Skip to main content
Download PDF

Application of the herbal chemical marker ranking system (Herb MaRS) to the standardization of herbal raw materials: a case study

BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies volume 23, Article number: 348 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Introduction

Phytochemical standardization of herbal materials involves establishing consistent levels of one or more active ingredients or markers. It ensures the authenticity and quality of herbal materials, extracts, and their products. This research aimed to apply the herbal chemical marker ranking system (Herb MaRS) originally proposed for quality assurance of complex herbal products to establish markers for controlling the quality of herbal raw materials.

Methods

The assessment of compounds for suitability as markers was based on the Herb MaRS, with minor modifications as follows: for more objective scoring, evidence of biological activity of the potential marker compound(s) was determined at three levels based on the number of symptoms of the disease condition a compound can treat or alleviate: (i) one symptom (1 point), two symptoms (2 points), and 3 or more symptoms (3 points). The reported concentrations of the compounds were also scored as follows: concentration not determined (0 points), concentration ≥ 5 ppm (1 point), concentration ≥ 50 ppm (2 points) and availability of analytical standards (1 point). Finally, the compounds were scored for the availability of an analytical method (1 point). The compounds were scored from 0 to 8, where 8 indicated the most suitable chemical marker.

Results

The selected markers were as follows: aromadendrine, α-terpineol, globulol, and 1,8-cineol (in Eucalyptus globulus Labill. ); aloin, aloe emodin, acemannan (in Aloe barbadensis (L.) Burm.f. ), lupeol, lupenone, betulinic acid, betulin, and catechin (in Albizia coriaria Oliv.); mangiferin, catechin, quercetin, and gallic acid (in Mangifera indica L.); polygodial (in Warburgia ugandensis Sprague); azadirachtin, nimbin, nimbidin (in Azadirachta indica A. Juss. ); and 6,8,10-gingerols, and 6-shogaol (in Zingiber officinalis Roscoe).

Conclusions

Herb MaRS can be efficiently applied to select marker compounds for quality control of herbal materials. However, for herbs whose phytochemicals have not been sufficiently researched, it is difficult to establish evidence of activity, and there are no analytical standards and/or methods; this is the case for plants exclusively used in Africa. The markers identified should be incorporated into chromatographic fingerprints, their quantitative methods developed, and evaluated for applicability at the various stages of the production chain of herbal medicines; then, they can be included in future local plant monographs. There is also a need to build local capacity to isolate marker compounds, particularly those that are not sold by current vendors.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Herbal materials vary greatly in chemical composition due to several factors, including climate, cultivation and harvesting practices, as well as genetic differences among cultivars of the same species [1]. To cater to this variability, herbal raw materials must be standardized before they are used for manufacturing medicinal products. Standardization involves activities that ensure that the materials and the resultant extracts are phytoequivalent. This ensures the reproducibility of the efficacy and safety of the materials and their products [1, 2].

The evaluation of chemical constituents of plant material involves screening and quantification of the major phytochemical groups, the establishment of fingerprint profiles, and/or quantification of selected chemical markers. Once the phytochemical profile is established, the data are evaluated using chemometric methods such as principal component analysis and hierarchical clustering to confirm the phytochemical equivalence of the materials (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

 A scheme for phytochemical evaluation of herbal materials

Full size image

Markers may be measured in both raw materials and finished products to obtain useful information for various applications. These include the identification and selection of raw materials where concentration limits are set, identification of adulterants and toxicants, assessment of batch-to-batch uniformity of materials from different sources, control of the manufacturing process, assessment of the suitability of packaging and storage, standardization of physiological activities, and calculation of the dosage of raw materials to include in the product formula [2,3,4] (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Applications of markers at different stages of the herbal medicine production chain

Full size image

Selection of marker compounds

When choosing a marker(s) for routine quality control of herbal materials, the following factors should be considered: (i) local availability of effective and easy-to-use analytical methods such thin layer chromatography, high-performance chromatography, and spectroscopy, (ii) availability of analytical standards of acceptable quality, (iii) relevance of the compounds to therapeutic application of the herbal material, and (iv) suitability of the compound(s) as stability indicators. According to the WHO, constituents with known biological activity (related to the traditional use of the herbal material), if known and available, should preferably be selected as markers. Otherwise, compounds with recognized biological activities or characteristic constituents can be used [3]. In line with the WHO and other regulatory guidelines, researchers at the National Institute of Complementary Medicine, University of Western Sydney, proposed a Herbal Chemical Marker Ranking System (Herb MaRS) for selecting markers for quality control of complex herbal products. The Herb MaRS was aimed at providing a uniform and comprehensive guide for the selection of marker compounds for the quality control of polyherbal products. The authors validated this system using an herbal product made from seven herbs. To determine the suitability of phytochemicals as markers, the Herb MaRS ranks the compounds on a scale of 0 to 5. A compound scoring 5 is the most suitable; this is a compound with the highest pharmacological activity related to major symptoms of the disease as claimed by the manufacturer; present in relatively high concentration in the herb or finished product (at least 5 µg/mL); and bioavailable. In addition, it is mandatory to screen toxic compounds, so they are scored 5 by default [5].

In Uganda, comprehensive phytochemical standardization of herbal materials is not yet mandatory since there are no relevant monographs. As such, the products produced from them are not registered; the National Drug Authority issues a “notification” status [6, 7]. For notification, the manufacturer only presents results for general phytochemical screening. Consequently, there have been reports of poor-quality herbal medicines on the market, including adulteration with conventional medicines. The NDA draft guidelines for the regulation of herbal medicines disseminated in 2021, for comments, have recommended the quantification of markers and the establishment of chromatographic fingerprints with reference to the WHO guidelines (https://www.nda.or.ug/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Guidelines-on-Regulation-of-Traditional-and-Local-Herbal-Medicnes-in-Uganda_Draft-2.pdf). However, since most plants have no monographs yet [8], manufacturers will not know what analytical markers and/or methods to use.

The aim of this work was to assess the applicability of the Herb MaRS to establish the quality control of herbal materials. To achieve this, a case study of the seven most commonly used plant species in the manufacture of herbal medicinal products in Uganda was conducted. According to our previous study [7], Eucalyptus globulus Labill., Aloe barbadensis (L.) Burm.f., Albizia coriaria Oliv., Mangifera indica L., Warburgia ugandensis Sprague, Azadirachta indica A. Juss. and Zingiber officinalis Roscoe were the most frequently used plants (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Popularity of herbal materials in Ugandan registered herbal products. The numbers indicate the percentage of products that contain the plant as active ingredient. modified with permission from [7]

Full size image

It is evident from Fig. 3 that the seven plant materials considered for this case study are as popular as the other 25 plants combined.

Methods

Identification of potential marker compounds

The suitability of analytical markers was determined based on the WHO guidelines for selecting marker substances of herbal origin for quality control of herbal medicines [3] and on the Herbal Chemical Marker Ranking System (Herb MaRS) [5]. Both the WHO guidelines and the Herb MaRS give priority to a compound whose biological activity is related to the traditional use of the plant and can be identified and quantified by the analytical methods available. Additionally, the compound chosen should be available commercially in pure form.

Establishment of active compounds and evidence of biological activity

An extensive literature search to identify the bioactive compounds and to establish evidence of their biological activity relevant to the therapeutic claims made on the product label was performed for the seven most commonly used herbal materials. Such evidence included studies reporting on the ability of the compound(s) to treat or ameliorate one or more symptoms of the disease condition as indicated by the manufacturer. According to Kaggwa et al. [7], Albizia coriaria, Mangifera indica, and Zingiber officinale are exclusively used in cough syrups; Warburgia ugandensis in cough and anti-ulcer syrups; Eucalyptus globulus in mouth washes, cough syrups and pain balms; Aloe vera in mouth washes, cough syrups, lip balms and GIT cleansing tablets; and Azadirachta indica in cough, anti-ulcer syrups and lip balms. The same study established evidence of the efficacy and safety of the plant materials for these therapeutic applications. Table 1 summarizes the diseases (or their symptoms) the products are indicated to manage.

