Objectives : In order to distinguish morphological characteristics of trunk bark and root bark of Ulmus davidiana var. japonica (Rehder) Nakai and the trunk bark and root bark of Hemiptelea davidii Planchon were sampled and compared in terms of their external and internal features with flour states ...
Objectives : In order to distinguish morphological characteristics of trunk bark and root bark of Ulmus davidiana var. japonica (Rehder) Nakai and the trunk bark and root bark of Hemiptelea davidii Planchon were sampled and compared in terms of their external and internal features with flour states according to their medical use, through microscopic examination. Methods : The slice of the tested material made by paraffin section technique was colored with Safranine Malachite Green contrast methods, and the flour of it was mounted by the liquid made by the same ratio of each of glycerin, acetic acid, and water, and then observed and photographed by olympus-BHT. Results : 1. Internal Features 1) A large parenchymatous cell was observed in the phloem of the slice of both trunk bark and root bark of Ulmi Cortex. However, both of the trunk bark and root bark of Hemipteleae Cortex did not have parenchymatous cell in the phloem; instead, stone cells including much square crystal of calcium oxalate were distributed around fiber bundle, and the parenchymatous cell included much druse crystal of calcium oxalate. 2) In both the Ulmi Cortex and Hemipteleae Cortex, rhytidome was observed in trunk bark, but not in root bark, but in the parenchymatous cell of the root bark of the Ulmi Cortex contained starch grain. 2. Flour States 1) In the flour of root bark of the Ulmi Cortex, a large parenchymatous cell was observed. However, in the flour of trunk bark and root bark of Hemipteleae Cortex, no parenchymatous eel was found; instead, stone cell including square crystal of calcium oxalate and druse crystal of calcium oxalate were observed. 2) There was no remarkable difference between the trunk bark and root bark of Hemipteleae Cortex. However, starch grain was contained in the parenchymatous cell of the root bark of Ulmi Cortex but not in the trunk bark of it. Conclusions : There were some morphological differences in external, internal, and flour parts of Ulmi Cortex and Hemipteleae Cortex. In particular, there was a morphological difference in flour states between the trunk bark and root bark of Ulmi Cortex, it is possible to use microscope to distinguish their flour states.
Objectives : In order to distinguish morphological characteristics of trunk bark and root bark of Ulmus davidiana var. japonica (Rehder) Nakai and the trunk bark and root bark of Hemiptelea davidii Planchon were sampled and compared in terms of their external and internal features with flour states according to their medical use, through microscopic examination. Methods : The slice of the tested material made by paraffin section technique was colored with Safranine Malachite Green contrast methods, and the flour of it was mounted by the liquid made by the same ratio of each of glycerin, acetic acid, and water, and then observed and photographed by olympus-BHT. Results : 1. Internal Features 1) A large parenchymatous cell was observed in the phloem of the slice of both trunk bark and root bark of Ulmi Cortex. However, both of the trunk bark and root bark of Hemipteleae Cortex did not have parenchymatous cell in the phloem; instead, stone cells including much square crystal of calcium oxalate were distributed around fiber bundle, and the parenchymatous cell included much druse crystal of calcium oxalate. 2) In both the Ulmi Cortex and Hemipteleae Cortex, rhytidome was observed in trunk bark, but not in root bark, but in the parenchymatous cell of the root bark of the Ulmi Cortex contained starch grain. 2. Flour States 1) In the flour of root bark of the Ulmi Cortex, a large parenchymatous cell was observed. However, in the flour of trunk bark and root bark of Hemipteleae Cortex, no parenchymatous eel was found; instead, stone cell including square crystal of calcium oxalate and druse crystal of calcium oxalate were observed. 2) There was no remarkable difference between the trunk bark and root bark of Hemipteleae Cortex. However, starch grain was contained in the parenchymatous cell of the root bark of Ulmi Cortex but not in the trunk bark of it. Conclusions : There were some morphological differences in external, internal, and flour parts of Ulmi Cortex and Hemipteleae Cortex. In particular, there was a morphological difference in flour states between the trunk bark and root bark of Ulmi Cortex, it is possible to use microscope to distinguish their flour states.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
문제 정의
한약재의 외부형태와 내부형태는 한약재 감별의 기본이 된다. 이에 著者 는 五加皮의 형태적 특징을 究明하기 위해 오갈피나무 A sessiliflorum Seeman, 가시오갈피A senticosus Harms의 뿌리껍질과 줄기껍질, 紅毛五加4 giraldii Harms의 줄기껍질을 수집하여 외부 및 내부 형태를 광학현미경 검사법으로 관찰하여 유의성 있는 결과를 얻었기에 보고하는 바이다.
제안 방법
giraldii Harms의 줄기껍질을 수집하여 외부 및 내부 형태를 광학현미경 검사법으로 관찰하여 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다.
검체의 횡단면은 파라핀 절편(Paraffin Section) 방법으로 片을 만든 다음 사프라닌-말라키트 녹(Safranine Malachite Green) 대비 염색법으로 염색하였고, 광학현미경(OLYMPUS-BHT, Japan)으로 관찰하여 사진 (OLYMPUS-PM, Japan)으로 찍고 모식도를 그렸다.
약재를 수집한 후 기원의 진위를 曝園大學校 韓醫 科大學 本草學敎室에서 판정하였다.
실정이다. 이에 著者는 五加皮의 형태적 특징을 究明하기 위해 오갈피나무 A sessiliflorum Seeman, 가시오갈피A senticosus Harins의 뿌리껍질과 줄기껍질, 紅毛五加 A giraldii Harms의 줄기껍질을 수집하여 외부 및 내부 형태를 광학현미경 검사법으로 관찰하였다.
대상 데이터
실험에 사용한 오갈피나무A sessiliflorum Seeman 와 가시오갈피A senticosus Harms의 뿌리껍질과 줄기 껍질은 2003년 8월 강원도 양구에서 재배품을 채취하였고, 紅毛五加 A giraldii Hams의 줄기 껍질은 서울 경동시장에서 2003년 7월 유통품을 구입하여 사용하였다.
성능/효과
生漢中及冤句五月七月採莖 十月採根 陰乾”이라 하여 五加皮는 5월과 7월에는 줄기를 채취하고, 10월에는 뿌리를 채취한다고 하였으며, 이후《圖經本草》9>, 《本草品滙精 要》叫《東醫寶鑑》m에서도 같은 내용으로 기술하고 있다. 그러므로 줄기껍질도 약용으로 하고 있음을알 수 있으며, 줄기껍질은 5월과 7월에, 뿌리껍질은 10월에 채취하는 것이 좋다는 것을 알 수 있다.《中 華本草》m에 五加皮는 재배후 3~4년이 지나서 여름과 가을철에 뿌리를 채취하여 鬚根을 버리고 껍질을 벗겨 사용한다고 하였다.
이와 같은 결과에서, 五加皮 종류의 약재는 외부형태에서 줄기껍질에서는 확연한 차이점을 보여 주었으나, 뿌리껍질에서는 차이점이 없었다. 그러나 뿌리껍질은 내부 형태에서 차이점을 보여주었는데, 가시오갈피나무는 코르크 석세포가 방사상으로 단속적으로 배열되어 있었으나, 가시오갈피와 紅毛五加에서는 볼 수 없었다.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.