|
 |
| PHARMACEUTICAL STANDARDIZATION |
|
| Year : 2013 | Volume
: 34
| Issue : 4 | Page : 401-405 |
|
|
Comparative physico-chemical profiles of Tugaksheeree (Curcuma angustifolia Roxb. and Maranta arundinacea Linn.)
N Rajashekhara1, Vinay J Shukla2, B Ravishankar3, Parameshwar P Sharma4
1 Professor and Head, Department of Post Graduate Studies in Dravyaguna, K.V.G. Ayurvedic Medical College, Sullia, India
2 Head, Pharmaceutical Chemistry Laboratory, Institute for Post Graduate Teaching and Research in Ayurveda, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India
3 Director, Research and Development, S.D.M. Centre for Research and Allied Sciences, Udupi, Karnataka, India
4 Ex. Professor and Head, Department of Dravyaguna, Institute for Post Graduate Teaching and Research in Ayurveda, Gujarat Ayurved University, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India
| Date of Web Publication | 21-Feb-2014 |
Correspondence Address:
N Rajashekhara
Agrahara House, Post Subrahmanya - 574 238, D. K. District, Karnataka
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0974-8520.127723
 Abstract | | |
Tugaksheeree is as an ingredient in many Ayurvedic formulations. The starch obtained from the rhizomes of two plants, is used as Tugaksheeree, Curcuma angustifolia (CA) Roxb. (Family: Zingiberaceae) and Maranta arundinacea (MA) Linn. (Family Marantaceae). In the present study, a comparative physico-analysis of both the drugs has been carried out. The results suggest that the starch from CA and MA has similar organoleptic characters. The percentage of starch content is higher in the rhizome of CA when compared with that of MA and the starch of MA is packed more densely than the starch in CA. The chemical constituents of both the starch and rhizomes are partially similar to each other. Hence, the therapeutic activities may be similar. Keywords: Curcuma angustifolia , Maranta arundinacea, physico-chemical analysis, Tugaksheeree
How to cite this article:
Rajashekhara N, Shukla VJ, Ravishankar B, Sharma PP. Comparative physico-chemical profiles of Tugaksheeree (Curcuma angustifolia Roxb. and Maranta arundinacea Linn.). AYU 2013;34:401-5 |
How to cite this URL:
Rajashekhara N, Shukla VJ, Ravishankar B, Sharma PP. Comparative physico-chemical profiles of Tugaksheeree (Curcuma angustifolia Roxb. and Maranta arundinacea Linn.). AYU [serial online] 2013 [cited 2023 May 30];34:401-5. Available from: https://www.ayujournal.org/text.asp?2013/34/4/401/127723 |
| Introduction | |  |
Tugaksheeree is as an important ingredient in many Ayurvedic formulations such as Chyavana Prasha, [1] Bala Ghrita, [2] Dadimashtaka Churna, [3] Pippalyadi avaleha, [4] Talisadya Churna, [5] Lavangadi Churna[6] etc.
Starch obtained from the rhizomes of Curcuma angustifolia (CA) Roxb. (East Indian Arrowroot) and Maranta arundinacea (MA) Linn. (West Indian Arrowroot) are presently used as botanical source of Tugaksheeree[7],[8],[9] [Figure 1],[Figure 2],[Figure 3],[Figure 4],[Figure 5] and [Figure 6].
Until date no research work has been carried out on comparing physico-chemical profiles of the above two plants. Hence, the study has been taken up to evaluate the test drug samples under organoleptic and physicochemical parameters.
| Materials and Methods | | |
The rhizome powders and starches of the drug samples CA and MA were collected in the month of December from Purva Mandala District of Madhya Pradesh and Dakshina Kannada district of Karnataka respectively in the month of December and authenticated in the Pharmacognosy Department of Gujarat Ayurved University, Jamnagar.
The samples were analyzed by using different organoleptic, qualitative and quantitative analyses of drug samples. A chromatography study and ultraviolet ( UV) spectrophotometric analysis were also carried out.
Organoleptic characters
The organoleptic characters in corresponds to the Pancha Jnanendriya Pariksha mentioned in Ayurveda were noted such as color, odor, touch and taste of the samples.
Physicochemical parameters
Parameters like loss on drying, total ash, extractive values, determination of pH, volatile oil content, percentage of starch and bulk density study were determined by following the methods described in the standards. [10],[11],[12]
Preliminary qualitative tests
The rhizome powders and water extracts (starch) were tested for starch (iodine test), carbohydrates, cyanogenic glycosides, reducing sugar, cardiotonic glycosides, saponins, steroids, resin and flavonoids. [13],[14] Along with the estimation of starch was also carried out. [15]
Chromatographic study
Thin layer chromatograpy (TLC) and high performance thin layer chromatograpy (HPTLC) of rhizome powders and starches of both CA and MA were carried out. [16],[17]
UV visible spectrophotometric analysis
The UV spectra were recorded on a Comeg TLC scanner III in situ mode after HPTLC development.