Table 1 Disease conditions managed by the most commonly used herbal materials in herbal manufacturing in Uganda. Table modified with permission from [7]
Full size table

A systematic search for articles was performed using search engines such as Google and indexes including PubMed, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, and Web of Science. The search terms consisted of the chemical name, pharmacological or therapeutic activity of interest, such as “anti-inflammatory activity of 6-gingerol”, plant botanical name and bioactive compounds thereof, such as “bioactive compounds in Mangifera indica leaves”, and “mechanism of action of mangiferin”. Only full-length articles published in English were reviewed. We did not limit the search to any timeline since evidence is considered valid until disputed by new findings.

Availability of analytical methods for the potential marker compounds

In addition to evidence of biological activity of the identified compounds, information regarding quality control methods recommended by existing pharmacopoeial monographs was included, particularly the WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants [9,10,11,12,13], the African Pharmacopoeia, the West African Herbal Pharmacopoeia [14] and the Pharmaceutical monographs for South African plants species [15]. Additionally, the availability of assay methods for the quantification of markers in the respective plant materials was crucial. The primary focus was on high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) methods because they are highly sensitive, specific, versatile and readily accessible even in resource-limited countries. Where HPLC methods were not available or not suitable, such as for essential oils, high-performance thin layer chromatography (HPTLC), gas chromatography (GC) or ultraviolet/visible (UV/VIS) spectrophotometric methods, and other available methods were considered. Both HPTLC-densitometry and spectrophotometric methods are less sensitive for the quantitative determination of markers than HPLC, although they are easier to use. On the other hand, GC-based methods are as sensitive as HPLC but are selective to only compounds that are volatile, such as essential oils, while some compounds can be derivatized to make them volatile, the analysis cost is escalated by expensive derivatization reagents.

Availability of analytical reference standards for the potential marker compounds

Information on the availability of analytical standards and the prices for the smallest units was obtained, preferably from the Sigma Aldrich ® website (https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/UG/en). This was for two main reasons: (i) from our experience, Sigma Aldrich is among the most reliable suppliers of high-quality chemicals, and (ii) they willingly display the prices for various grades and quantities of the same analytical standard. If the compounds were not available from Sigma Aldrich®, a general Google search to establish other potential sources was executed. Finally, the cost of 1 mg or mL of the marker was computed with an assumption that this amount is sufficient for a single analysis to construct calibration curves. We believe that the cost of equivalent grades of standards from other vendors will differ only slightly.

Selection of the most suitable marker compounds

Using a modified Herb MaRS, compounds were given scores from 0 to 8, where 8 indicates the most suitable chemical marker. The Herb MaRS [5] does not elaborate on how the individual attributes of the compound are scored but rather gives a lumpsum mark after the overall assessment. Therefore, for more objective scoring, we modified the ranking system as follows: evidence of biological activity was divided into three levels based on the number of symptoms of the disease condition a compound can treat or alleviate: (i) one symptom (1 point), two symptoms (2 points), 3 and more symptoms, with well-elucidated mechanisms of action (3 points). We also scored the reported concentrations of the compounds in the plant material (concentration not determined (0 points), concentration ≥ 5 ppm (1 point), (concentration ≥ 50 ppm, 2 points) and availability of analytical standards (1 point); last, we scored the availability of an analytical method (1 point).

Results

Evidence of biological activity of potential chemical markers

For most plant materials, there are compounds with sufficient biological evidence relevant to the industrial application of the products in which the medicinal plant is contained. However, most of the compounds in Warburgia ugandensis have not been individually evaluated. The most important bioactive compounds are shown in Fig. 4: E. globulus (1,8-cineol (1), aromadendrin (2), globulol (3) and α-terpineol (4)), A. barbadensis; (aloin A (5), aloin B (6), aloe emodin (7), acemannan (8) and mannose 6 phosphate (9)), A. coriaria; (lupeol (10), lupenone (11), betulinic acid (12), catechin (13)), M. indica; (catechin (13), quercetin (14), mangiferin (15) and gallic acid (16)), Azadirachta indica; (azadirachtin (20), mahmoodin (21), nimbin (22), and nimbolide (23), Zingiber officinalis; (gingerols (17), shogaols (18) and zingerone (19)), Warburgia ugandensis; (bemadienolide (24), muzigadial, polygodial (25), warbuganal (26), ugandensolide (27), and muzigadial (28).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Bioactive compounds in the studied medicinal plants relevant to industrial application (the structures were generated with ChemDraw® software)

Full size image

The biological activities of these compounds and their mechanisms of action are summarized in Table 2 below.

Table 2 Evidence of biological activity of the compounds found in the plant materials
Full size table

Availability of analytical standards and assay methods

For Eucalyptus globulus, Aloe barbadensis, Zingiber officinalis, and Azadirachta indica, monographs with well-elaborated quality control methods have been published. In addition, analytical standards for the selected compounds are available, and their assay methods have been developed. On the other hand, no monographs for Albizia coriaria, Mangifera indica, and Warburgia ugandensis exist; for W. ugandensis, there are no analytical standards or assay methods to quantify the individual compounds. The cost per mg or mL of analytical standard ranged from €0.6 to 498 for α-terpineol and azadirachtin, respectively, with an average cost of €62.5 ± 101.5. The results are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3 Available analytical standards and assay methods for selected medicinal plant compounds
Full size table

Selection of markers

Most of the compounds scored at least 5 points out of 8 except those for Warburgia ugandensis, which scored only one point. The scores of the markers for each plant are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4 Ranking of the biomarkers
Full size table

Discussion

Standardization is a key step in the quality assurance of herbal materials and their products; it is essential to ensure reproducibility of the biological activity and quality of the product. In this study, we established a list of compounds that can be used as markers for seven of the most commonly used plant materials in Uganda. Our emphasis was on compounds that are known to be active such that their determination informs both the quality and efficacy of the materials. We hope this information will be relevant to manufacturers once the new National Drug Authority (NDA) guidelines are put in force; quantification of markers and establishment of chromatographic fingerprints will be needed (https://www.nda.or.ug/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Guidelines-on-Regulation-of-Traditional-and-Local-Herbal-Medicnes-in-Uganda_Draft-2.pdf).

With the use of a modified herbal marker ranking system, compounds were identified that can be utilized to control the quality of herbal materials. Evidence of biological activity, availability of the analytical standard and availability of an analytical method are paramount. Thus, a compound should score at least 5 points to be suitable, that is, 3 points for biological activity and one point each for analytical standard and analytical method availability. The minimum concentrations of the markers in the plant material, if not already known, can be established by the manufacturer, and the compound assigned a qualitative (≤ 50 ppm) or quantitative (≥ 50 ppm) role depending on the concentrations in the plant material [5]. Another important factor to consider in quantitative analysis is the cost of the marker compounds. In this study, we highlight unit costs and the costs of the smallest packs for each compound. It is important to note, however, that the final acquisition costs will include vendor or agent markups and so might be significantly higher. While 1 mg or 1 mL is considered sufficient for external calibration, other forms of calibration, such as standard addition, will require higher amounts of the marker. To show the relevance of the selected markers, we list situations for which standardization of each plant material is needed.

