Authors:
Wenqing LiSchool of Food Science and Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510640, PR China

Search for other papers by Wenqing Li in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Zhengming QianCollege of Medical Imaging Laboratory and Rehabilitation, Xiangnan University, Chenzhou, 423000, PR China
Dongguan HEC Cordyceps R&D Co., LTD, Dongguan, Guangdong, 523850, PR China

Search for other papers by Zhengming Qian in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8467-2941
,
Yuansheng ZouDongguan HEC Cordyceps R&D Co., LTD, Dongguan, Guangdong, 523850, PR China

Search for other papers by Yuansheng Zou in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Guoying TanDongguan HEC Cordyceps R&D Co., LTD, Dongguan, Guangdong, 523850, PR China

Search for other papers by Guoying Tan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Wenjia LiDongguan HEC Cordyceps R&D Co., LTD, Dongguan, Guangdong, 523850, PR China

Search for other papers by Wenjia Li in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Qinggui LeiDongguan HEC Cordyceps R&D Co., LTD, Dongguan, Guangdong, 523850, PR China

Search for other papers by Qinggui Lei in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Runfeng LiState Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, 510000, PR China

Search for other papers by Runfeng Li in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Dongming LanSchool of Food Science and Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510640, PR China

Search for other papers by Dongming Lan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2988-4703
Open access

Abstract

A simple, rapid, sensitive and eco-friendly liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method was developed for simultaneous determination of free cordycepin (3′-deoxyadenosine) and isocordycepin (2′-deoxyadenosine) in 10 kinds of Cordyceps samples. The samples were prepared by ultrasonic extraction at 75 °C for 30 min with boiling water as the extraction solvent. The LC separation was performed on an Agilent poroshell 120 SB-Aq C18 column (3.0 × 50 mm, 2.7 μm) in isocratic mode with an eco-friendly mobile phase (2% ethanol containing 0.2% acetic acid) at a flow rate of 0.6 mL min−1, and detected by MS/MS in positive mode with multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). The developed method showed good linearity (r > 0.9990), sensitivity (LODs = 0.04 pg, LOQ = 0.1 pg), precision (RSD ≤ 3.8%) and stability (RSD ≤ 3.6%). The recoveries of developed method were 94.4–109.5% (RSD ≤ 5.5%). Compared with reported methods, the current method was rapid (less than 35% analytical time), sensitive (more than 5 folds), and eco-friendly (less than 10 μL harmful organic solvent). 10 different kinds of Cordyceps samples (40 batches) were tested by the developed method. Codycepin was only found in Cordyceps millitaris and C. millitaris fruiting body, and isocordycepin was detected in Cordyceps sinensis and other 6 Cordyceps samples. The developed method would be an improved method for the quality evaluation of Cordyceps samples.

Abstract

A simple, rapid, sensitive and eco-friendly liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method was developed for simultaneous determination of free cordycepin (3′-deoxyadenosine) and isocordycepin (2′-deoxyadenosine) in 10 kinds of Cordyceps samples. The samples were prepared by ultrasonic extraction at 75 °C for 30 min with boiling water as the extraction solvent. The LC separation was performed on an Agilent poroshell 120 SB-Aq C18 column (3.0 × 50 mm, 2.7 μm) in isocratic mode with an eco-friendly mobile phase (2% ethanol containing 0.2% acetic acid) at a flow rate of 0.6 mL min−1, and detected by MS/MS in positive mode with multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). The developed method showed good linearity (r > 0.9990), sensitivity (LODs = 0.04 pg, LOQ = 0.1 pg), precision (RSD ≤ 3.8%) and stability (RSD ≤ 3.6%). The recoveries of developed method were 94.4–109.5% (RSD ≤ 5.5%). Compared with reported methods, the current method was rapid (less than 35% analytical time), sensitive (more than 5 folds), and eco-friendly (less than 10 μL harmful organic solvent). 10 different kinds of Cordyceps samples (40 batches) were tested by the developed method. Codycepin was only found in Cordyceps millitaris and C. millitaris fruiting body, and isocordycepin was detected in Cordyceps sinensis and other 6 Cordyceps samples. The developed method would be an improved method for the quality evaluation of Cordyceps samples.

Introduction

Cordyceps sinensis, a famous traditional Chinese medicine, is a parasitic fungus growing on the larvae of Hepialidae caterpillar. It has been used to tonify the kidney, replenish the lung, stanch bleeding, and resolve phlegm for thousands of years [1]. Nucleosides are one of the main bioactive constituents in it [2, 3]. Cordycepin (3′-deoxyadenosine), one of the nucleosides, has a variety of biological activities, including anti-cancer [4], anti-inflammatory [5] and liver protective activities [6]. In previous reports, cordycepin was always believed as the important active component in C. sinensis [7–10]. However, the genome research showed that cordycepin could not be produced by C. sinensis for lack of the relevant genes [11]. A recent analytical report indicated that cordycepin could not be detected in C. sinensis and the reported cordycepin chromatographic peak in previous literatures might be isocordycepin (2′-deoxyadenosine) [12]. Thus, the content of cordycepin in C. sinensis needs to be confirmed by a more sensitive and distinctive method.

