↓ Skip to main content

A multi-detector chromatographic approach for characterization and quantitation of botanical constituents to enable in silico safety assessments

Overview of attention for article published in Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
A multi-detector chromatographic approach for characterization and quantitation of botanical constituents to enable in silico safety assessments
Published in
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00216-018-1163-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy R. Baker, Brian T. Regg

Abstract

An approach has been developed to characterize the individual chemical constituents of botanicals. The challenge was to identify and quantitate the significant analytes in these complex mixtures, largely in the absence of authentic standards. The data-rich information content generated by this three-detector configuration was specifically intended to be used to conduct safety and/or quality evaluations for complex botanical mixtures, on a chemical constituent basis. The approach utilized a broad gradient UHPLC chromatographic separation. Following the chromatographic separation and UV detection, the eluent was split and sent into a charged aerosol detector (CAD), for quantitation, and a quadrupole/time-of-flight high-resolution mass spectrometer for component identification. The known bias of the otherwise universal CAD response, for organic solvent composition of the mobile phase, was compensated by the addition of an inverse gradient make-up stream. This approach and the orthogonal information content from the chromatography and three different detectors was specifically designed to enable in-silico safety assessments. These guide, minimize, or even eliminate the need for in vivo and in vitro safety assessments. The methodology was developed and demonstrated using standardized extracts of Ginkgo biloba. Results from the development of this novel approach and the characterization example reported here demonstrate the suitability of this instrumental configuration for enabling in-silico safety assessments and proving general quality assessments of botanicals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 26%
Other 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 5 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Chemical Engineering 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 May 2019.
All research outputs
#16,053,755
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#4,983
of 9,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,948
of 339,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#70
of 179 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,619 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 339,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 179 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.