Markers for Eucalyptus globulus oil

Eucalyptus globulus is known for the essential oils obtained from the leaves of the plant. The oil is used to manufacture products such as syrups used to manage symptoms of respiratory tract disorders (cough, common cold, catarrh, sore throat, congestion from asthma, bronchitis, allergic conditions- sinusitis, rhinitis, hiccups), fever and measles; pain balms applied topically to manage pain and inflammation; and mouth washes for conditions such as toothache, bad odor, sensitive teeth, bleeding gums, tooth cavities, tooth decay, and mouth sores [7]. Some of the most studied compounds that exhibit pharmacological activities to support the indications include aromadendrine, α-terpineol, globulol, and 1,8-cineol (Table 2; Fig. 4), with scores of 7, 8, 6, and 8, respectively. Since all the compounds are available in pure form and several quantitative methods have been established (Table 3), these compounds are all suitable as markers. Aromadendrine is the most expensive, with a unit cost of €183), while α-terpineol is the cheapest, with a unit cost of €0.6. The WHO and the African pharmacopoeia recommend the use of 1,8-cineol as a standard for both chemical reaction and TLC fingerprint identification methods [10, 13]; however, some studies have shown aromadendrine to be the major component, and perhaps a multimarker approach is more appropriate than determining only cineol [25]. These markers can be used to authenticate, determine phyto-equivalence and monitor the consistency in quality of oils obtained from different subspecies and geographical locations.

Markers for Aloe vera (Aloe barbadensis)

Aloe vera is used as the gel, latex or whole leaf extract. Whole leaf and latex products are used to treat constipation, to “cleanse” the GIT, and to treat wounds [7]. The main active ingredients are anthraquinone glycosides, notably aloin (barbaloin A and B) and aloe emodin [33] (Fig. 4). The efficacy of these compounds is well established, their analytical standards are available, and many analytical methods have been published (Tables 2 and 3). Therefore, aloin A and B scored 8 points, while aloe emodin scored 7 points. The unit cost of analytical standards for aloin A is €44.0, that of aloin B is €60.5, and that of aloe emodin is €31.1. The WHO monograph recommends chemical and TLC methods for the identification of anthracenes and spectrophotometric determination of total anthracene glycosides as barbaloin equivalents for quantitative analysis [10]. These markers can be employed in identifying aloes obtained from different geographical regions, determining the best geographical sources of aloe vera gel products [123], and standardizing aloe products marketed for the treatment of constipation [10].

Because of suspected carcinogenicity [127], some regulatory authorities have banned the inclusion of aloe (whole leaf and latex) in oral over-the-counter nutraceuticals and laxative products. For instance, the International Aloe Science Council set a limit of 10 ppm total anthraquinone glycoside concentration (as aloin), while the European Medicines agency and Food and Drug authority set the limit at 0 ppm [128, 129]. In this case, aloin and aloe emodin are negative markers and can be used to assess the quality of over-the-counter products. However, the Uganda National Drug Authority and Uganda Bureau of Standards have not published any regulations on the use of aloes.

The main components of the gel are carbohydrates such as glucomannans and sugars [103]). One of the main compounds, acemannan, scored 8 points. Its biological activity is well studied, analytical markers are available and analytical methods have been developed (Tables 2 and 3). The main sugar, mannose 6 phosphate, scored only 3 points since its bioactivity is not well studied, and there are no analytical methods; thus, its concentration in the gel has not been reported. The unit cost of acemannan is approximately €20.8. For quality assurance of Aloe vera gel, the WHO monograph recommends a chemical test for carbohydrate and polysaccharide analysis by GC/MS. A molecular exclusion chromatographic method and a UV‒Vis spectrophotometric method for polysaccharides have also been published and are more affordable.

Assay methods for acemannan can be used to select high-yielding plant varieties, the best cultivation sites, suitable agronomic practices, and harvest seasons [130, 131].

Markers for Albizia coriaria

The dried stem bark is the plant material of interest for medicinal purposes. Commercial products are used for managing symptoms of respiratory tract disorders (whooping cough, catarrh, sore throat, congestion from asthma bronchitis, fever, sinusitis) [7]. Some pharmacologically active compounds, such as triterpenoids, lupeol, lupenone, betulinic acid and betulin [132, 133] (Fig. 4), have been elucidated with scores of 8, 6, 8, and 8, respectively. These compounds possess biological activities relevant to the commercial uses of the products, are available in pure form and have been quantified in many Albizia species, although assay methods specific to A. coriaria are scarce. The unit costs range between €68 for betulinic acid and €9.5 for betulinic acid.

There are no pharmacopoeial methods or monographs for A. coriaria materials. The identified markers can be used to monitor the batch-to-batch consistency of raw materials [134, 135] and to evaluate the efficiency of extraction methods.

Markers for Mangifera indica

The pharmacologically active compounds are obtained from extracts of the stem bark and leaves of Mangifera indica. The products containing these extracts are used for the management of respiratory tract disorders (whooping cough, catarrh, sore throat, congestion from asthma and bronchitis) [7]. Several phenolic compounds have been characterized and shown to possess biological activity relevant to the medicinal use of the materials. Mangiferin, catechin, quercetin and gallic acid scored 8. The unit costs of these markers ranged from €1.8 for quercetin to €34.5 for gallic acid. While epicatechin scored 5 points, its analytical standard is not readily available.

The identified markers can be used to monitor the batch-to-batch consistency of raw materials, to select the most suitable plant cultivars to source from [111] and to control the extraction and processing methods. There are no monographs for M. indica materials [7].

Markers for Azadirachta indica

The seed oil, leaves and stem bark are used as herbal materials. Products containing these herbal materials are used to manage respiratory tract disorders (cough, flu, sore throat, sinusitis), gastrointestinal disorders (gastric ulcers, flatulence, constipation) and lip balms (dry, cracked, and painful lips) [7]. The most important compounds are the limonoid azadirachtin and the tetranortriterpenes [84] nimbin, nimbidin, nimbolide and mahmoodin (Fig. 4). Most compounds scored 7 and above and are therefore suitable markers. The unit costs of these markers range from €105 to 289 for nimbin and azadirachtin, respectively. Although nimbolide and mahmoodin scored 5 points, they lack analytical standards and assay methods. According to the WHO monographs, high-performance liquid chromatography quantification of oxidized tetranortriterpenes in oil and leaf materials can be used for quality control [11]. Assays of these markers can be applied to select habitats for cultivation of neem, determine the best harvesting season and ensure consistency of materials obtained from various sources [115, 136, 137].

Markers for Zingiber officinalis (Ginger)

Herbal material is obtained from the rhizome, and the products are used to manage symptoms of respiratory tract disorders (cough, flu, sore throat, sinusitis, bronchial asthma, and fever) [7]. Gingerols and their dehydration products, shogaols (Fig. 4), have been extensively studied [89]. The compounds possess several pharmacological activities relevant to the application of the products; their analytical standards are readily available (apart from 12-gingerol), and analytical methods have been published. Thus, all compounds scored between 6 and 8 points and are thus suitable as markers. The unit cost of the analytical standards ranges between 50 and 60 euros. The WHO monographs recommend TLC fingerprinting with gingerols and shogaols as standards and GC and HPLC assay methods [10]. Since gingerols are dehydrated to form shogaols during storage and upon exposure to heat [138], the ratio of gingerols to shogaols can be used to determine the freshness of the ginger samples and optimize storage conditions. The quantities of the markers can be applied to optimize extraction processes and to study the phyto-equivalence of gingers obtained from different sources [139].

Markers for Warburgia ugandensis

The bark of the stem is used as a drug for the treatment of respiratory tract disorders (cough, measles symptoms, common colds, sinusitis, rhinitis, asthma, catarrh, bronchial congestion, and hiccups) and gastric ulcers [7]. While many compounds have been elucidated, the most important being the drimane sesquiterpenes bemadienolide, muzigadial, polygodial, warburganal, ugandensolide, and muzigadial [99] (Fig. 4), specific bioactivity studies are rare.