Up to now, only two high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) methods, online solid-phase extraction (SPE)- HPLC and HPLC with fluorescence detection (HPLC-FD) methods, were developed for the determination of cordycepin and isocordycepin in C. sinensis [12, 13]. To solve the problem of low sensitivity of traditional HPLC, online SPE and derivatization with FD were employed, respectively. However, these pretreatment operations made the analytical process complex. Moreover, the reported methods were time-consuming and consumed harmful organic solvents. For example, the online SPE-HPLC method took 105 min and consumed methanol, the HPLC-FD method took more than 1,600 min and consumed methanol, acetonitrile, chloroacetaldehyde and so on. In addition, the tested Cordyceps samples in the reported methods were limited. Four kinds of Cordyceps samples, including C. sinensis, Hirsutella sinensis, Cordyceps militaris and Cordyceps chanhua were analyzed by SPE-HPLC. Three kinds of Cordyceps samples, including C. sinensis, C. militaris and C. militaris fruiting body were tested by HPLC-FD. The distribution of cordycepin and isocordycepin in other kinds of Cordyceps samples is still unclear. Nowadays, the rapid and green HPLC method has gained increasing attention from researchers in analytical chemistry [14, 15]. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a simple, sensitive, rapid, and green analytical method to improve the test method of cordycepin and isocordycepin in C. sinensis and other Cordyceps samples.

Liquid chromatography tandem mass (LC-MS/MS), which can provide high selectivity and short analysis time, has been employed as a useful tool for the determination of trace components in herbal medicines [16, 17]. To the best of our knowledge, there are no reports on simultaneous determination of cordycepin and isocordycepin in C. sinensis and its substitutes by LC-MS/MS. Ethanol and water are environmentally favourable and non-toxic solvents [18].

In the current experiment, a simple, rapid, and sensitive LC–MS/MS method for simultaneous determination of cordycepin and isocordycepin in Cordyceps was developed with ethanol and water. The established method was applied in the analysis of 40 batches of samples (including 10 different kinds of Cordyceps), and the contents of cordycepin and isocordycepin in different samples were compared.

Experimental

Chemicals and reagents

Cordycepin (>98%) was purchased from Winherb (Shanghai, China). Isocordycepin (99.87%) was purchased from Aladdin (Shanghai, China). Acetic acid (LC-MS grade) was obtained from Aladdin (Shanghai, China). Ethanol (HPLC grade) was obtained from Energy-chemical (Shanghai, China). The deionized water was purified by Milli-Q purification system (Millipore, USA).

Materials

40 batches of Cordyceps samples (10 different kinds of Cordyceps, Fig. 1), including 10 batches of cultured C. sinensis, 10 batches of natural C. sinensis, 3 batches of H. sinensis, 3 batches of C. militaris fruiting body, 3 batches of C. militaris, 3 batches of C. chanhua, 2 batches of Cordyceps haukesii, 2 batches of Cordyceps liangshanensis, 2 batches of Cordyceps gracilis and 2 batches of Paecilomyces hepiali were collected from different areas of China. The sample information was listed in (Table 1). The authenticity of all samples were identified by Dr Qian. Voucher specimens were deposited at the Key Laboratory of State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Dongguan, Guangdong.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

The pictures of Cordyceps samples

Citation: Acta Chromatographica 2022; 10.1556/1326.2022.01094

Table 1.

The contents of analytes in samples

SampleNo.OriginContent (μg g−1)SampleNo.OriginContent (μg g−1)
CordycepinIsocordycepinCordycepinIsocordycepin
Cultured

Cordyceps sinensis
S1Hubei-0.63Hirsutella sinensisS21Zhejiang-2.03
S2Hubei-1.28S22Hubei-3.99
S3Hubei-1.86S23Hubei-4.10
S4Hubei-1.26Cordyceps militaris

fruiting body
S24Zhejiang863.68-
S5Hubei-1.99S25Guangdong1567.93-
S6Hubei-0.45S26Guangdong958.43-
S7Hubei-0.43C. militarisS27Liaoning4218.29-
S8Hubei-2.69S28Heilongjiang3522.59-
S9Hubei-1.80S29Jilin2623.30-
S10Hubei-2.13Cordyceps chanhuaS30Jiangxi-12.62
Natural

