| Structure Identification: |
| Pharmacognosy Journal, 2013 , 5 (6) :259-264. | | Development of HPTLC method for estimation of piperine, guggulsterone E and Z in polyherbal formulation[Reference: WebLink] | The different batches of formulation were prepared in laboratory by using authenticated raw material and were subjected to various physical and chemical evaluations. Then the prepared formulation and three commercial formulations were investigated for the qualitative and quantitative estimation of mentioned constituents.
METHODS AND RESULTS:
The methanolic extract of all formulations were quantified by using HPTLC studies. Linear regression data for the calibration curves of standards viz. piperine, guggulsterone E and Z showed a good linear relationship over a concentration range of 0.06–0.14 μg/spot, 2.5–17.5 μg/spot, 5–30 μg/spot respectively with the correlation coefficient of 0.99085, 0.99847, 0.9990 respectively and thus exhibits good linearity between concentration and area. The content of guggulsterone E (14.68 %w/w, 13.05 %w/w, 6.36 %w/w, 14.36 %w/w); guggulsterone Z (31.81 %w/w, 26.95 %w/w, 11.62 %w/w, 23.86 %w/w); and piperine (0.068 %w/w, 0.0150 %w/w, 0.321 %w/w, 0.0375 %w/w) were found in TF, TN, TM, TP prepared and three marketed formulation respectively.
CONCLUSIONS:
The proposed HPTLC method was found to be rapid, simple and linear for quantitative estimation of piperine, Guggulsterone E&Z in different formulations and extracts. |
|
Cell. 2018 Jan 11;172(1-2):249-261.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.12.019.IF=36.216(2019)
Cell Metab. 2020 Mar 3;31(3):534-548.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2020.01.002.IF=22.415(2019)
Mol Cell. 2017 Nov 16;68(4):673-685.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.10.022.IF=14.548(2019)
ACS Nano. 2018 Apr 24;12(4): 3385-3396. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.7b08969.IF=13.903(2019)
Nature Plants. 2016 Dec 22;3: 16206. doi: 10.1038/nplants.2016.205.IF=13.297(2019)
Sci Adv. 2018 Oct 24;4(10): eaat6994. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aat6994.IF=12.804(2019)