基于化学分析和感官技术的传统经验和药典法炮制蜜百合的质量比较

Comparison on Quality of Honey Processed Lilii Bulbus Prepared by Traditional Empirical and Pharmacopoeial Methods Based on Chemical Analysis and Sensory Techniques

目的:基于化学分析和智能感官技术对经验法和药典法制备的2种蜜百合进行质量比较,在挖掘继承名老中药专家传统经验基础上,完善提升蜜百合质量标准。方法:分别按照2020年版《中华人民共和国药典》(以下简称《中国药典》)方法(先加蜜后炒制)和老药工经验法(先炒制后加蜜)制备蜜百合样品,按照2020年版《中国药典》百合项下方法对2种蜜百合的外观性状、薄层色谱法(TLC)鉴别、检查、浸出物等项目进行检测;采用高效液相色谱法(HPLC)建立不同加蜜方式蜜百合的指纹图谱,并对其中王百合苷A、王百合苷B和5-羟甲基糠醛(5-HMF)的含量进行测定,通过多元统计分析评价2种蜜百合质量差异。同时,利用电子鼻、电子舌分别进行嗅觉和味觉测定,结合多元统计分析,以变量重要性投影(VIP)值>1筛选差异传感器,以比较2种蜜百合的差异。结果:与药典法蜜百合比较,经验法蜜百合含水量更低,浸出物含量略高,外观更佳,便于储存;建立了2种蜜百合的HPLC指纹图谱,二者相似度≥0.999,表明二者成分构成相似,标定了29个共有峰,其中峰8和峰18分别为王百合苷A和王百合苷B;对2种蜜百合中指标成分的定量分析显示,王百合苷A、王百合苷B的含量差异无统计学意义,而经验法蜜百合5-HMF含量显著高于药典法蜜百合(P<0.01);2种蜜百合的电子舌与电子鼻检测结果显示,经验法蜜百合的鲜味、鲜味丰富度及咸味均高于药典法蜜百合;电子鼻检测结果显示,W1W、W2S、W5S、W1S 4个传感器为2种蜜百合的差异气味传感器,其中W1S、W2S传感器对经验法蜜百合的响应值均高于药典法蜜百合,可能与5-HMF的含量有关。结论:与药典法蜜百合比较,经验法蜜百合含水量、浸出物及5-HMF的含量相对更优,二者可通过电子鼻、电子舌明显区分,该研究可为挖掘继承名老中药专家传统经验,进一步完善蜜百合炮制方法及质量标准提供参考。

Objective:To compare the quality of two kinds of honey-processed Lilii Bulbus(HPLB)prepared by empirical and pharmacopoeial methods based on chemical analysis and intelligent sensory technology,and to improve and upgrade the quality standard of HPLB on the basis of excavating and inheriting the traditional experience of famous experts in traditional Chinese medicine(TCM).Method:Samples of HPLB were prepared according to the method in the 2020 edition of Chinese Pharmacopoeia(honey was added before frying)and the empirical method of the old pharmacists(honey was added after frying),and the appearance characteristics,thin layer chromatography(TLC)identification,inspection,leachables and other items of the two kinds of samples were detected according to the methods under the Lilii Bulbus in the 2020 edition of Chinese Pharmacopoeia.The fingerprints of HPLB with different honey addition methods were established by high performance liquid chromatography(HPLC),and the contents of regaloside A,regaloside B and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural(5-HMF)were determined,the quality difference between the two HPLB samples was evaluated by multivariate statistical analysis.Meanwhile,electronic nose and electronic tongue were used to measure the sense of smell and taste,and combined with multivariate statistical analysis,the difference sensors were screened with the variable importance in the projection(VIP)value>1 in order to compare the differences between the two kinds of HPLB.Result:Compared with HPLB prepared by the pharmacopoeial method,the sample prepared by the empirical method had lower water content,slightly higher soluble extract content,better appearance and easy storage.HPLC fingerprints of two kinds of HPLB samples were established,and the similarity between them was≥0.999,indicating that the composition of two species was similar.And 29 common peaks were calibrated,among which peaks 8 and 18 were regaloside A and regaloside B.The quantitative analysis of the index components in the two kinds of HPLB samples showed that the difference in the contents of regaloside A and regaloside B was not statistically significant,whereas the content of 5-HMF in empirical HPLB was significantly higher than that of the pharmacopoeial HPLB(P<0.01).The electronic tongue and electronic nose test results showed that the umami,umami richness and saltiness of the empirical HPLB were higher than those of the pharmacopoeial HPLB.The results of electronic nose detection showed that the four sensors W1W,W2S,W5S and W1S were the differential odor sensors of the two samples,among which the response values of W1S and W2S sensors were higher than those of the pharmacopoeial HPLB,which might be related to the content of 5-HMF.Conclusion:Compared with the pharmacopoeial HPLB,the empirical sample is of better quality,but the two can be clearly distinguished by electronic nose and electronic tongue,which can provide a reference for excavating and inheriting the traditional experience of famous experts in TCM and further improving the processing methods and quality standards of HPLB.