C. sinensis
S11Qinghai-0.98S31Jiangxi-15.52
S12Qinghai-1.37S32Jiangxi-10.78
S13Qinghai-0.95Cordyceps haukesiiS33Guizhou-13.83
S14Tibet-1.11S34Guizhou-9.59
S15Tibet-0.81Cordyceps liangshanensisS35Sichuan-8.44
S16Tibet-1.04S36Sichuan-5.67
S17Tibet-1.40Cordyceps gracilisS37Xinjiang;-3.54
S18Sichuan-1.29S38Kazakh-1.60
S19Sichuan-0.67Paecilomyces hepialiS39Jiangxi-3.95
S20Sichuan-1.11S40Jiangxi-1.63

Preparation of standard solutions

The stock standard solution of cordycepin (499.3 μg mL−1) and isocordycepin (509.1 μg mL−1) was prepared with deionized water and further diluted with deionized water to obtain a series of working solutions. The standard solutions were kept at 4 °C.

Preparation of sample solution

The sample was homogeneously powdered in a mill, passed through a 65 mesh sieve, and then extracted by boiling water extraction (BWE). The following procedure was modified from a literature [19]. 0.1 g powdered sample and 10.0 mL boiling water (95 °C–97 °C) were added into a conical flask. The mixture was extracted ultrasonically (33 kHz, 250 W) at 75 °C for 30 min, and then cooled at room temperature; water was subsequently added to compensate for the lost weight. The final solution was filtered through a 0.22 µm membrane prior to LC-MS/MS analysis.

LC-MS/MS condition

The analysis was performed on an Agilent 1290 Infinity UPLC system (Agilent Technologies, USA) equipped with a binary pump, an auto-sampler, a column oven, and a Triple Quadrupole 6470 mass spectrometer (QQQ). The LC separation was performed on an Agilent poroshell 120 SB-Aq C18 column (3.0 × 50 mm, 2.7 µm) with 2% ethanol containing 0.2% acetic acid as the mobile phase at the flow rate of 0.6 mL min−1. The column temperature was maintained at 30 °C. The injection volume was 2 µL.

QQQ equipped with a Jet Stream electrospray ionization (ESI) source was operated in positive ionization mode with “multiple reaction monitoring” (MRM). MRM transition (252→136) (fragmentor voltage 70 V; collision energy 20 V) was employed for quantitative analysis and MRM transition (252→119) (fragmentor voltage 70 V; collision energy 40 V) was employed for validation; Other conditions were as follows: drying gas (N2) flow rate 10 L/min; drying gas temperature 350 °C; sheath gas flow 11 L min; sheath gas temperature 350 °C; nebulize 35 psi; capillary voltage 4.0 kV; dwell time 500 ms.

Method validation

The current method was validated for linearity, limit of quantification (LOQ), limit of detection (LOD), precision, accuracy, and stability according to Chinese Pharmacopoeia [20].

Linearity, LOQ and LOD

The stock standard solution was diluted to a series of concentrations: from 0.9986 to 99.86 ng mL−1 for cordycepin, from 1.018 to 101.8 ng mL−1 for isocordycepin. These solutions were analyzed for the evaluation of linearity. The calibration curve was constructed by plotting the mean peak area versus concentration. The LOQs and LODs were detected by injection of standard solutions and recorded as the corresponding mass which gave the signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios of 10 and 3, respectively.

Precision

The intra- and inter-day tests were used to assess the precision of the developed method. The intraday precision was determined by analyzing the standard solution in six replicates within one day. The interday precision was determined by analyzing the standard solution twice per day for three days. The relative standard deviation (RSD, %) was used as a measure of precision.

Recovery

The accuracy was evaluated by spiking known accurate quantities of cordycepin and isocordycepin into sample S1 in six replicates and then analyzed with the proposed procedure. The accuracy was expressed as recovery rate which was calculated as 100% × (found amount–original amount)/spiked amount.

Stability

The stability was assessed by analyzing the sample solution every two hours within 24 h, and the RSD of peak area was calculated.

Result and discussion

Optimization of extraction condition

Various extraction methods for analyzing nucleosides in Cordyceps have been reported [21, 22]. Ultrasonic extraction was the most common one. To be noted, different types of extraction solvent resulted in different extraction contents of nucleosides in the previous studies [23, 24]. Qian et al. reported that the adenosine content of C. sinensis extracted by ambient temperature water extraction (ATWE) was significantly higher than that extracted by boiling water extraction (BWE), and further study proved that adenosine triphosphate (ATP)/adenosine diphosphate (ADP)/adenosine monophosphate (AMP) could be transformed into adenosine, and adenosine could be transformed into inosine at ATWE condition [24]. Tian et al. reported that the content of isocordycepin in C. sinensis extracted by water was higher than that extracted by 80% methanol, which indicated that transformation might also exist in cordycepin and isocordycepin [12].

