Comment · Tue, January 26, 2021 · ND Owner
Red reishi triterpenoids% ?
Original post in this thread
Akashii7 · 7 points
If someone has any idea how much triterpenoids % are there Red reishi 8:1 ?
As the description says high amount of triterpenoids and beta glucan.
But recently I saw It might just have 2% while real mushroom reishi has 4% wouldn't that make it better ? (Also ik extracting triterpenoids is much difficult but still)
I know ND has lidicspore reishi with 30% triterpenoids and I will give that a try sometime later but if anyone has idea of 8:1 let me know thanks!
As I'm looking to buy my mushroom stack Lion's mane and reishi again later and 180oct this time.
It has been great just using it for a month but just wanted to clear this question I had in mind.
What they were answering
Nemesis_Ra_Algoras · 1 points
I read a few articles on a chinese website, they seem to claim that the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture’s NY/SJ 339-2001 standard protocol for the detection of triterpenes in reishi spore is flawed, but widely used. The protocol uses oleanolic acid (C_30 H_48 O_3) as reference, and it leads to a high triterpenoids % mistakenly detected from the spores, which should be something else - many confused the bioactive triterpenoids (ganoderic acid A, B, C etc.) with oleic acid and ergosterol. Instead, they claim that the amount of triterpenoids in reishi spore oil is negligible. I cant find references to papers in their articles + not sure if one can translate the page since it won't let me copy/paste. Figure 18 in the second link says the HPLC fingerprints (right hand side) of reishi spores don't have detectable peaks.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · ND Owner
I read a few articles on a chinese website, they seem to claim that the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture’s NY/SJ 339-2001 standard protocol for the detection of triterpenes in reishi spore is flawed, but widely used.
Yep, that is very common. It's not just an issue in China. Some US standards for testing are not accurate, which is why we are so crazy about methodologies, methods, and proper chemistry. We found issues with India as well. This was on bacopa, but methods, methodologies, and reference standards all play a big role in the accuracy and validity of your results. I will say that using oleanolic acid as your reference standard for assay is not as bad as it sounds. It's not being used as the ID of the triterpenoids, but as an assay standard to calibrate the response factor. That happens in a lot of methods. It's perfectly sound if the reference standard's response factor is very similar to the response factor of the target compounds. So for instance, we use cyanidin 3-O-rutinoside as our reference standard for the assay of the total anthocyanidins in our tart cherry extract. This is because its response factor is the same as the other anthocyanidins in the tart cherry, so that gives you your response factor to calculate the assay numbers. It's not only looking at cyanidin 3-O-rutinoside content. It's just using that for the calibration curve for the assay calculations. I used Google Translate on those pages, but I am not sure if the scientific precision is coming over that way. I am not sure if they are claiming that the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture’s NY/SJ 339-2001 standard protocol is only looking at oleanolic acid, or if they are claiming that it is inaccurate to use the response factor from it to properly assay the triterpenoids. Obviously the most accurate methods would use the actual triterpenoids as reference standards, so you can get the exact response factors. However, sometimes they don't exist, or that is prohibitively expensive. We are actually building out our own methods using triterpenoid reference standards for reishi in our lab, so we are addressing that limitation. We are also doing it on our UPLC-MS systems, which will give us mass data alongside the UV spectral data. That's going to give us the most accurate definitive answer to the reishi triterpenoid question.