Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37711307›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023

Comprehensive comparison of different parts of

Yaping Zheng, Pei Li, Jie Shen, Kailin Yang, Xinyan Wu, Yue Wang, Yu-He Yuan, Peigen Xiao, Chunnian He

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Biphasic Dose-Response and Mechanism Analysis of Vanillic Acid fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Protective Effect of Peony (Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Yaping ZhengKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Pei LiKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jie ShenKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Kailin YangKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xinyan WuKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yue WangKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yu-He YuanInstitute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Peigen XiaoKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Chunnian HeKey Laboratory of Bioactive Substances and Resources Utilization of Chinese Herbal Medicine, Ministry of Education, Institute of Medicinal Plant Development, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Methods: Untargeted ultra-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time of flight-mass spectrometry (UPLC-Q-TOF-MS) metabolomics was applied to characterize the metabolic profiles of 10 different parts of Results and discussion: A total of 160 metabolites were alternatively identified definitely or tentatively, which were significantly different in various plant parts by multivariate statistical analysis. Quantitative analysis showed that underutilized plant parts also contain many active ingredients. Compared with the medicinal part of root bark, the root core part still contains a higher content of paeoniflorin (17.60 ± 0.06 mg/g) and PGG (15.50 ± 2.00 mg/g). Petals, as an edible part, contain high levels of quercitrin, and stamens have higher methyl gallate and PGG. Unexpectedly, the ovary has the highest content of methyl gallate and rather high levels of PGG (38.14 ± 1.27 mg/g), and it also contains surprisingly high concentrations of floralalbiflorin I. Paeoniflorin (38.68 ± 0.76 mg/g) is the most abundant in leaves, and the content is even higher than in the root bark. Branches are also rich in a variety of catechin derivatives and active ingredients such as hydrolyzable tannins. Seed kernels also contain fairly high levels of paeoniflorin and albiflorin. Fruit shells still contain a variety of components, although not at high levels. Seed coats, as by-products removed from peony seeds before oil extraction, have high contents of stilbenes, such as

Indexed as

bioactivitydifferent partsmetabolomicsPaeonia ostiiquantitative analysis

Identifiers

PMID37711307
PMCPMC10497777

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.