首页|土茯苓与红色木质土茯苓的鉴别与研究

土茯苓与红色木质土茯苓的鉴别与研究

扫码查看
目的:对比土茯苓与红色木质土茯苓的性状和显微鉴别、薄层色谱、红外图谱及高效液相色谱指纹图谱,分析二者质量差异.方法:观察两种土茯苓性状鉴别、横切面鉴别、水试鉴别、粉末显微鉴别及薄层色谱、红外色谱,并采用HPLC法测定落新妇苷含量.结果:土茯苓与红色木质土茯苓的性状和显微鉴别有明显不同;水试鉴别显示土茯苓水溶液始终透明,红色木质土茯苓水溶液始终浑浊不透明;两者薄层色谱、红外图谱及高效液相色谱指纹图谱均存在明显差异.结论:土茯苓断面色泽深,淀粉粒较少,水浸液黏性稍差,落新妇苷含量较高,与红色木质土茯苓比较差异显著,本研究结果对土茯苓质量评价有一定参考作用.
Identification and Study of Tufuling and Red Woody Tufuling
Objective:To analyze the quality difference between Tufuling(smilacis glabrae rhizoma)and red woody Tufuling by comparing the character,microscopic identification,TLC,infrared chromatography and HPLC fingerprint.Methods:The character identification,cross section identification,water test identification,powder microscopic identification,TLC,infrared chromatography of two kinds of the herbs were observed,and HPLC was adopted to detect the contents of astilbin.Results:The property and microscopic identification of Tufuling and red woody Tufuling were noticeably different;the water test identification showed that the aqueous solution of Tufuling was always transparent,while the aqueous solution of red woody Tufuling was always turbid and opaque;the differences existed in TLC,infrared chromatography and HPLC fingerprint of both drugs.Conclusion:Tufuling section had a darker colour,fewer starch grains,slightly lower viscosity of water infusion and higher content of astilbin,which were significantly different from each other and were useful as references for the quality evaluation of Tufuling.

Tufulingred woody Tufulingmicroscopic identificationthin-layer chromatographyhigh performance liquid chromatography

黄义纯、谭本仁、李晓华、陈华龙、肖斌、赖颖强、徐晓梅

展开 >

韶关市食品药品检验所,广东 韶关 512028

汕头大学医学院附属粤北人民医院,广东 韶关 512026

土茯苓 红色木质土茯苓 显微鉴别 薄层色谱 高效液相色谱法

2020年度广东省中医药局科研项目

20202195

2024

西部中医药
甘肃中医药研究院

西部中医药

CSTPCD
影响因子:0.98
ISSN:1004-6852
年,卷(期):2024.37(5)
  • 4