To obtain the suitable extraction condition of cordycepin and isocordycepin, the comparison of ATWE and BWE was carried out. Deoxyadenosine triphosphate (dATP), deoxyadenosine diphosphate (dADP), deoxyadenosine monophosphate (dAMP), isocordycepin, cordycepin and 2′-deoxyinosine were monitored. The comparison results of ATWE and BWE were listed in the supporting information. As shown in Figure S1, only dAMP and isocordycepin were detected in the two extraction solutions. The content of dAMP in ATWE solution was lower than BWE solution, while the content of isocordycepin in ATWE solution was higher than BWE solution. The results proved that in ATWE condition, dAMP would be transformed into isocordycepin, while the transformation could be inhibited in BWE condition. Thus, the BWE condition was used for the extraction of free cordycepin and isocordycepin from samples.

Optimization of LC-MS/MS condition

The cordycepin and isocordycepin, which were usually separated on a reverse phase column with a high ratio of water, were polar components [12, 25, 26]. In the literature, the LC separation of cordycepin and isocordycepin was operated on an Agilent ZORBAX SB-Aq (4.6 × 150 mm, 5 μm) column, and 15 min were consumed [12]. Poroshell column, which consists of silica particles with a fused core and a layer of porous silica coating, can provide rapid separation of compounds with low back pressure. To reduce the separation time and solvent consumption, a smaller internal diameter and smaller particle size Agilent poroshell SB-Aq C18 column (3.0 × 50 mm, 2.7 μm) was utilized. To avoid the harmful organic solvent consumption, ethanol was selected as the organic mobile phase. Comparing 1%, 2%, and 4% ethanol, the 2% ethanol condition was chosen as the optimal condition because of the suitable compounds resolution and separation time. Two mobile phase additives (formic acid and acetic acid) were also compared. Acetic acid-ethanol system was selected for the better resolution. The flow rates of 0.5, 0.6, and 0.7 mL min−1 were tested, 0.6 mL min−1 was used for the better separation and shorter time. In addition, the different column temperatures (25, 30, and 35 °C) were compared, and the results showed that the higher column temperature could reduce the separation time, but too high temperature would decrease the resolution. Eventually, 30 °C was selected.

In the current study, the MRM mode of LC-MS/MS was used for detection two analytes. Cordycepin and isocordycepin could be easily ionized into protonated precursor ions ([M+H] +), thus the positive mode was used. After elimination of ribodesose residues, the precursor ions (m/z 252) of cordycepin and isocordycepin produced diagnostic product ions (DPIs) associated with adenine (m/z 136) (Fig. 2), MRM transition (252→136) was picked as the quantitative ions. To obtain a good sensitivity, the collision energy (40, 30, 20, 10 V) was optimized. According to the relative response abundance, 20 V was selected. To ensure the peak was correct, the second intensity of DPIs (m/z 119), which was produced by elimination of NH3 from adenine (Fig. 2), was picked for validation; the collision energy was optimized and 40 V was selected.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

The MS spectra and fragmentation pathways for cordycepin (A) and isocordycepin (B)

Citation: Acta Chromatographica 2022; 10.1556/1326.2022.01094

Method validation

The calibration curve of cordycepin was y = 7904.17x−4078.36 (r = 0.9996) within the tested range (0.9986–99.86 ng ml−1), of isocordycepin was y = 10351.58x−6918.81 (r = 0.9994) within tested range (1.018–101.8 ng ml−1), which indicated good linearity of the two compounds. The LODs for cordycepin and isocordycepin were 0.040 and 0.041 pg. The LOQs for cordycepin and isocordycepin were both 0.10 pg.

The RSDs of intra- and inter-day precision (n = 6) for cordycepin were 2.1% and 3.4%; The RSDs of intra- and inter-day precision (n = 6) for isocordycepin were 3.8% and 3.2%. The recoveries of cordycepin and isocordycepin (n = 6) were 101.2–105.4% (RSD = 1.6%), 94.4–109.5% (RSD = 5.5%), respectively. The RSDs of stability (24 h) for cordycepin and isocordycepin were 2.9% and 3.6%. The developed LC-MS method was sensitive and accurate for the determination of cordycepin and isocordycepin in Cordyceps samples.

Analysis of samples

The validated method was utilized to determine the contents of cordycepin and isocordcepin in different Cordyceps samples. The representative chromatograms of different Cordyceps were shown in (Fig. 3) and the results were listed in (Table 1).

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

The Chromatograms of Cordyceps samples: A. blank; B. STD; C. Cultured Cordyceps sinensis; D. Natural C. sinensis; E. Hirsutella sinensis; F. Cordyceps militaris fruiting body; G. Cordyceps militaris; H. Cordyceps chanhua; I. Cordyceps haukesii; J. Cordyceps liangshanensis; K. Cordyceps gracilis; L. Paecilomyces hepiali. 1. Cordycepin, 2. Isocordycepin

Citation: Acta Chromatographica 2022; 10.1556/1326.2022.01094

Cordycepin was only detected in Cordyceps millitaris and C. millitaris fruiting body samples. Isocordycepin was detected in C. sinensis, H. sinensis, C. chanhua, C. haukesii, C. liangshanensis, C. gracilis and Paecilomyces hepialid samples, while not detected in C. millitaris and C. millitaris fruiting body samples. This result was in line with the recent genome and chemical reports: C. millitaris could produce the cordycepin [9], while C. sinensis contain the isocordycepin [11, 12].

