Extracts of ginkgo (Ginkgo biloba) leaf are widely available worldwide in herbal medicinal products, dietary supplements, botanicals and complementary medicines, and several pharmacopoeias contain monographs for ginkgo leaf, leaf extract and finished products. Being a high-value botanical commodity, ginkgo extracts may be the subject of economically motivated adulteration. We analysed eight ginkgo leaf retail products purchased in Australia and Denmark and found compelling evidence of adulteration with flavonol aglycones in three of these. The same three products also contained genistein, an isoflavone that does not occur in ginkgo leaf. Although the United States Pharmacopeia - National Formulary (USP-NF) and the British and European Pharmacopoeias stipulate a required range for flavonol glycosides in ginkgo extract, the prescribed assays quantify flavonol aglycones. This means that these pharmacopoeial methods are not capable of detecting adulteration of ginkgo extract with free flavonol aglycones. We propose a simple modification of the USP-NF method that addresses this problem: by assaying for flavonol aglycones pre and post hydrolysis the content of flavonol glycosides can be accurately estimated via a simple calculation. We also recommend a maximum limit be set for free flavonol aglycones in ginkgo extract.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
11
17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
9
14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
7
11%
Medicine and Dentistry
4
6%
Other
8
13%
Unknown
12
19%
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 05 March 2014.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Phytomedicine
#1,442
of 2,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,599
of 239,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Phytomedicine
#13
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,788 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. 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 239,843 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 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
