Fig. 2

The differences of DL properties between authentic and nonauthentic herbal materials. a1 Cyperi rhizoma (fragmented materials); a2 Semiaquilegiae radix (fragmented materials); a3 DL decay curves. Data are plotted as the mean ± SEM. Note that the data are plotted on a log–log scale; a4 Histograms comparing the DL properties between Cyperi rhizoma and Semiaquilegiae radix. Mean ± SD, *p < 0.05; a5 PCA score plots of the DL properties obtained from all batches of Cyperi rhizoma (Red) and Semiaquilegiae radix (Green); b1 Atractylodis macrocephalae rhizoma (sliced materials); b2 Aucklandiae radix (sliced materials); b3 DL decay curves. Data are plotted as the mean ± SEM. Note that the data are plotted on a log–log scale; b4 Histograms comparing the DL properties between Atractylodis macrocephalae rhizoma and Aucklandiae radix. Mean ± SD, *p < 0.05; b5) PCA score plots of the DL properties obtained from all batches of Atractylodis macrocephalae rhizoma (Red) and Aucklandiae radix (Green); c1 Pulsatillae radix (fragmented materials); c2 Rhapontici radix (fragmented materials); c3 DL decay curves. Data are plotted as the mean ± SEM. Note that the data are plotted on a log–log scale; c4 Histograms comparing the DL properties between Pulsatillae radix and Rhapontici radix. Mean ± SD, *p < 0.05; c5 PCA score plots of the DL properties obtained from all batches of Pulsatillae radix (Red) and Rhapontici radix (Green); d1 Ginseng radix et rhizoma (fragmented materials); d2 Ginseng radix et rhizoma (sliced materials); d3 Phytolaccae radix (fragmented materials); d4 Glehniae radix (sliced materials); d5 DL decay curves. Data are plotted as the mean ± SEM. Note that the data are plotted on a log–log scale; d6 Histograms comparing the DL properties among three materials. Mean ± SD, *p < 0.05; d7 PCA score plots of the DL properties obtained from all batches of Ginseng radix et rhizoma (Red), Glehniae radix (Green) and Phytolaccae radix (Purple)