Only polygodial, muzigadial muzigadiolide, warburganal, and ugandensidial have been shown to possess some antimycobacterial activity [99]. In addition to limited pharmacological evidence, most of these compounds are not available in pure form for use as analytical standards, and no assay methods have been published. Thus, the compounds scored between only 1 and 3 points and are therefore not suitable quality control markers according to the Herb MaRS. In such cases, the WHO recommends the use of other constituents, whose biological activities are known even though the relevance of such activities to the traditional use of the plant may not be well established [3]. Thus, compounds such as linoleic acid, myrcene, and linalool, which are known components of W. ugandensis [140], can be used for its quality control; such evaluation will not be relevant to pharmacological standardization of the plant materials. This lack of pharmacological data, analytical methods and standards is common to plants that are exclusively used in Africa [8].

Conclusions

This study has demonstrated the applicability of the Herb MaRS to the quality assurance of herbal materials. Markers have been identified for the phytochemical standardization of the six most common medicinal plants in Uganda. The selected markers were as follows: (aromadendrine, α-terpineol, globulol, and 1,8-cineol) (in Eucalyptus globulus Labill. ); (aloin, aloe emodin, acemannan) (in Aloe barbadensis (L.) Burm.f. ), (lupeol, lupenone, betulinic acid, betulin, and catechin) (in Albizia coriaria Oliv.); (mangiferin, catechin, quercetin, and gallic acid (in Mangifera indica L.); (azadirachtin, nimbin, nimbidin (in Azadirachta indica A.Juss. ); and (6,8,10-gingerols, and 6-shogaol (in Zingiber officinalis Roscoe). For W. ugandensis, the compounds with known biological activity were not suitable as markers because they lack analytical standards and/or analytical methods. This implies that the Herb MaRS is only applicable for plants that have been extensively researched, such that it is possible to establish evidence of efficacy and/or safety. The method is also only applicable to plants whose phytochemical ingredients have analytical standards and corresponding analytical methods.

Recommendations

Markers for the other twenty-five (25) plant materials should be established using the same approach. The identified markers should be evaluated for suitability at the various stages of the production chain of herbal medicines in Uganda, i.e., from authentication and quality control of raw materials to evaluating reproducibility in the efficacy, safety, and stability of finished products notified by the National Drug Authority. Information about marker evaluation can be included in future Ugandan medicinal plant monographs and/or product databases to guide their quality assurance. In addition to the quantification of marker compounds, the construction of fingerprint databases for various plants is encouraged. The standardized fingerprints can then be used for routine quality assessment of the plant materials.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. American Herbal Products Association. Good agricultural and collection practices and good manufacturing practices for botanical materials. 2021.

  2. American Herbal Products Association. Standardization of botanical products: white paper. Silver Spring: American Herbal Products Association; 2003. p. 33.

  3. World Health Organization. WHO guidelines for selecting marker substances of herbal origin for quality control of herbal medicines. In: Edited by Preparations WECoSfP. 2016. p. 72–85.

  4. EMA E. Guideline on specifications: test procedures and acceptance criteria for herbal substances, herbal preparations and herbal medicinal products/traditional herbal medicinal products. In: París. Obtenido de www.ema.europa. eu; 2011.

  5. Bensoussan A, Lee S, Murray C, Bourchier S, Van Der Kooy F, Pearson JL, Liu J, Chang D, Khoo C. Choosing chemical markers for quality assurance of complex herbal medicines: development and application of the herb MaRS criteria. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015;97(6):628–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. National Drug Authority. Drug Register. In: National Drug Authorty; 2021.

  7. Kaggwa B, Kyeyune H, Munanura EI, Anywar G, Lutoti S, Aber J, Bagoloire LK, Weisheit A, Tolo CU, Kamba PF, et al. Safety and efficacy of medicinal plants used to manufacture herbal products with regulatory approval in uganda: a cross-sectional study. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2022;2022:1304839.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Kaggwa B, Kyeyune H, Munanura EI, Anywar G, Lutoti S, Aber J, Bagoloire LK, Weisheit A, Tolo CU, Kamba PF. Safety and efficacy of medicinal plants used to manufacture herbal products with regulatory approval in Uganda: a cross-sectional study. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2022;2022:1304839.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Murray V, Shaw D. WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants, volume 2. Health Hyg. 2000;21(3):129.

    Google Scholar 

  10. World Health Organization. WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  11. World Health Organization. WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants: volume 3. Geneve: World Health Organization; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  12. World Health Organization. WHO monographs on selected medicinal plants: volume 4. Geneve: World Health Organization; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Inter African Committee on Medicinal P, African Traditional M, Organization of African U, Scientific T, Research C. African pharmacopoeia, vol. 1. 2nd ed. Lagos: Organization of African Unity, Scientific, Technical, & Research Commission; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  14. West African Health Organization. West African Herbal Pharmacopoeia BOBO-DIOULASSO (BURKINA FASO), Vol. 1. Bobo-Dioulasso: West African Health Organization; 2013.

  15. Scott G, Springfield EP. Pharmaceutical monographs for 60 South African plant species used as traditional medicines. South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI). Available at http://www.plantzafrica.com/medmonographs. Accessed 15 Feb 2023.

