Simultaneous densitometric determination of β-sitosterol and lupeol through validated HPTLC method in different plant parts of Uraria picta (Jacq.) Desv. ex DC. – A dashmool species

• Autorzy: Saxena Hari Om , Parihar Samiksha , Pawar Ganesh , Rao G. Rajeshwar

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1556/1326.2022.01018

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

β-sitosterol (BS) and lupeol (LU) exhibit a number of biological activities and are the important bioactive marker compounds in pharmaceutical science. In the present study, a simple, precise, accurate and validated high performance thin layer chromatographic (HPTLC) method was developed for simultaneous quantification of these two compounds in leaves, stem and roots of Uraria picta, a critically endangered medicinal plant and one of the important constituents of ten plants ayurvedic formulation called Dashmoola. Standards and test samples were applied on TLC aluminum plate precoated with 0.2 mm layer of silica gel 60F254. The plate was run in a twin glass chamber comprising toluene: methanol: chloroform (8:1:1, v/v/v) as a mobile phase. The plates were immersed in anisaldehyde-sulfuric reagent and then heated at 105 °C for 5 min in CAMAG TLC plate heater for appearance of bands. Densitometric scanning was performed at λ_max = 525 nm using tungsten light source in CAMAG TLC Scanner4 armed with WinCATS software. R_F values of BS and LU standards and those of test samples were found to be 0.53 ± 0.01 and 0.63 ± 0.01 respectively. The method was further validated by following the International Conference of Harmonization (ICH) guidelines. For BS and LU, the linear regression data for the calibration plots revealed a satisfactory linear association with r² = 0.995 and 0.998, respectively. Linear range for both BS and LU was 200–600 ng/band. Accuracy of the method was evaluated by performing recovery study at three different levels by standard addition methods with an average recovery of 99.86% and 101.07%. The results revealed that the leaf samples of U. picta contained highest concentration of BS (0.150 ± 0.02%) while its root samples confined the highest concentration of LU (0.149 ± 0.01%). The developed method can be applied for routine and quality control analysis in different herbal formulations containing U. picta species.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Uraria picta; β-sitosterol; lupeol; HPTLC; method validation

• Wydawca: University of Silesia in Katowice ; Akademiai Kiado
• Czasopismo: Acta Chromatographica
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: Vol. 35, no. 1
• Strony: 99--105
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 39 poz., tab., rys., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Saxena Hari Om

• Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur (M.P.), 482021, India

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7239-9880

autor

Parihar Samiksha

• Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur (M.P.), 482021, India

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3098-2618

autor

Pawar Ganesh

• Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur (M.P.), 482021, India

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4505-9845

autor

Rao G. Rajeshwar

• Tropical Forest Research Institute, Jabalpur (M.P.), 482021, India

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8153-882X

Bibliografia

• 1. Sastri, B. N. The wealth of India. A dictionary Indian raw Mater. Ind. Prod. 1962, 6, 21–30, Council of Scientific & Industrial Research: New Delhi, India.
• 2. Hooker, J. D. The Flora of British India, Vol. 1; Reeve & Co.: London, 1872.
• 3. Kirtikar, K. R.; Basu, B. D. Indian Medicinal Plants, Vol. 2; Lalit Mohan Publication: Allahabad, 1935; pp 1347–8.
• 4. Yusuf, M.; Chowdhury, J. U.; Wahab, M. A.; Begum, J. Medical Plants of Bangladesh; Bangladesh Council of Scientific and Industrial Research: Dhaka, 1994; pp 73.
• 5. McNeill, J. International code of botanical nomenclature. In Seventeenth International Botanical Congress Vienna; Ruggell Liechtenstein: Austria, Vol. 568, 2005.
• 6. Ohashi, H.; Iokawa, Y. Taiwania 2007, 52, 177–83.
• 7. Yadav, A. K.; Yadav, D.; Shanker, K.; Verma, R. K.; Saxena, A. K.; Gupta, M. M. Chromatographia 2009, 69, 653–8.
• 8. Kumar, B.; Prasad, P.; Mehdi, J.; Gupta, A.; Shanker, K.; Singh, M.; Gautam, R.; Yadav, H. K. J. Appl. Res. Med. Aromat. Plants. 2020, 16, 100242.
• 9. Mane, J. D.; Nagore, S.; Chitlange Asian J. Pharm. Clin. Res., 2021, 40–4.
• 10. Bhusare, B. P.; Ahire, M. L.; John, C. K.; Nikam, T. D. J. Phytol. 2021, 13, 41–7.
• 11. Pathak, J. M.; Krishnamurthy, R.; Chandorkar, M. S.; Gulkari, V. D.; Gupta, R. Indian J. Hortic. 2005, 62, 378–84.
• 12. Khare, C. P. Indian Medicinal Plants; An Illustrated Dictionary; Springer: Berlin, 2007; pp 699–700.
• 13. Rahman, M. M.; Gibbons, S.; Gray, A. I. Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 1692–7.
• 14. Igboechi, A. C.; Osazuwa, E. O.; Igwe, U. E. J. Ethnopharmacol 1989, 26, 293–8.
• 15. Manonmani, S.; Vishwanathan, V. P.; Subramanian, S.; Govindasamy, S. Indian J. Pharmacol. 1995, 27, 101.
• 16. Occhiuto, F.; Limardi, F. Phytother Res. 1994, 8, 153–6.
• 17. Occhiuto, F.; Circosta, C.; de Pasquale, A.; Briguglio, F. Phytother Res. 1990, 4, 118–20.
• 18. Tandon, N.; Sharma, M.; Saraswathy, A.; KN, S. K.; Shakila, R. Quality Standards of Indian Medicinal Plants; Medicinal Plants Unit, Vol. 10; ICMR: New Delhi, 2010; pp 340–5.
• 19. Amole, O. O.; Mofomosara, S. H.; Ekene, O. A. Afr. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2010, 4, 151–7.
• 20. Patel, B. D.; Kamariya, Y. H.; Patel, M. B. Pharmacologyonline 2011, 2, 134–45.
• 21. Garg, N.; Garg, M.; Maan, A. S.; Sandhu, B. S.; Mittal, S.; Goyal, S. J. Res. Opin. 2012, 2, 1–5.
• 22. Singh, N. K. Int. J. Green. Pharm. 2017, 11, S166–73.
• 23. Ainslie, J. R. A List of Plants Used in Native Medicine in Nigeria. Institute Paper 7; Imperial Forestry Institute, University of Oxford: Oxford, 1937.
• 24. Chhipa, A. S.; Baksi, R.; Nivsarkar, M. Future J. Pharm. Sci. 2021, 7, 1–12.
• 25. Kirtikar, K. R.; Basu, B. D. Indian Medicinal Plants; International Book Publishers: Dehradun, India, 1993.
• 26. Prasad, G. U.; Sankaran, P. S.; Pande, P. J. Indian J. Med. Res. 1965, 53, 645–50.
• 27. Saxena, H. O.; Soni, A.; Mohammad, N.; Choubey, S. K. J. Chem. Pharm. Res. 2014, 6, 756–60.
• 28. Ambavade, S. D.; Misar, A. V.; Ambavade, P. D. Orient. Pharm. Exp. Med. 2014, 14, 193–211.
• 29. Ahmad, H.; Sehgal, S.; Mishra, A.; Rajiv, G.; Shubhini, S. A. Phcog. J. 2012, 4, 45–55.
• 30. Margareth, B. C. G.; Miranda, J. S. Int. J. Biomed. Pharm. Sci. 2009, 3, 46–66.
• 31. Saxena, H. O.; Mohan, B.; Kakkar, A.; Pawar, G. Curr. Tradit. Med. 2017, 3, 29–37.
• 32. Joshi, D. D.; Uniyal, R. C. Int. J. Green. Pharm. 2008, 2, 158–61.
• 33. Mohan, B.; Saxena, H. O.; Parihar, S.; Kakkar, A. Pharma Innovation 2020, 9, 463–7.
• 34. ICH Harmonized Tripartite Guideline Validation of analytical procedures: text and methodology Q2 (R1). In International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, 2005.
• 35. Qiao, C. F.; Han, Q. B.; Song, J. Z.; Mo, S. F.; Kong, L. D.; Kung, H. F.; Xu, H.X. J. Sep. Sci. 2007, 30, 813–8.
• 36. Wani, M. S.; Gupta, R. C.; Pradhan, S. K.; Munshi, A. H. JPC-J Planar Chromat. 2018, 31, 220–9.
• 37. Reich, E.; Schibli, A.; DeBatt, A. J. AOAC Int. 2008, 91, 13–20.
• 38. Kojima, H.; Sato, N.; Hatano, A.; Ogura, H. Phytochemistry 1990, 29, 2351–5.
• 39. Parsons, I.C. Phytochemical Studies on Some Species of the Allied Rutaceae and Burseraceae. Ph.D. Thesis; University of Strathclyde: U.K, 1991.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MEiN, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2022-2023).