| Title |
Estimating Herbal Product Authentication and Adulteration in India Using a Vouchered, DNA-Based Biological Reference Material Library
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Safety, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40264-016-0459-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dhivya Shanmughanandhan, Subramanyam Ragupathy, Steven G. Newmaster, Saravanan Mohanasundaram, Ramalingam Sathishkumar |
| Abstract |
India is considered the 'medicinal garden' of the world, with 8000 medicinal plants of which 960 are commercial species that are traded nationally and globally. Although scientific studies estimate herbal product adulteration as 42-66 % in North America, India does not have any published marketplace studies and subsequent estimates of adulteration in an industry facing considerable supply demands. The goal of this project is to provide an initial assessment of herbal product authentication and adulteration in the marketplace in India by (1) developing a biological reference material (BRM) herbal DNA library for Indian herbal species using DNA barcode regions (ITS2 and rbcL) in order to facilitate accurate species resolution when testing the herbal products; and (2) assessing herbal product identification using our BRM library; and (3) comparing the use of our BRM library to identify herbal products with that of GenBank. A BRM herbal DNA library consisting of 187 herbal species was prepared to authenticate the herbal products within India. Ninty-three herbal products representing ten different companies were procured from local stores located at Coimbatore, India. These samples were subjected to blind testing for authenticity using the DNA barcode regions rbcL and ITS2. The results indicate that 40 % of the products tested are authentic, and 60 % of the products may be adulterated (i.e. contained species of plants not listed on the product labels). The adulterated samples included contamination (50 %), substitution (10 %) and fillers (6 %). Our BRM library provided a 100 % Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) match for all species, whereas the GenBank match was 64 %. Our findings suggest that most Indian herbal medicinal products are essentially mixed with one or a few other herbs that could lessen the therapeutic activity of the main ingredients. We do not recommend the use of GenBank to identify herbal products because the use of this non-curated and/or vouchered database will result in inaccurate species identification. These DNA-based tools provide a scientific foundation for herbal pharmacovigilance to ensure the safety and efficacy of natural drugs. This study provides curated BRMs that will underpin innovations in molecular diagnostic biotechnology, which will soon provide more robust estimates of adulteration and commercial tools that will strengthen due diligence in quality assurance within the herbal industry. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 30 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,921,555
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Drug Safety
#1,505
of 1,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,962
of 323,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Safety
#20
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,704 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,194 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.