  16. Amić A, Milenković D, Marković Z, Cagardová D, Pedregal JR-G, Marković JMD. Impact of the phenolic O–H vs. C-ring C–H bond cleavage on the antioxidant potency of dihydrokaempferol. New J Chem. 2021;45(18):7977–86.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zeng Y, Nikitkova A, Abdelsalam H, Li J, Xiao J. Activity of quercetin and kaemferol against Streptococcus mutans biofilm. Arch Oral Biol. 2019;98:9–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moo C-L, Osman MA, Yang S-K, Yap W–S, Ismail S, Lim S-H-E, Chong C-M, Lai K-S. Antimicrobial activity and mode of action of 1,8-cineol against carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Juergens U, Engelen T, Stöber M, Racké K, Gillissen A, Vetter H. Inhibitory activity of 1,8-cineol (eucalyptol) on cytokine production in human mononuclear phagocytes in vitro. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2004;17:281–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cai Z-M, Peng J-Q, Chen Y, Tao L, Zhang Y-Y, Fu L-Y, Long Q-D, Shen X-C. 1,8-Cineole: a review of source, biological activities, and application. J Asian Nat Prod Res. 2021;23(10):938–54.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jiang Z, Guo X, Zhang K, Sekaran G, Cao B, Zhao Q, Zhang S, Kirby GM, Zhang X. The essential oils and eucalyptol from Artemisia vulgaris L. prevent acetaminophen-induced liver injury by activating Nrf2–Keap1 and enhancing APAP clearance through nontoxic metabolic pathway. Front Pharmacol. 2019;10: 782.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Luedtke K, Rushton A, Wright C, Geiss B, Juergens TP, May A. Transcranial direct current stimulation for the reduction of clinical and experimentally induced pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin J Pain. 2012;28(5):452–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Takaishi M, Fujita F, Uchida K, Yamamoto S, Sawada M, Hatai C, Shimizu M, Tominaga M. 1,8-cineole, a TRPM8 agonist, is a novel natural antagonist of human TRPA1. Mol Pain. 2012;8:1744-8069-1748–86.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bachheti R. Chemical composition and antibacterial activity of the essential oil from the leaves of Eucalyptus globulus collected from Haramaya University, Ethiopia. Der Pharma Chem. 2015;7(2):209–14.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Mulyaningsih S, Sporer F, Reichling J, Wink M. Antibacterial activity of essential oils from Eucalyptus and of selected components against multidrug-resistant bacterial pathogens. Pharm Biol. 2011;49(9):893–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Brand C, Ferrante A, Prager R, Riley T, Carson C, Finlay-Jones J, Hart P. The water-soluble components of the essential oil of Melaleuca alternifolia (tea tree oil) suppress the production of superoxide by human monocytes, but not neutrophils, activated in vitro. Inflamm Res. 2001;50(4):213–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Quintans-Júnior LJ, Oliveira MG, Santana MF, Santana MT, Guimarães AG, Siqueira JS, De Sousa DP. Almeida RN: α-Terpineol reduces nociceptive behavior in mice. Pharm Biol. 2011;49(6):583–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. de Witte P. Metabolism and pharmacokinetics of anthranoids. Pharmacology. 1993;47(Suppl 1):86–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ishii Y, Tanizawa H, Takino Y. Studies of Aloe. III.: mechanism of Cathartic Effect.(2). Chem Pharm Bull. 1990;38(1):197–200.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Arosio B, Gagliano N, Fusaro LMP, Parmeggiani L, Tagliabue J, Galetti P, De Castri D, Moscheni C, Annoni G. Aloe-emodin quinone pretreatment reduces acute liver injury induced by carbon tetrachloride. Pharmacol Toxicol. 2000;87(5):229–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Im S-A, Oh S-T, Song S, Kim M-R, Kim D-S, Woo S–S, Jo TH, Park YI, Lee C-K. Identification of optimal molecular size of modified Aloe polysaccharides with maximum immunomodulatory activity. Int Immunopharmacol. 2005;5(2):271–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Park M-Y, Kwon H-J, Sung M-K. Evaluation of aloin and aloe-emodin as anti-inflammatory agents in aloe by using murine macrophages. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2009;73(4):828–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sánchez-Machado DI, López-Cervantes J, Sendón R, Sanches-Silva A. Aloe vera: ancient knowledge with new frontiers. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2017;61:94–102.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wang HH, Chung JG, Ho CC, Wu LT, Chang SH. Aloe-emodin effects on arylamine N-acetyltransferase activity in the bacterium Helicobacter pylori. Planta Med. 1998;64(02):176–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Roberts DB, Travis EL. Acemannan-containing wound dressing gel reduces radiation-induced skin reactions in C3H mice. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;32(4):1047–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Karaca K, Sharma J, Nordgren R. Nitric oxide production by chicken macrophages activated by Acemannan, a complex carbohydrate extracted from Aloe vera. Int J Immunopharmacol. 1995;17(3):183–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Davis RH, Donato J, Hartman GM, Haas RC. Anti-inflammatory and wound healing activity of a growth substance in Aloe vera. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1994;84(2):77–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Davis RH, DiDonato JJ, Johnson R, Stewart CB. Aloe vera, hydrocortisone, and sterol influence on wound tensile strength and anti-inflammation. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1994;84(12):614–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Rathinavel T, Ammashi S, Shanmugam G. Analgesic and anti-inflammatory potential of Lupeol isolated from indian traditional medicinal plant Crateva adansonii screened through in vivo and in silico approaches. J Genet Eng Biotechnol. 2021;19(1):62.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Sunitha S, Nagaraj M, Varalakshmi P. Hepatoprotective effect of lupeol and lupeol linoleate on tissue antioxidant defense system in cadmium-induced hepatotoxicity in rats. Fitoterapia. 2001;72(5):516–23.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Pereira Beserra F, Xue M, Maia GLA, Leite Rozza A, Helena Pellizzon C, Jackson CJ. Lupeol, a Pentacyclic Triterpene, promotes Migration, Wound Closure, and Contractile Effect in Vitro: possible involvement of PI3K/Akt and p38/ERK/MAPK pathways. Molecules. 2018;23(11):2819.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Ciurlea S, Ionescu D, Redes L, Soica C. Lupeol, a pentacylcic triterpene that reduces the lesions and irritability on murine skin and is effective on in vitro tumor models. J Agroaliment Process Technol. 2010;16(4):427–32.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Thirumalaisamy R, Ameen F, Subramanian A, Selvankumar T, Alwakeel S, Govarthanan M. In vitro and in-silico anti-inflammatory activity of Lupeol isolated from Crateva adansonii and its hidden molecular mechanism. Int J Pept Res Ther. 2020;26(4):2179–89.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Lee C, Lee JW, Seo JY, Hwang SW, Im JP, Kim JS. Lupeol inhibits LPS-induced NF-kappa B signaling in intestinal epithelial cells and macrophages, and attenuates acute and chronic murine colitis. Life Sci. 2016;146:100–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Okusa PN, Stévigny C, Névraumont M, Gelbcke M, Van Anrwerpen P, Braekman JC, Duez P. Ferulaldehyde and lupeol as direct and indirect antimicrobial compounds from Cordia gilletii (Boraginaceae) root barks. Nat Prod Commun. 2014;9(5):1934578X1400900506.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ahamed B, Krishna V, Gowdru H, Rajanaika H, Kumaraswamy H, Rajshekarappa S, Dandin C, Mahadevan K. Isolation of bactericidal constituents from the stem bark extract of Grewia tiliaefolia Vahl. Res J Med Plant. 2007;1(3):72–82.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Mutai C, Keter L, Ngeny L, Jeruto P. Effects of triterpenoids on Herpes Simplex Virus Type1 (Hsv-1) in vitro. 2012;1:140. https://doi.org/10.4172/scientificreports.140.

