Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26165523›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2015

Identification of common horsetail (Equisetum arvense L.; Equisetaceae) using Thin Layer Chromatography versus DNA barcoding.

C Haris Saslis-Lagoudakis, Sam Bruun-Lund, Natalie E Iwanycki, Ole Seberg, Gitte Petersen, Anna K Jäger, Nina Rønsted

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Multi-Pronged Technique for IdentifyingPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Detection of Seasonal Variation inFrontiers in plant science · 2019
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

C Haris Saslis-LagoudakisEvolutionary Genomics Section, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Sølvgade 83S, Copenhagen, DK-1307, Denmark.
Sam Bruun-LundEvolutionary Genomics Section, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Sølvgade 83S, Copenhagen, DK-1307, Denmark.
Natalie E IwanyckiEvolutionary Genomics Section, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Sølvgade 83S, Copenhagen, DK-1307, Denmark.
Ole SebergEvolutionary Genomics Section, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Sølvgade 83S, Copenhagen, DK-1307, Denmark.
Gitte PetersenEvolutionary Genomics Section, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Sølvgade 83S, Copenhagen, DK-1307, Denmark.
Anna K JägerNatural Products Research, Department of Drug Design and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, Copenhagen, DK-2100, Denmark.
Nina RønstedEvolutionary Genomics Section, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Sølvgade 83S, Copenhagen, DK-1307, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The global herbal products market has grown in recent years, making regulation of these products paramount for public healthcare. For instance, the common horsetail (Equisetum arvense L.) is used in numerous herbal products, but it can be adulterated with closely related species, especially E. palustre L. that can produce toxic alkaloids. As morphology-based identification is often difficult or impossible, the identification of processed material can be aided by molecular techniques. In this study, we explore two molecular identification techniques as methods of testing the purity of these products: a Thin Layer Chromatography approach (TLC-test) included in the European Pharmacopoeia and a DNA barcoding approach, used in recent years to identify material in herbal products. We test the potential of these methods for distinguishing and identifying these species using material from herbarium collections and commercial herbal products. We find that both methods can discriminate between the two species and positively identify E. arvense. The TLC-test is more cost- and time-efficient, but DNA barcoding is more powerful in determining the identity of adulterant species. Our study shows that, although DNA barcoding presents certain advantages, other established laboratory methods can perform as well or even better in confirming species' identity in herbal products.

Indexed as

Chromatography, Thin LayerDNA Barcoding, TaxonomicDNAEquisetumPhylogenySequence Analysis, DNADNA

Identifiers

PMID26165523
PMCPMC4499799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.