Plates were developed by the selected solvent system i.e., dichloro methane:benzene:diethyl ether (0.5:4.0:0.5) and dichloro methane only. After the development of the plates, using an air blower, they were observed under UV spectra.
| Observations, Results and Discussion | | |
The organoleptic characters of the rhizome powders of CA and MA samples are different. This may be because both belong to different family. However, the starches of both the plants have the similar organoleptic characters [Table 1].
Physicochemical parameters
The study shows higher loss on drying in the CA rhizome, i.e., 25.00% w/w and higher water extractive value, i.e., 4.00% w/w, indicating the presence of a substance with a higher water holding capacity and water soluble compounds having ionic properties. The presence of such types of components increases the microbial growth in the available favorable conditions. Hence, the shelf life period is shorter in comparison with the MA rhizome.
The low CA Ash value shows the presence of low inorganic materials, that is, salts. Moreover, the portion of water-soluble ash part was higher against MA [Table 2].
Volatile oil content (0.30% v/w) was found only in the rhizome powder of CA. This may be responsible for its camphoraceous odor and bitter acrid taste [Table 2].
Percentage of starch
Was determined by the traditional and laboratory methods and it was observed that the rhizome of CA contained more starch in comparison with starch from the rhizome of MA.
Bulk density study
It was observed that the bulk density of both the rhizome powders were similar, that is, 0.45 g/cm 3 and 0.50 g/cm 3 . The bulk density of the CA starch was 0.56 g/cm 3 while that of MA starch was 0.71 g/cm 3 . This indicated that the starch of MA might be packed more densely than that of the CA starch [Table 3].
Phytochemical study
Preliminary qualitative tests
The preliminary phytochemical screening indicated the presence of starch, carbohydrates, saponin, terpinoid/sterols, resin and flavonoids in the rhizome powders of both CA and MA resin, starch and saponin were found in the starches of both CA and MA [Table 4].
Chromatographic study and UV visible spectrophotometric analysis
Plate no. 1
Samples: CA rhizome, CA starch, MA starch (80% methanol extracts).
Solvent system: Dichloro methane: benzene: diethyl ether (0.5:4.0:0.5).
Under short UV, the components at 0.03 were common in CA rhizome, CA starch and MA starch, showing the possibility of being the same compounds. All the components at 0.86 were common in the CA rhizome and CA starch showed the possibility of being the same in all the compounds.
Components at 0.86, 0.86 and 0.85 were observed in the CA rhizome, CA starch and MA starch, which showed the possibility of them being similar types of compounds. Components at 0.75 and 0.76 were observed in CA starch and MA starch showed the possibility of them being similar type of compounds.
Under long UV, the components at 0.03 were common in the CA rhizome and MA starch, showing the possibility of being the same compounds.
Components at 0.94, 0.95 and 0.93 were observed in CA rhizome, CA starch and MA starch, indicating the possibility of them being similar types of compounds. Components at 0.12 and 0.11 were observed in CA starch and MA starch indicating the possibility of them being similar types of compounds [Table 5]. | Table 5: Chromatographic study and ultraviolet visible spectrophotometric analysis
Click here to view |
It was observed that the components at 0.86 were common in CA rhizome and CA starch showing the possibility of them being the same compounds. The component 0.85 in MA starch showed the possibility of a similar kind of compound [Table 6].
The component 0.03 is common in CA rhizome and MA starch showing the possibility of it being same compound [Table 6].
Components at 0.94, 0.95 and 0.93 in CA rhizome, CA starch and MA starch showed the possibility of being similar types of compounds [Table 6].
The components 0.75 and 0.76 in CA starch and MA starch showed the possibility of being similar types of compounds [Table 7].
The components at 0.12 and 0.11 in CA starch and MA starch showed the possibility of being similar types of compounds [Table 7].
Plate no. 2
Samples: MA rhizome, MA starch and CA starch (80% methanol extracts).
Solvent system: Dichloromethane:benzene:diethyl ether (0.5:4.0:0.5).
Under short U.V., it is observed that the components at 0.04 are common in MA Rhizome and MA Starch, indicating the possibility of being the same compounds. Furthermore, components at 0.38 are common in MA starch and CA starch, showing the possibility of being the same compounds.
Components at 0.04, 0.04 and 0.03 are observed in MA rhizome, MA starch and CA Starch indicating the possibility of them being similar type of compounds. Also, the components at 0.53, 0.51 and 0.52 in MA rhizome, MA starch and CA starch showed the possibility of being similar types of compounds.
Under long UV, the components at 0.04 are common in MA rhizome and MA starch showing the possibility of being the same compounds. Components at 0.04, 0.04 and 0.03 are observed in MA rhizome, MA starch and CA starch indicating the possibility of them being similar types of compounds [Table 8].