  48. Tanaka T, Ikeda T, Kaku M, Zhu X-H, Okawa M, Yokomizo K, Uyeda M, Nohara T. A new Lignan glycoside and phenylethanoid glycosides from Strobilanthes cusia B REMEK. Chem Pharm Bull. 2004;52(10):1242–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Yun Y, Han S, Park E, Yim D, Lee S, Lee C-K, Cho K, Kim K. Immunomodulatory activity of betulinic acid by producing pro-inflammatory cytokines and activation of macrophages. Arch Pharm Res. 2003;26(12):1087–95.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Oyebanji BO, Saba AB, Oridupa OA. Studies on the anti-inflammatory, analgesic and antipyrexic activities of betulinic acid derived from Tetracera potatoria. Afr J Tradit Complement Altern Med. 2014;11(1):30–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Sakna ST, Maghraby YR, Abdelfattah MS, et al. Phytochemical diversity and pharmacological effects of triterpenes from genus Ziziphus: a comprehensive review. Phytochem Rev. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11101-022-09835-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Oloyede HOB, Ajiboye HO, Salawu MO, Ajiboye TO. Influence of oxidative stress on the antibacterial activity of betulin, betulinic acid and ursolic acid. Microb Pathog. 2017;111:338–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Kurokawa M, Basnet P, Ohsugi M, Hozumi T, Kadota S, Namba T, Kawana T, Shiraki K. Anti-herpes Simplex Virus Activity of Moronic Acid purified fromRhus javanica in Vitro and in vivo. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1999;289(1):72–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Chiou Y-S, Huang Q, Ho C-T, Wang Y-J, Pan M-H. Directly interact with Keap1 and LPS is involved in the anti-inflammatory mechanisms of (-)-epicatechin-3-gallate in LPS-induced macrophages and endotoxemia. Free Radic Biol Med. 2016;94:1–16.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kim JM, Kang JY, Park SK, Moon JH, Kim MJ, Lee HL, Jeong HR, Kim JC, Heo HJ. Powdered Green Tea (Matcha) attenuates the cognitive dysfunction via the regulation of systemic inflammation in chronic PM2. 5-exposed BALB/c mice. Antioxidants. 2021;10(12): 1932.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Mishra CB, Pandey P, Sharma RD, Malik MZ, Mongre RK, Lynn AM, Prasad R, Jeon R, Prakash A. Identifying the natural polyphenol catechin as a multitargeted agent against SARS-CoV-2 for the plausible therapy of COVID-19: an integrated computational approach. Brief Bioinform. 2021;22(2):1346–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Onishi S, Mori T, Kanbara H, Habe T, Ota N, Kurebayashi Y, Suzuki T. Green tea catechins adsorbed on the murine pharyngeal mucosa reduce influenza a virus infection. J Funct Foods. 2020;68: 103894.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Song J-M, Lee K-H, Seong B-L. Antiviral effect of catechins in green tea on influenza virus. Antivir Res. 2005;68(2):66–74.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Pardo-Andreu GL, Sánchez-Baldoquín C, Ávila-González R, Delgado R, Naal Z, Curti C. Fe (III) improves antioxidant and cytoprotecting activities of mangiferin. Eur J Pharmacol. 2006;547(1–3):31–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Li H, Wang Q, Ding Y, Bao C, Li W. Mangiferin ameliorates Porphyromonas gingivalis-induced experimental periodontitis by inhibiting phosphorylation of nuclear factor‐κB and Janus kinase 1–signal transducer and activator of transcription signaling pathways. J Periodontal Res. 2017;52(1):1–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Vieira AB, Coelho LP, Insuela DB, Carvalho VF, Dos Santos MH, Silva PM, Martins MA. Mangiferin prevents guinea pig tracheal contraction via activation of the nitric oxide-cyclic GMP pathway. PLoS One. 2013;8(8): e71759.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Rivera DG, Hernández I, Merino N, Luque Y, Álvarez A, Martín Y, Amador A, Nuevas L, Delgado R. Mangifera indica L. extract (Vimang) and mangiferin reduce the airway inflammation and Th2 cytokines in murine model of allergic asthma. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2011;63(10):1336–45.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Biswas T, Sen A, Roy R, Maji S, Maji HS. Isolation of mangiferin from flowering buds of Mangifera indica L and its evaluation of in vitro antibacterial activity. J Pharm Anal. 2015;4(3):49–56.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Sahu S, Das BK, Pradhan J, Mohapatra B, Mishra B, Sarangi N. Effect of Magnifera indica kernel as a feed additive on immunity and resistance to Aeromonas hydrophila in Labeo rohita fingerlings. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2007;23(1):109–18.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Du S, Liu H, Lei T, Xie X, Wang H, He X, Tong R, Wang Y. Mangiferin: an effective therapeutic agent against several disorders. Mol Med Rep. 2018;18(6):4775–86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Zheng MS, Lu ZY. Antiviral effect of mangiferin and isomangiferin on herpes simplex virus. Chin Med J (Engl). 1990;103(2):160–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Oh WY, Ambigaipalan P, Shahidi F. Preparation of quercetin esters and their antioxidant activity. J Agric Food Chem. 2019;67(38):10653–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Wang Y, Tang Y, Li Z, Hua Q, Wang L, Song X, Zou B, Ding M, Zhao J, Tang C. Joint toxicity of a multiheavy metal mixture and chemoprevention in sprague dawley rats. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(4): 1451.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Kahkeshani N, Farzaei F, Fotouhi M, Alavi SS, Bahramsoltani R, Naseri R, Momtaz S, Abbasabadi Z, Rahimi R, Farzaei MH. Pharmacological effects of gallic acid in health and diseases: a mechanistic review. Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2019;22(3):225.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Kang M-S, Oh J-S, Kang I-C, Hong S-J, Choi C-H. Inhibitory effect of methyl gallate and gallic acid on oral bacteria. J Microbiol. 2008;46(6):744–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Lee JH, Oh M, Seok JH, Kim S, Lee DB, Bae G, Bae HI, Bae SY, Hong YM, Kwon SO, et al. Antiviral Effects of Black Raspberry (Rubus coreanus) seed and its gallic acid against Influenza Virus infection. Viruses. 2016;8(6):157.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Tang Y, Li Y, Yu H, Gao C, Liu L, Xing M, Liu L, Yao P. Quercetin attenuates chronic ethanol hepatotoxicity: implication of free iron uptake and release. Food Chem Toxicol. 2014;67:131–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Granado-Serrano AB, Martín MA, Bravo L, Goya L, Ramos S. Quercetin modulates Nrf2 and glutathione-related defenses in HepG2 cells: involvement of p38. Chem Biol Interact. 2012;195(2):154–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Boesch-Saadatmandi C, Loboda A, Wagner AE, Stachurska A, Jozkowicz A, Dulak J, Döring F, Wolffram S, Rimbach G. Effect of quercetin and its metabolites isorhamnetin and quercetin-3-glucuronide on inflammatory gene expression: role of miR-155. J Nutr Biochem. 2011;22(3):293–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Li Y, Yao J, Han C, Yang J, Chaudhry MT, Wang S, Liu H, Yin Y. Quercetin, inflammation and immunity. Nutrients. 2016;8(3): 167.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Hossion AM, Zamami Y, Kandahary RK, Tsuchiya T, Ogawa W, Iwado A, Sasaki K. Quercetin diacylglycoside analogs showing dual inhibition of DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV as novel antibacterial agents. J Med Chem. 2011;54(11):3686–703.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Safwat NA, Kashef MT, Aziz RK, Amer KF, Ramadan MA. Quercetin 3-O-glucoside recovered from the wild egyptian Sahara plant, Euphorbia paralias L., inhibits glutamine synthetase and has antimycobacterial activity. Tuberculosis. 2018;108:106–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Fan D, Zhou X, Zhao C, Chen H, Zhao Y, Gong X. Anti-inflammatory, antiviral and quantitative study of quercetin-3-O-β-D-glucuronide in Polygonum perfoliatum L. Fitoterapia. 2011;82(6):805–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Di Petrillo A, Orrù G, Fais A, Fantini MC. Quercetin and its derivates as antiviral potentials: a comprehensive review. Phytother Res. 2022;36(1):266–78.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Thoh M, Babajan B, Raghavendra PB, Sureshkumar C, Manna SK. Azadirachtin interacts with retinoic acid receptors and inhibits retinoic acid-mediated biological responses. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(6):4690–702.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Sarmiento WC, Maramba CC, Gonzales MLM. An in vitro study on the antibacterial effect of neem (Azadirachta indica) leaf extract on methicillin-sensitive and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. PIDSP J. 2011;12(1):40–5.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Bhargava K, Gupta M, Gupta G, Mitra C. Anti-inflammatory activity of saponins and ot-her natural products. Indian J Med Res. 1970;58(6):724–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Pillai N, Santhakumari G. Anti-arthritic and anti-inflammatory actions of nimbidin. Planta Med. 1981;43(09):59–63.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Hossain MA, Al-Toubi WA, Weli AM, Al-Riyami QA, Al-Sabahi JN. Identification and characterization of chemical compounds in different crude extracts from leaves of Omani neem. J Taibah Univ Sci. 2013;7(4):181–8.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Pillai N, Santhakumari G. Effect of nimbidin on gastric acid secretion. Anc Sci Life. 1985;5(2):91.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Alam A, Haldar S, Thulasiram HV, Kumar R, Goyal M, Iqbal MS, Pal C, Dey S, Bindu S, Sarkar S. Novel anti-inflammatory activity of epoxyazadiradione against macrophage migration inhibitory factor: inhibition of tautomerase and proinflammatory activities of macrophage migration inhibitory factor. J Biol Chem. 2012;287(29):24844–61.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Rojanapo W, Suwanno S, Somaree R, Glinsukon T, Thebtaranonth Y. Mutagenic and antimicrobial testing activity of nimbolide and nimbic acid. J Sci Thailand. 1985;11:177–88.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Ara I, Siddiqui BS, Faizi S, Siddiqui S. Structurally novel diterpenoid constituents from the stem bark of Azadirachta indica (Meliaceae). J Chem Soc Perkin  Trans 1. 1989;2:343–5.