The contents of isocordycepin in cultured and natural C. sinensis were ranged from 0.43 to 2.69 μg g−1 and from 0.67 to 1.40 μg g−1, respectively. T test was applied to specify the difference between the content of isocordycepin in cultured and natural C. sinensis. P-value was obtained as 0.11, which revealed that there was no significant difference. Compared with previous studies, the contents of isocordycepin in C. sinensis of present experiment were lower [12, 13]. The reason may be that the contents of isocordycepin in previously reported methods included the free and transformed isocordycepin, while the present method only reflected the free isocordycepin. The contents of isocordycepin in H. sinensis, C. gracilis, and P. hepialid were similar to C. sinensis. The contents of isocordycepin in C. chanhua, C. haukesii, C. liangshanensis were slightly higher than C. sinensis. Interestingly, the contents of cordycepin in C. millitaris and C. millitaris fruiting body were significantly higher than the contents of isocordycepin in other Cordyceps samples. In addition, the contents of cordycepin in C. millitaris was higher than that in C. millitaris fruiting body, which might be caused by that cordycepin might be prone to be produced in the caterpillar than solid medium.

Comparison with reported LC methods

A comparison of the proposed method and the two reported methods for the determination of codycepin and isocordycepin in Cordyceps was exhibited in (Table 2). In terms of simplicity, the proposed method was much simpler than method 1 and method 2, because method 1 and method 2 needed extra online SPE and derivatization, respectively. In terms of analytical time, the proposed method was the fastest, which only consumed 35 min, including 30 min of sample extraction and 5 min of LC-MS separation. While method 1 consumed 1,695 min in total, including 1,680 min of sample preparation (extraction and derivatization) and 15 min HPLC-FD separation; method 2 took 105 min, including 90 min of sample extraction and 15 min of online SPE-HPLC separation. In terms of sensitivity, the proposed method was the best with LOD of 0.04 pg. Compared with method 2, the sensitivity was remarkably improved 12,300 folds; compared with method 1, the sensitivity was also improved 5 folds. In terms of eco-friendly, the developed method only consumed 6 μL acetic acid and 60 μL ethanol, while methods 1 and 2 both used harmful organic solvents, such as acetonitrile and methanol. In a word, the proposed method was a simple, rapid, sensitive, and eco-friendly method for the determination of cordycepin and isocordycepin in Cordyceps samples.

Table 2.

The reported LC method for simultaneous determination of codycepin and isocordycepin in Cordyceps

NoAnalystsSample preparationSample detectionTotal timegTotal organic solvent consumedhLODRef.
MethodsSolventsTimeOther stepsMethodsMobile phaseeTimef
11.adenosine

2.CORa

3.iCORb
SEc + derivatization20 mL

50% methanol
1,680 mincentrifugation, filtrationHPLC-FD15 mL

5% acetonitrile
15 min1,695 min10.75 mL methanol +acetonitrile0.21 pg[13]
21.COR 2.iCORSE+UEd100 mL water90 minfiltrationonline SPE-HPLC15 mL

9% methanol
15 min105 min1.35 mL methanol492 pg[12]
This work1.COR 2.iCORUE10 mL water (95–97 °C)30 minfiltrationLC-MS3 mL

2% ethanol
5 min35min0.06 mL ethanol0.04 pg/

a COR: cordycepin; b iCOR: isocordycepin; c SE: shaking extraction; d UE: ultrasonic extraction; e The mobile phase additives (<0.1 mL) were not reflected; f Other steps were not included in the total time. g Separation time was recorded as the retention time of codycepin and isocordycepin; h The derivatization reagent chloroacetaldehyde was not reflected.

Conclusion

In the current study, simultaneous determination of free codycepin and isocordycepin in Cordyceps samples was carried out by LC-MS/MS. 10 different kinds of Cordyceps samples (40 batches) were tested. Codycepin was only found in C. millitaris and C. millitaris fruiting body, while isocordycepin was contained in C. sinensis and other 6 kinds of Cordyceps samples. Compared with the reported methods, the developed LC-MS/MS method was simple, rapid, sensitive, and eco-friendly. The sensitivity was improved at least 5 folds, the analytical time was only 33%, and little harmful organic solvent was consumed (6 µL). The developed LC-MS/MS method was an improved analytical method for the determination of free cordycepin and isocordcrpin in Cordyceps samples.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and or publication of this article.

