↓ Skip to main content

Species identification approach for both raw materials and end products of herbal supplements from Tinospora species

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Species identification approach for both raw materials and end products of herbal supplements from Tinospora species
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12906-018-2174-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maslin Osathanunkul, Rossarin Osathanunkul, Panagiotis Madesis

Abstract

Nowadays herbal products used in traditional medicine are sold in processed forms and thus morphological authentication is almost impossible. With herbal industry rapidly growing size, consumer safety becomes an important issue that requires special attention. Identification of herbal species in the products is therefore needed. Sequences from the selected regions (matK, rbcL, trnL and ITS1) were retrieved and analysed. Then the most suitable barcode was assessed for discrimination of T. crispa from closely related species by HRM analysis and used in authentication of commercial products. The ITS1 barcode was found to be the suitable primer as melting data from the HRM assay proved to be capable of distinguishing T. crispa from its related species. The developed protocol was then employed to authenticate medicinal products in powdered form. HRM analysis of all tested samples here revealed that five out of eight products contained not only the indicated species T. crispa but also other Tinospora, that have a high level of morphological similarity. Misrepresentation, poor packaging and inappropriate labeling of the tested medicinal herbal products are thought to be the reason of the results here. Using Bar-HRM with the ITS marker lead to success in authenticating the tested herbal products.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 23%
Student > Master 3 14%
Lecturer 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 5 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 23%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 27%

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 31 March 2018.
All research outputs
#10,172,108
of 12,733,544 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#1,804
of 2,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,902
of 273,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,733,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,598 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 273,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them