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Mustafa T, Srivastava K, Jensen K. Pharmacology of ginger, Zingiber officinale. J Drug Develop. 1993;6:25–39.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Suekawa M, Yuasa K, Isono M, Sone H, Ikeya Y, Sakakibara I, Aburada M, Hosoya E. Pharmacological studies on ginger. IV. Effect of (6)-shogaol on the arachidonic cascade. Nihon Yakurigaku Zasshi. 1986;88(4):263–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Aimbire F, Penna S, Rodrigues M, Rodrigues K, Lopes-Martins RAB, Sertié JAA. Effect of hydroalcoholic extract of Zingiber officinalis rhizomes on LPS-induced rat airway hyperreactivity and lung inflammation. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 2007;77(3–4):129–38.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Hiserodt R, Franzblau S, Rosen R. Isolation of 6-, 8-, and 10-Gingerol from Ginger Rhizome by HPLC and preliminary evaluation of inhibition of Mycobacterium a vium and Mycobacterium t uberculosis. J Agric Food Chem. 1998;46(7):2504–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Park M, Bae J, Lee DS. Antibacterial activity of [10]-gingerol and [12]‐gingerol isolated from ginger rhizome against periodontal bacteria. Phytother Res. 2008;22(11):1446–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Mahady GB, Pendland SL, Yun GS, Lu Z-Z, Stoia A. Ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe) and the gingerols inhibit the growth of Cag A + strains of Helicobacter pylori. Anticancer Res. 2003;23:3699.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Yamahara J, Rong HQ, Iwamoto M, Kobayashi G, Matsuda H, Fujimura H. Active components of ginger exhibiting anti-serotonergic action. Phytother Res. 1989;3(2):70–1.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Huang Q, Iwamoto M, Tanaka AOKIS, Tajima N, Yamahara K, Takaishi J, Yoshida Y, Tomimatsu M, Tamai T. Anti-5-hydroxytryptamine3 effect of galanolactone, diterpenoid isolated from ginger. Chem Pharm Bull. 1991;39(2):397–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Aeschbach R, Löliger J, Scott B, Murcia A, Butler J, Halliwell B, Aruoma O. Antioxidant actions of thymol, carvacrol, 6-gingerol, zingerone and hydroxytyrosol. Food Chem Toxicol. 1994;32(1):31–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. da Cunha FM, Fröde TS, Mendes GL, Malheiros A, Cechinel Filho V, Yunes RA, Calixto JB. Additional evidence for the anti-inflammatory and anti-allergic properties of the sesquiterpene polygodial. Life Sci. 2001;70(2):159–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Wube AA, Bucar F, Gibbons S, Asres K. Sesquiterpenes from Warburgia ugandensis and their antimycobacterial activity. Phytochemistry. 2005;66(19):2309–15.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Khumalo G, Sadgrove N, Van Vuuren S, Van Wyk B-E. Antimicrobial activity of volatile and nonvolatile isolated compounds and extracts from the bark and leaves of Warburgia salutaris (Canellaceae) against skin and respiratory pathogens. South Afr J Bot. 2019;122:547–50.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Apel MA, Rodrigues RA, Soares LAL, Henriques AT. Quantification of the components in commercial essential oil of Eucalyptus globulus labill. By gas chromatography–GC-FID and GC–MS. Drug Anal Res. 2017;1(2):9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Elsohly MA, Gul W, Avula B, Khan IA. Determination of the anthraquinones aloe-emodin and aloin-A by liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric and diode array detection. J AOAC Int. 2007;90(1):28–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Cuevas BA, Méndez CHH, Flores II, Solís-Pereira S, Cuevas-Glory L, Muñoz GR. Y Vargas MdLV, Cortez JT: Main Polysaccharides isolated and quantified of Aloe vera Gel in different Seasons of the year. Food Nutr Sci. 2016;7(06):447.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Metcalfe C. Quantitation of aloe vera polysaccharides by O-Acetyl and UV–Vis spectrophotometry: first action 2018.14. J AOAC Int. 2019;102(4):1091–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Somwong P, Theanphong O. Quantitative analysis of triterpene lupeol and anti-inflammatory potential of the extracts of traditional pain-relieving medicinal plants Derris scandens, Albizia procera, and Diospyros rhodocalyx. J Adv Pharm Technol Res. 2021;12(2):147–51.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  106. Kaggwa B, Munanura EI, Kyeyune H, Anywar G, Okella H, Ajayi CO, Wangalwa R, Mulangwa J, Sesaazi CD, Bagoloire LK. Evaluation of catechin, lupeol, and betulinic acid as markers for the chromatographic quality control of Albizia coriaria raw materials; an experimental study. J Med Plants Res. 2023;17(5):180–200.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Andrade EM, Teixeira JS, Silva DK, Santos TBd, Korn MG, Brandão HN, Ferraz CG, Meira CS, Soares MB, Guimarães ET. Phytochemical analysis, multielement composition and biological activities of extracts and lupenone from Albizia inundata (Mart.) Barneby & JW Grimes. J Braz Chem Soc. 2020;31:1825–37.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Tatke P, Desai S, Gabhe S. Estimation of betulinic acid in extracts and formulations containing Albizialebbeck by HPLC. World J Pharm Res. 2014;3(6):1277–86.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Desai S, Tatke P, Gaitonde V, Gabhe S. Fast HPLC-DAD method for estimation of Catechin for standardization of extracts and antiasthmatic polyherbal formulations containing Albizia lebbeck. Indian J Pharm Educ Res. 2020;54(3):550–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Zhang X, Su B, Li J, Li Y, Lu D, Zhu K, Pei H, Zhao M. Analysis by RP-HPLC of mangiferin component correlation between Medicinal Loranthus and their Mango host trees. J Chromatogr Sci. 2012;52(1):1–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Núñez Sellés AJ, Vélez Castro HT, Agüero-Agüero J, González-González J, Naddeo F, De Simone F, Rastrelli L. Isolation and quantitative analysis of phenolic antioxidants, free sugars, and polyols from mango (Mangifera indica L.) stem bark aqueous decoction used in Cuba as a nutritional supplement. J Agric Food Chem. 2002;50(4):762–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Gottumukkala RV, Nadimpalli N, Sukala K, Subbaraju GV. Determination of catechin and epicatechin content in chocolates by high-performance liquid chromatography. Int Sch Res Notices. 2014;2014:628196.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Kim TJ, Kim YJ, Seo WD, Park SU, Kim JK. Improved quantification of catechin and epicatechin in red rice (Oryza sativa L.) using stable isotope dilution liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. Appl Biol Chem. 2022;65(1):85.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Ramesh A, Balasubramanian M. Rapid preconcentration method for the determination of azadirachtin-A and -B, nimbin and salannin in neem oil samples by using graphitized carbon solid phase extraction. Analyst. 1999;124(1):19–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Sidhu OP, Kumar V, Behl HM. Variability in triterpenoids (nimbin and salanin) composition of neem among different provenances of India. Ind Crops Prod. 2004;19(1):69–75.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Suttiarporn P, Choommongkol V. Microwave-assisted improved extraction and purification of Anticancer Nimbolide from Azadirachta indica (neem) Leaves. Molecules. 2020;25(12):2913.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  117. Ashraf K, Mujeeb M, Ahmad A, Ahmad S, Ahmad N, Amir M. Determination of gingerols in ginger by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Lett. 2014;47(12):2120–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. Tao Y, Li W, Liang W, Van Breemen RB. Identification and quantification of gingerols and related compounds in ginger dietary supplements using high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. J Agric Food Chem. 2009;57(21):10014–21.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Park SY, Jung MY. UHPLC-ESI‐MS/MS for the quantification of eight major Gingerols and Shogaols in ginger products: Effects of ionization polarity and mobile phase modifier on the sensitivity. J Food Sci. 2016;81(10):C2457–2465.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Aldoghaim FS, Flematti GR, Hammer KA. Antimicrobial activity of several cineole-rich western australian Eucalyptus essential oils. Microorganisms. 2018;6(4): 122.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  121. Kanama SK, Viljoen AM, Kamatou GP, Chen W, Sandasi M, Adhami H-R, Van Wyk B-E. Simultaneous quantification of anthrones and chromones in Aloe ferox (Cape aloes) using UHPLC–MS. Phytochem Lett. 2015;13:85–90.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Reynolds T. The compounds in Aloe leaf exudates: a review. Bot J Linn Soc. 1985;90(3):157–77.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Kumar S, Yadav M, Yadav A, Rohilla P, Yadav JP. Antiplasmodial potential and quantification of aloin and aloe-emodin in Aloe vera collected from different climatic regions of India. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2017;17(1):369.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  124. Fitmawati F, Resida E, Kholifah SN, Roza RM, Almurdani M, Emrizal E. Phytochemical screening and antioxidant profiling of Sumatran wild mangoes (Mangifera spp.): a potential source for medicine antidegenerative effects. F1000Res. 2020;9:220.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  125. Song L, Wang J, Gao Q, Ma X, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Xun H, Yao X, Tang F. Simultaneous determination of five azadirachtins in the seed and leaf extracts of Azadirachta indica by automated online solid-phase extraction coupled with LC–Q-TOF–MS. Chem Cent J. 2018;12(1):1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Forim MR, Cass QB, Fernandes JB, Vieira PC. Simultaneous quantification of azadirachtin and 3-tigloylazadirachtol in brazilian seeds and oil of Azadirachta indica: application to quality control and marketing. Anal Methods. 2010;2(7):860–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Boudreau MD, Olson GR, Tryndyak VP, Bryant MS, Felton RP, Beland FA. From the cover: aloin, a component of the aloe vera plant leaf, induces pathological changes and modulates the composition of microbiota in the large intestines of f344/N male rats. Toxicol Sci. 2017;158(2):302–18.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  128. Bayne HJ. FDA issues final rule banning use of aloe and cascara sagrada in OTC drug products. HerbalGram. 2002;56:56.

