Rapid Quantification of Evodiamine and Rutae?carpine in Evodia Rutaecarpa(Juss.)Benth. Using Supercritical Fluid Chromatography
BAI Guo-yu,DAI Ying-ping,ZHUZHAO Jing-tao,LI Kai-lun,JIANG Wen-jia,XU Dong-yue,FU Qing,JIN Yu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.19969/j.fxcsxb.21123002
2022-01-01
Abstract:This study proved the feasibility of using supercritical fluid chromatography(SFC)in rapid quantification of evodiamine and rutaecarpine in Evodia rutaecarpa(Juss. )Benth.(E. rutaecarpa). The two alkaloids were firstly ex?tracted by supercritical fluid extraction(SFE). As a result, the developed SFE conditions were as follows, sample (120-200 mesh)/cellulose acetate=1:1, 20％ethanol as modifier, 40℃, 25 MPa and the CO2 flow rate of 8 mL/min.The developed SFC method was carried out on a 2-EP column,with methanol as modifier at a flow rate of 1. 4 mL/min, a column temperature of 35℃and a back pressure of 15 MPa. The baseline separation of evodiamine and rutaecarpine was completed within 6 min.After verification,the SFC method was confirmed to be linear with correla?tion coefficients(r2) of 0. 9998, good precision(RSD below 0. 50％) and accuracy(recoveries of 102％-109％). Meanwhile,limits of detection(LODs)and limits of quantitation(LOQs)for evodiamine were 1. 00 and 3. 33μg/mL, while LOD and LOQ for rutaecarpine were 0. 95 and 3. 17μg/mL,respectively.Finally,the method was applied to the determination of contents of evodiamine and rutaecarpine in ten E. rutaecarpa samples from 4 areas. The total content of target alkaloids accounted 2. 95％for Guangdong, 1, 0. 51％for Guangdong, 2, 1. 27％for Guizhou, 3, 1. 00％for Hunan,4,0. 93％for Hunan,5,1. 81％for Jiangxi,6,0. 73％for Jiangxi,7,0. 58％for Jiangxi,8, 0. 41％for Jiangxi,9 and 0. 36％for Jiangxi,10.Although the ten samples all meet the requirements for the Chinese Pharmacopoeia, the origin difference of sample quality is very obvious, and the samples from the same place also have differences. In addition, the developed method was compared with the Pharmacopoeia method(2020 Edition). The results of content determination by the two methods were similar(1. 27％by SFC vs.1. 12％by Pharmacopoeia), while the time required by SFC(6 min)was significantly shorter than that by the Pharmacopoeia method(25 min). This work showed the potential of SFC in the fast quantification of active components in traditional Chinese medicines .