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the Dongguan Key Laboratory of Quality Research and Application of Traditional Chinese Medicines for Characteristic Industries (2021ZDB05) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81872765).

Supplementary material

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1556/1326.2022.01094.

References

  • 1.

    The Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Committee of the Chinese Pharmacopoeia, Beijing, 2015, Vol. 1, p. 115.

  • 2.

    Xiao, J. H.; Qi, Y.; Xiong, Q. Recent Pat. Biotechnol. 2013, 7, 153.

  • 3.

    Liu, Y.; Wang, J. H.; Wang, W. H.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X. L.; Han, C. C. Evid. Based Complement. Alternat. Med. 2015, 2015, 1.

  • 4.

    Yoon, S. Y.; Park, S. J.; Park, Y. J. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 3027.

  • 5.

    Tan, L. S.; Song, X. M. T.; Ren, Y. L.; Wang, M.; Guo, C. J.; Guo, D. L.; Gu, Y. C.; Li, Y. Z.; Cao, Z. X.; Deng, Y. Phytother. Res. 2021, 35, 1284.

  • 6.

    Gong, X. B.; Li, T. J.; Wan, R. Z.; Sha, L. Int. Immunopharmacol 2021, 91, 107173.

  • 7.

    Zong, S. Y.; Han, H.; Wang, B.; Li, N.; Dong, T. T. X.; Zhang, T.; Tsim, K. W. K. Molecules 2015, 20, 21816.

  • 8.

    Chen, Y. C.; Chen, Y. H.; Pan, B. S.; Chang, M. M.; Huang, B. M. J. Food Drug Anal. 2017, 25, 197.

  • 9.

    Nakamura, K.; Shinozuka, K.; Yoshikawa, N. J. Pharmacol. Sci. 2015, 127, 53.

  • 10.

    Lin, S.; Liu, Z. Q.; Xue, Y. P.; Baker, P. J.; Wu, H.; Xu, F.; Teng, Y. M.; Brathwaite, E.; Zheng, Y. G. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2016, 179, 633.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Xia, Y. L.; Luo, F. F.; Shang, Y. F.; Chen, P. L.; Lu, Y. Z.; Wang, C. S. Cell Chem. Biol 2017, 24, 1479.

  • 12.

    Tian, Y.; Wang, C. X.; Qian, Z. M.; Zhou, L.; Zhou, M. X.; Sun, W. Y.; Yao, X. S.; Li, W. J; Gao, H. China J. Chin. Mater. Med. 2017, 42, 1932.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Su, Y. X.; Li, P.; Zhang, H. S.; Lin, M. T.; Liu, W. Z.; Xu, R.; HuH. K.; Liu, Y. M. Anal. Methods 2019, 11, 4946.

  • 14.

    Qian, Z. M.; Wu, Z.; Li, C. H.; Tan, G. Y.; Hu, H. K.; Li, W. J. Anal. Methods 2020, 12, 3337.

  • 15.

    Núnez, O.; Gallart-Ayala, H.; Martins, C. P. B.; Lucci, P. J. Chromatogr. A. 2012, 1228, 298.

  • 16.

    He, L. F.; He, X. Y.; Liu, X. C.; Shi, W. J.; Xu, X. F.; Zhang, Z. C. Steroids 2020, 164, 108751.

  • 17.

    Lee, S. R.; Park, H. B.; Kim, K. H. Anal. Chem. 2018, 90, 13212.

  • 18.

    Capello, C.; Fischer, U. Hungerbühler. Green. Chem. 2007, 9, 927.

  • 19.

    Zhang, H.; Li, C. H.; Zhang, Q.; Li, W. J.; Qian, Z. M.; Yang, F. Q. Pharm. Today 2018, 28, 661.

  • 20.

    The Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Committee of the Chinese Pharmacopoeia, Beijing, 2015, Vol. 1, p. 281.

  • 21.

    Zhao, J.; Xie, J.; Wang, L. Y.; Li, S. P. J. Pharmaceut. Biomed. 2014, 87, 271.

  • 22.

    Zhong, A.; Qian, Z. M.; Li, W. J.; Yang, F. Q; Chen, S. L.; Li, E. W. Mycosystema 2016, 35, 388.

  • 23.

    Yang, F. Q.; Li, S. P. J. Pharmaceut. Biomed. 2008, 48, 231.

  • 24.

    Qian, Z. M.; Zhen, D. M.; Li, W. Q.; Li, W. J.; Sun, M. T.; Yang, F. Q.; Xiang, L. World Chin. Med. 2016, 11, 758.

  • 25.

    Fan, H.; Li, S. P.; Xiang, J. J.; Lai, C. M.; Yang, F. Q.; Gao, J. L.; Wang, Y. T. Anal. Chim. Acta 2006, 567, 218.

  • 26.