    Google Scholar 

  129. EUR-Lex 32021R0468 EN EUR-Lex Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/468 of 18 March 2021. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/468/oj. Accessed 5 Feb 2023.

  130. Lucini L, Pellizzoni M, Molinari GP. Anthraquinones and β-polysaccharides content and distribution in Aloe plants grown under different light intensities. Biochem Syst Ecol. 2013;51:264–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Ling-Tong JIANGC-Q, Feng Q, Na S, Chang-Hai Y, Xiao-Ming W, ZHENG Q-S. Distribution of mineral nutrients and active ingredients in Aloe vera irrigated with diluted seawater. Pedosphere. 2014;24(6):722–30.

    Google Scholar 

  132. Byamukama R, Barbara G, Namukobe J, Heydenreich M, Kiremire BT. Bioactive compounds in the stem bark of Albizia coriaria (Welw. Ex Oliver). Int J Biol Chem Sci. 2015;9(2):1013–24.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Omara T, Kiprop AK, Kosgei VJ. Isolation and characterization of compounds in ethanolic extract of Albizia coriaria (welw ex. Oliver) leaves: a further evidence of its ethnomedicinal diversity. Bull Natl Res Centre. 2022;46(1):1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Omara T, Kiprop AK, Kosgei VJ. Intraspecific variation of phytochemicals, antioxidant, and antibacterial activities of different solvent extracts of Albizia coriaria leaves from some agroecological zones of Uganda. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2021;2021:2335454.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  135. Anywar G, Kakudidi E, Byamukama R, Mukonzo J, Schubert A, Oryem-Origa H. Indigenous traditional knowledge of medicinal plants used by herbalists in treating opportunistic infections among people living with HIV/AIDS in Uganda. J Ethnopharmacol. 2020;246: 112205.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Sidhu OP, Behl HM. Seasonal variation in azadirachtins in seeds of Azadirachta indica. Curr Sci. 1996:1084–6.

  137. Gupta V, Ahlawat S, Kumar R, Ajit Datta A. Effect of season and year on azadirachtin A and oil content in neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) seeds and relationship of azadirachtin A and oil content with rainfall, temperature and humidity. Curr Sci. 2010;10:953–6.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Jung MY, Lee MK, Park HJ, Oh E-B, Shin JY, Park JS, Jung SY, Oh J-H, Choi D-S. Heat-induced conversion of gingerols to shogaols in ginger as affected by heat type (dry or moist heat), sample type (fresh or dried), temperature and time. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2018;27(3):687–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Pace R, Martinelli EM. The phytoequivalence of herbal extracts: a critical evaluation. Fitoterapia. 2022;162: 105262.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Kioy D, Gray AI, Waterman PG. A comparative study of the stem-bark drimane sesquiterpenes and leaf volatile oils of Warburgia ugandensis and W. stuhlmannii. Phytochemistry. 1990;29(11):3535–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We appreciate the guidance and mentorship of Engineer Anke Weisheit (Business and Innovation manager), Dr. Casim Umba Tolo (Center Leader) of the Pharm-Biotechnology and Traditional Medicine Centre (PHARMBIOTRAC), Mbarara University of Science and Technology.

Funding

This study was funded by the World Bank through the Pharm-Biotechnology and Traditional Medicine Centre (PHARMBIOTRAC), African Center of Excellence II (ACE-II) Project. The funder contributed research money and stipends (SD) but was not involved in the planning and implementation of the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Pharm-Bio Technology and Traditional Medicine Center (PHARMBIOTRAC), PO Box 1410, Mbarara, Uganda

    Bruhan Kaggwa, Hedmon Okella & Ogwang Patrick Engeu

  2. Department of Pharmacy, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, P.O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda

    Bruhan Kaggwa, Edson Ireeta Munanura, Henry Kyeyune & Fadhiru Pakoyo Kamba

  3. Department of Plant Sciences, Microbiology & Biotechnology, Makerere University, P.O. Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda

    Godwin Anywar

  4. Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, P. O BOX 1410, Mbarara, Uganda

    Raphael Wangalwa

Authors
  1. Bruhan Kaggwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Godwin Anywar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Edson Ireeta Munanura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Raphael Wangalwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Henry Kyeyune
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hedmon Okella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Fadhiru Pakoyo Kamba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ogwang Patrick Engeu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

B.K conceived the idea, and drafted the manuscript. GA, E.I.M and H.K collected and analyzed bioactivity data. H.O and H.K collected and analyzed data on availability of analytical standards and assay methods. R.W drew the chemical structures, tables and graphs. F.P.K and O.P.E supervised the work. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscripts.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruhan Kaggwa.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This work was approved by the Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Research and Ethics Committee.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaggwa, B., Anywar, G., Munanura, E.I. et al. Application of the herbal chemical marker ranking system (Herb MaRS) to the standardization of herbal raw materials: a case study. BMC Complement Med Ther 23, 348 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-023-04178-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-023-04178-3

Keywords

BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies

ISSN: 2662-7671

Contact us