Paper · 1998 · PubMed

[A reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatographic method for the determination of pinoresinol diglucopyranoside in Eucommia Ulmoides Oliv].

X Qi; S Zhang

3
claims
3
verbatim quotes
3
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatographic method for the determination of (+)-pinoresinol-di-O-beta-D-glucopyranoside in the bark of Eucommia Ulmoides was established. The air-dried bark of E. Ulmoides was ground into powder and extracted continuously with methanol. The extract was evaporated under reduced pressure, then suspended in water. This suspension being subjected to column chromatography was eluted successively with water, 30%, 50% and 90% aqueous solution of ethanol. The 30% EtOH eluate was concentrated and then injected into HPLC system. The conditions of HPLC were: YWG-C18 column (250 mm x 4.6 mm i.d. 10 microns); 28%(V/V) methanol mobile phase and UV detector at 232 nm. The calibration curve was linear in the range of 0.068 microgram-0.68 microgram of(+)-pinoresinol-di-O-beta-D-glucopyranoside with correlation coefficient of 0.9999. The coefficient of variation and average recovery were 0.50%-0.74% (n = 5) and 99.22% (n = 3) respectively.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The calibration curve was linear from 0.068 to 0.68 microgram with correlation coefficient 0.9999.

Outcome
calibration curvee0
Value
0.068 microgram-0.68 micrograme0
Qualifier
correlation coefficient of 0.9999e0

Verbatim

e0

“The calibration curve was linear in the range of 0.068 microgram-0.68 microgram of(+)-pinoresinol-di-O-beta-D-glucopyranoside with correlation coefficient of 0.9999.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 707–872 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The method had a coefficient of variation of 0.50%-0.74%.

Outcome
coefficient of variatione0
Value
0.50%-0.74%e0

Verbatim

e0

“The coefficient of variation and average recovery were 0.50%-0.74% (n = 5) and 99.22% (n = 3) respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–980 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The method had average recovery of 99.22%.

Outcome
average recoverye0
Value
99.22%e0

Verbatim

e0

“The coefficient of variation and average recovery were 0.50%-0.74% (n = 5) and 99.22% (n = 3) respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–980 · show in text ↑