    Qian, Z. M.; Li, S. P. Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2017, 7, 202.

Supplementary Materials

  • 1.

    The Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Committee of the Chinese Pharmacopoeia, Beijing, 2015, Vol. 1, p. 115.

  • 2.

    Xiao, J. H.; Qi, Y.; Xiong, Q. Recent Pat. Biotechnol. 2013, 7, 153.

  • 3.

    Liu, Y.; Wang, J. H.; Wang, W. H.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X. L.; Han, C. C. Evid. Based Complement. Alternat. Med. 2015, 2015, 1.

  • 4.

    Yoon, S. Y.; Park, S. J.; Park, Y. J. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 3027.

  • 5.

    Tan, L. S.; Song, X. M. T.; Ren, Y. L.; Wang, M.; Guo, C. J.; Guo, D. L.; Gu, Y. C.; Li, Y. Z.; Cao, Z. X.; Deng, Y. Phytother. Res. 2021, 35, 1284.

  • 6.

    Gong, X. B.; Li, T. J.; Wan, R. Z.; Sha, L. Int. Immunopharmacol 2021, 91, 107173.

  • 7.

    Zong, S. Y.; Han, H.; Wang, B.; Li, N.; Dong, T. T. X.; Zhang, T.; Tsim, K. W. K. Molecules 2015, 20, 21816.

  • 8.

    Chen, Y. C.; Chen, Y. H.; Pan, B. S.; Chang, M. M.; Huang, B. M. J. Food Drug Anal. 2017, 25, 197.

  • 9.

    Nakamura, K.; Shinozuka, K.; Yoshikawa, N. J. Pharmacol. Sci. 2015, 127, 53.

  • 10.

    Lin, S.; Liu, Z. Q.; Xue, Y. P.; Baker, P. J.; Wu, H.; Xu, F.; Teng, Y. M.; Brathwaite, E.; Zheng, Y. G. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2016, 179, 633.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Xia, Y. L.; Luo, F. F.; Shang, Y. F.; Chen, P. L.; Lu, Y. Z.; Wang, C. S. Cell Chem. Biol 2017, 24, 1479.

  • 12.

    Tian, Y.; Wang, C. X.; Qian, Z. M.; Zhou, L.; Zhou, M. X.; Sun, W. Y.; Yao, X. S.; Li, W. J; Gao, H. China J. Chin. Mater. Med. 2017, 42, 1932.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Su, Y. X.; Li, P.; Zhang, H. S.; Lin, M. T.; Liu, W. Z.; Xu, R.; HuH. K.; Liu, Y. M. Anal. Methods 2019, 11, 4946.

  • 14.

    Qian, Z. M.; Wu, Z.; Li, C. H.; Tan, G. Y.; Hu, H. K.; Li, W. J. Anal. Methods 2020, 12, 3337.

  • 15.

    Núnez, O.; Gallart-Ayala, H.; Martins, C. P. B.; Lucci, P. J. Chromatogr. A. 2012, 1228, 298.

  • 16.

    He, L. F.; He, X. Y.; Liu, X. C.; Shi, W. J.; Xu, X. F.; Zhang, Z. C. Steroids 2020, 164, 108751.

  • 17.

    Lee, S. R.; Park, H. B.; Kim, K. H. Anal. Chem. 2018, 90, 13212.

  • 18.

    Capello, C.; Fischer, U. Hungerbühler. Green. Chem. 2007, 9, 927.

  • 19.

    Zhang, H.; Li, C. H.; Zhang, Q.; Li, W. J.; Qian, Z. M.; Yang, F. Q. Pharm. Today 2018, 28, 661.

  • 20.

    The Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Committee of the Chinese Pharmacopoeia, Beijing, 2015, Vol. 1, p. 281.

  • 21.

    Zhao, J.; Xie, J.; Wang, L. Y.; Li, S. P. J. Pharmaceut. Biomed. 2014, 87, 271.

  • 22.

    Zhong, A.; Qian, Z. M.; Li, W. J.; Yang, F. Q; Chen, S. L.; Li, E. W. Mycosystema 2016, 35, 388.

  • 23.

    Yang, F. Q.; Li, S. P. J. Pharmaceut. Biomed. 2008, 48, 231.

  • 24.

    Qian, Z. M.; Zhen, D. M.; Li, W. Q.; Li, W. J.; Sun, M. T.; Yang, F. Q.; Xiang, L. World Chin. Med. 2016, 11, 758.

  • 25.

    Fan, H.; Li, S. P.; Xiang, J. J.; Lai, C. M.; Yang, F. Q.; Gao, J. L.; Wang, Y. T. Anal. Chim. Acta 2006, 567, 218.

  • 26.

    Qian, Z. M.; Li, S. P. Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2017, 7, 202.

  • Collapse
  • Expand
The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.
 
