ArticleBiomedical chromatography : BMC2026
Identification of Artemisia argyi H.Lév. and Artemisia mongolica Based on GC Fingerprint and Chemometrics Analysis.
Article in Biomedical chromatography : BMC, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artemisia argyi Lévl. et Vant. and Artemisia mongolica (Fisch. ex Besser) Nakai are two distinct species of the genus Artemisia (Asteraceae). In some regions of China, Artemisiae Mongolicae Folium is frequently used as a substitute for Artemisiae Argyi Folium. These two herbal materials exhibit marked differences in chemical composition, which result in distinct therapeutic effects. Herein, gas chromatography (GC) fingerprinting and chemometrics were employed to compare their volatile constituents and establish an effective discrimination method. A standard GC fingerprinting procedure for Artemisiae Argyi Folium was established, yielding 21 common characteristic peaks. The similarity values of 20 batches of Artemisiae Argyi Folium were ≥ 0.894, whereas those of 12 batches of Artemisiae Mongolicae Folium were ≤ 0.812. Common peaks were further identified by GC-MS. Cluster analysis (CA), principal component analysis (PCA), and orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) were applied to identify differential components. Multivariate analyses clearly separated the two species. Five volatile compounds with VIP > 1.2 were selected as potential chemical markers to distinguish Artemisiae Argyi Folium from its adulterant Artemisiae Mongolicae Folium.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.