基于HS-GC-MS和电子感官技术分析白芍不同炮制品的颜色、气味变化  

Analysis of Color and Odor Changes of Different Processed Products of Paeoniae Radix Alba Based on HS-GC-MS and Electronic Sensory Techniques

作　　者：彭嘉玉 黄玉珍 温佳文 郑郁清 杨明[1] 张金莲[1] 陈宇帆[2] PENG Jiayu;HUANG Yuzhen;WEN Jiawen;ZHENG Yuqing;YANG Ming;ZHANG Jinlian;CHEN Yufan(Jiangxi University of Chinese Medicine,Nanchang 330004,China;Ganzhou People's Hospital,Ganzhou 341000,China)

机构地区：[1]江西中医药大学,南昌330004 [2]赣州市人民医院,江西赣州341000

出　　处：《中国实验方剂学杂志》2024年第20期141-150,共10页Chinese Journal of Experimental Traditional Medical Formulae

基　　金：国家重点研发计划项目(2018YFC1707206);国家自然科学基金项目(82060724);江西省中医药标准化研究项目(2021B01,2021B02,2023A19);江西省卫生健康委员会科技计划项目(202120015);江西省高水平本科教学团队项目(2252201013)。

摘　　要：目的:探究白芍及其炮制品颜色、气味与挥发性成分的相关性,考察不同炮制方法对白芍气味及颜色形成的影响。方法:采用电子鼻、色差仪识别白芍、蜜麸炒白芍、蜜糠炒白芍的气味和色度信息;采用顶空气相色谱-质谱法(HS-GCMS)对白芍不同炮制品中的挥发性成分进行鉴定与相对定量,并采用主成分分析(PCA)和正交偏最小二乘法-判别分析(OPLS-DA)对其挥发性成分进行分析,根据变量重要性投影(VIP)值>1且相对气味活度值(ROAV)≥1的原则筛选三者间差异性关键风味成分。运用Pearson相关性分析分别探究挥发性差异风味成分与色度值、电子鼻传感器之间的关联。结果:白芍经蜜糠、蜜麸炒制后明度值(L^(*))降低,红绿色值(a^(*))和黄蓝色值(b^(*))均明显增加(P<0.05,P<0.01);气味差异主要体现在S1、S2、S4、S5、S6、S8、S11传感器,电子鼻的PCA结果表明白芍、蜜糠炒白芍、蜜麸炒白芍的气味区别明显,其中蜜麸炒白芍整体气味强度高于蜜糠炒白芍。从白芍及其炮制品中共鉴定出47种挥发性成分,其中白芍21种、蜜糠炒白芍36种、蜜麸炒白芍37种;气味分析发现,白芍、蜜糠炒白芍和蜜麸炒白芍中分别有12、24、22种挥发性成分可能是其关键风味成分;相关性分析显示,饮片L^(*)与美拉德反应产物含量呈负相关,a^(*)、b^(*)与美拉德反应产物含量呈正相关,S1、S8传感器与美拉德反应产物含量呈负相关,S2、S4、S5、S6、S11传感器与美拉德反应产物呈正相关。结论:白芍经蜜糠、蜜麸炒制后颜色均加深,同时生成具健脾活性的5-羟甲基糠醛、糠醛等成分,符合蜜糠、蜜麸炒制“焦香健脾”的理论。蜜麸炒白芍炮制过程发生美拉德反应程度较蜜糠炒白芍强,使蜜麸炒白芍味偏焦香、色暗黄;蜜糠炒白芍味偏甜香、色亮黄。Objective:To investigate the correlation between the color,odor and volatile components of Paeoniae Radix Alba(PRA)and its processed products,and to examine the effects of different processing methods on the odor and color formation of PRA.Method:The odor and chromaticity information of PRA,honey chaff-fried PRA and honey bran-fried PRA were identified by electronic nose and colorimeter,and the volatile components in the different processed products of PRA were identified and relatively quantified by headspace gas chromatography-mass spectrometry(HS-GC-MS),and analyzed using principal component analysis(PCA)and orthogonal partial least squares-discriminant analysis(OPLS-DA),then the differential key flavor components among the three were screened according to the principles of variable importance in the projection(VIP)value>1 and relative odor activity value(ROAV)≥1.Pearson correlation analysis was used to investigate the association between the differential flavor components and the colorimetric values and electronic nose sensors,respectively.Result:After being fried with honey chaff and honey bran,the lightness value(L^(*))of PRA decreased,and red-green value(a^(*))and yellow-blue value(b^(*))increased significantly(P<0.05,P<0.01).The odor differences were mainly reflected in the S1,S2,S4,S5,S6,S8 and S11 sensors,and the results of PCA of the electronic nose indicated that the odor differences among PRA,honey chaff-fried PRA and honey bran-fried PRA were obvious,among which the overall odor intensity of honey bran-fried PRA was higher than that of honey chaff-fried PRA.A total of 47 volatile components were identified from PRA and its processed products,including 21 for PRA,36 for honey chaff-fried PRA,and 37 for honey bran-fried PRA.Odor analysis revealed that 12,24 and 22 volatile components may be the key flavor components in PRA,honey chaff-fried PRA and honey bran-fried PRA,respectively.Correlation analysis showed that the L^(*)of the decoction pieces was negatively correlated with the content of the Mai

关 键 词：白芍 顶空气相色谱-质谱法(HS-GC-MS) 蜜糠炒 蜜麸炒 挥发性成分 中药炮制 电子鼻 

分 类 号：R22[医药卫生—中医基础理论] R943.1[医药卫生—中医学] R28[理学—分析化学] O657[理学—化学]