The Open Access statement together with the description of the Copyright and License Policy are available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.
 

 

Senior editors

Editor(s)-in-Chief: Kowalska, Teresa

Editor(s)-in-Chief: Sajewicz, Mieczyslaw

Editors(s)

  • Danica Agbaba (University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia)
  • Ivana Stanimirova-Daszykowska (University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland)
  • Monika Waksmundzka-Hajnos (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)

Editorial Board

  • R. Bhushan (The Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India)
  • J. Bojarski (Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland)
  • B. Chankvetadze (State University of Tbilisi, Tbilisi, Georgia)
  • M. Daszykowski (University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland)
  • T.H. Dzido (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)
  • A. Felinger (University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary)
  • K. Glowniak (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)
  • B. Glód (Siedlce University of Natural Sciences and Humanities, Siedlce, Poland)
  • A. Gumieniczek (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)
  • U. Hubicka (Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland)
  • K. Kaczmarski (Rzeszow University of Technology, Rzeszów, Poland)
  • H. Kalász (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • K. Karljiković Rajić (University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia)
  • I. Klebovich (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary)
  • A. Koch (Private Pharmacy, Hamburg, Germany)
  • Ł. Komsta (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)
  • P. Kus (Univerity of Silesia, Katowice, Poland)
  • D. Mangelings (Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium)
  • E. Mincsovics (Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Á. M. Móricz (Centre for Agricultural Research, Budapest, Hungary)
  • G. Morlock (Giessen University, Giessen, Germany)
  • A. Petruczynik (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)
  • R. Skibiński (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)
  • B. Spangenberg (Offenburg University of Applied Sciences, Germany)
  • T. Tuzimski (Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland)
  • Y. Vander Heyden (Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium)
  • A. Voelkel (Poznań University of Technology, Poznań, Poland)
  • B. Walczak (University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland)
  • W. Wasiak (Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland)
  • I.G. Zenkevich (St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation)

 

KOWALSKA, TERESA
E-mail: kowalska@us.edu.pl

SAJEWICZ, MIECZYSLAW
E-mail:msajewic@us.edu.pl

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • Science Citation Index
  • Sci Search
  • Research Alert
  • Chemistry Citation Index and Current Content/Physical
  • Chemical and Earth Sciences
  • SCOPUS
  • GoogleScholar
  • Index Copernicus
  • CABI

2021  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
652
Journal Impact Factor 2,011
Rank by Impact Factor Chemistry, Analytical 66/87
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
1,789
5 Year
Impact Factor
1,350
Journal Citation Indicator 0,40
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator Chemistry, Analytical 72/99
Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
29
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,27
Scimago Quartile Score Chemistry (miscellaneous) (Q3)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
2,8
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
General Chemistry 210/409 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,586

2020
 
Total Cites
650
WoS
Journal
Impact Factor
1,639
Rank by
Chemistry, Analytical 71/83 (Q4)
Impact Factor
 
Impact Factor
1,412
without
Journal Self Cites
5 Year
1,301
Impact Factor
Journal
0,34
Citation Indicator
 
Rank by Journal
Chemistry, Analytical 75/93 (Q4)
Citation Indicator
 
Citable
45
Items
Total
43
Articles
Total
2
Reviews
Scimago
28
H-index
Scimago
0,316
Journal Rank
Scimago
Chemistry (miscellaneous) Q3
Quartile Score
 
Scopus
393/181=2,2
Scite Score
 
Scopus
General Chemistry 215/398 (Q3)
Scite Score Rank
 
Scopus
0,560
SNIP
 
Days from
58
submission
 
to acceptance
 
Days from
68
acceptance
 
to publication
 
Acceptance
51%
Rate

2019  
Total Cites
WoS
495
Impact Factor 1,418
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
1,374
5 Year
Impact Factor
0,936
Immediacy
Index
0,460
Citable
Items
50
Total
Articles
50
Total
Reviews
0
Cited
Half-Life
6,2
Citing
Half-Life
8,3
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00048
Article Influence
Score
0,164
% Articles
in
Citable Items
100,00
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,05895
Average
IF
Percentile
20,349
Scimago
H-index
26
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,255
Scopus
Scite Score
226/167=1,4
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
Chemistry (miscellaneous) 240/398 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,494
Acceptance
Rate
41%

 

Acta Chromatographica
Publication Model Online only
Gold Open Access
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 400 EUR/article
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription Information Gold Open Access
Purchase per Title  

Acta Chromatographica
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation
1992
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Institute of Chemistry, University of Silesia
Founder's
Address
PL-40-007 Katowice, Poland, Bankowa 12
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2083-5736 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Jun 2022 0 0 0
Jul 2022 0 0 0
Aug 2022 0 0 0
Sep 2022 0 0 0
Oct 2022 0 0 0
Nov 2022 0 75 29
Dec 2022 0 0 0