸A含量呈现显著性差异,不同花期盘叶金银花样本中新绿原酸等5种成分含量也呈现显著性差异;不同干燥方式金银花、盘叶金银花样本中新绿原酸等6种成分含量均呈现出显著性差异。结论:所建立的盘叶金银花与金银花HPLC指纹图谱和化学模式识别等评价方法可为判别及评价盘叶金银花与金银花质量提供依据。
Objective:To establish and compare HPLC fingerprint profiles of Lonicerae Tragophyllae Flos(LTF)and Lonicerae Japonicae Flos(LJF),analyze chemical variations across different flowering stages and drying methods,and provide a scientific basis for quality evaluation.Methods:HPLC was employed to establish the fingerprints of LTF and LJF.Combined with similarity evaluation,cluster analysis(CA)and orthogonal partial least squares-discriminant analysis(OPLS-DA)were applied to systematically compare the differences in chemical component contents between the two species under different flowering stages and drying methods.Results:A total of 10 common chromatographic peaks were identified in the fingerprints,and the samples were classified into 2 categories by CA.OPLS-DA revealed significant differences between LTF and LJF,and the chromatographic peaks that could distinguish the two were luteoloside(peak 9),isochlorogenic acid A(peak 10),peak 4,and morroniside(peak 3).The conclusions from the analysis of two methods were basically consistent.Comparative analysis revealed that the content of isochlorogenic acid A in LJF exhibited significant differences across various flowering stages.Similarly,five constituents including neochlorogenic acid in LTF samples from different flowering periods also showed significant variations.Furthermore,under different drying methods,both LJF and LTF samples demonstrated significant differences in the contents of neochlorogenic acid and five other constituents.Conclusions:The established HPLC fingerprints and chemical pattern recognition evaluation methods for LTF and LJF could provide a basis for distinguishing and evaluating the quality of these two species.