Two components at 0.38 are common in MA starch and CA starch showing the possibility of being the same compounds [Table 9].
Two components at 0.51 and 0.52 in MA starch and CA starch show the possibility of being similar type of compounds [Table 9].
| Discussion | | |
Starches of CA and MA have similar organoleptic characters. Physicochemical profiles show the presence of starch, carbohydrates, saponin, terpinoid/sterols, resin and flavonoids in the rhizome powders of both CA and MA resin, starch and saponin were found in the starches of both CA and MA shelf life period of the rhizome of CA is shorter in comparison with that of the MA rhizome due to higher loss on drying and higher water extractive value. Low ash value in CA shows the presence of low inorganic materials that is salts. Volatile oil content has been found in the rhizome powder of CA, which may be responsible for its camphoraceous odor and bitter acrid taste. The percentage of starch content is higher in the rhizome of CA in comparison with that of MA. The starch in MA is packed more densely than that of the CA starch. The chemical constituents of both the starch and rhizomes are partially similar to each other with the possibility of same components at 0.03 and 0.86 in plate no. 1 and at 0.38 in plate no. 2, based on the chromatographic study and UV spectrophotometric analysis.
| Conclusion | | |
The physicochemical profile of both the starches was found to be similar, because of the similar type of components present in CA and MA. Therefore, both the source plants can be used as substitutes for therapeutic purposes.
| References | | |
| 1. | Agnivesha, Charaka, Dridhabala, Charaka Samhita, Chikitsa Sthana, Rasayana Adhyaya, Abhayaamalakiya Rasayana Pada, 1/1/62-74, Edited by Yadavji Trikamji Acharya, reprint edtion, Chaukhambha Orientalia, Varanasi, 2011;379. 
|
| 2. | Sushruta, Sushruta Samhita, Uttar Tantra, Mutraghata Pratishedha Adhyaya, 58/58-64, edited by Jadavji Trikamji Acharya, 9 th edition, Chaukhambha Orientalia, Varanasi, 2007;791.
|
| 3. | Vagbhata. Ashtanga Hridaya, Chikitsa Sthana, Atisara Chikitsa Adhyaya, 9/113-114, edited by Anna Moreshwar Kunte and Krishna Ramachandra Sastri Navare, 6 th edition, Chaukhambha Surabhararathi Prakashan, Varanasi, 2010;664.
|
| 4. | Vangasena Vangasena Samhita, editors. Rajiv Kumar Roy Ram Kumar Roy. Varanasi: Pracchya Prakashan; 2010. p. 524.
|
| 5. | Yogaratanakara Vidyotni Hindi Commentary by Shastri VL, and Sastri BS. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Surabhararathi Prakashan; 2009. p. 504.
|
| 6. | Sharangadhara. Sharangadhara Samhita Madhyama Khanda, with the commentary of Adhamalla′s Dipika and Kasiram′s Gudhartha Dipika. In: Shastri P, editor. 6 th ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Orientalia; 2005. p. 186.
|
| 7. | Sharma PV. Dravyaguna Vijnana. Part II. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Bharati Academy; 2009. p. 612, 742.
|
| 8. | Bapalal G. Vaidya Nighatu Adrasha. Vol. II. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Bharati Academy; 2005. p. 558, 579-80.
|
| 9. | Lucas DS. Dravyaguna Vijnana. Vol. II. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Vishwabharathi; 2008. p. 672-3.
|
| 10. | Anonymous, The Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India, Vol. 1, Part - 1, Appendix-3. 1 st ed., New Delhi: Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India; 2001. p. 143-6.
|
| 11. | Anonymous, Wealth of India. Vol. 2. New Delhi: National Institute of Science Communication, C.S.I.R; 2001. p. 261.
|
| 12. | Martin AN. Physical Pharmacy. 4 th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2002. p. 423.
|
| 13. | Baxi AJ, Shukla VJ, Bhatt U. Methods of Qualitative Testing of Some Ayurvedic Formulations. Jamnagar: Gujarat Ayurved University; 2001. p. 5-12
|
| 14. | Khandelwal KR. Practical Pharmacognosy Techniques and Experiment. Pune: Nirali Prakashan; 2001. p. 149-56.
|
| 15. | Raghuramulu N, Madhavan Nair and Kalyanasundaram KS. A Manual of Laboratory Techniques. Hyderabad: Published by National Institute of Nutrition, ICMR; 1983.
|
| 16. | Stahl E, editor. Thin Layer Chromatography, A Laboratory Hand Book. 2 nd ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag;1969.
|
| 17. | Snyder LR. Classification of solvent properties of common liquids. J Chromatogr Sci 1978;16:223-34.
|
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6]
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7], [Table 8], [Table 9]
|
