Advertisement

Journal of Analysis and Testing

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 210–222 | Cite as

High-Throughput Chemotyping of Cannabis and Hemp Extracts Using an Ultraviolet Microplate Reader and Multivariate Classifiers

  • Zewei Chen
  • Peter de Boves HarringtonEmail author
  • Steven F. Baugh
Original Paper

Abstract

As the use of Cannabis products as natural medicines burgeons, it is also appearing as a food ingredient. It is important to screen Cannabis samples as ingredients by profiling their chemical compositions, which is referred to as chemotyping. Two sets of botanical extracts were studied. The first set is referred to as Cannabis contained plant materials from 15 samples of the sativa, indica, and hybrids of the two species. The second set contained 20 extracts from the variety of Cannabis sativa with low tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentrations, i.e., below 0.3%, and, henceforth, will be referred to as hemp. An ultraviolet (UV) microplate reader provides a cost-effective and high-throughput method for identifying chemotypes of plant extracts by their spectra. The microplate reader affords rapid measurements of small volumes, e.g., 50 µL, which demonstrates a potential to significantly reduce the analysis time and cost for Cannabis and hemp chemotyping or chemical profiling. Replicate samples were measured on different days to demonstrate the robustness of the method. Projected difference resolution (PDR) maps were used to visualize the separations among the classes. Five multivariate classifiers, fuzzy rule-building expert system (FuRES), super partial least squares-discriminant analysis (sPLS-DA), support vector machine (SVM), and two tree-based support vector machines (SVMtreeG and SVMtreeH) were evaluated. The classifiers were validated with ten bootstrapped Latin partitions (BLPs). For the Cannabis extracts, the SVMtreeG yielded the best performance and the classification accuracy was 99.1 ± 0.4% for spectra collected in the nonlinear absorbance range. For the hemp extracts, the SVM classifier performed the best with a 97.4 ± 0.6% classification accuracy. These results demonstrate that the UV microplate reader coupled with multivariate classifiers can be used as a high-throughput and cost-effective approach for chemotyping Cannabis.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Cannabis extracts Hemp extracts Ultraviolet microplate reader Multivariate models High-throughput chemotyping Chemometrics Projected difference resolution map 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Chemistry Mapping, Inc. is thanked for supplying Cannabis and hemp extracts. Authors appreciate Xinyi Wang and Ahmet Aloglu for their useful comments. Authors also appreciate Dr. Justin Holub and Tang Tang for their help with the microplate reader measurement.

Supplementary material

41664_2018_75_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    State Medical Marijuana Laws. http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-medical-marijuana-laws.aspx. Accessed 15 Sep 2017.
  2. 2.
    Wang X-S, Tang C-H, Yang X-Q, Gao W-R. Characterization, amino acid composition and in vitro digestibility of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) proteins. Food Chem. 2008;107(1):11–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hartsel J, Eades J, Hickory B, Makriyannis A. Cannabis sativa and Hemp. Nutraceuticals: efficacy, safety and toxicity. London: Elsevier Inc; 2016. p. 735–54.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pollastro F, Taglialatela-Scafati O, Allara M, Munoz E, Di Marzo V, De Petrocellis L, et al. Bioactive prenylogous cannabinoid from fiber hemp (Cannabis sativa). J Nat Prod. 2011;74(9):2019–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    ElSohly MA, Radwan MM, Gul W, Chandra S, Galal A. Phytochemistry of Cannabis sativa L. Phytocannabinoids. New York: Springer; 2017. p. 1–36.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mechoulam R, Peters M, Murillo-Rodriguez E, Hanuš LO. Cannabidiol—recent advances. Chem Biodivers. 2007;4(8):1678–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang X, Harrington PDB, Baugh SF. Comparative study of NMR spectral profiling for the characterization and authentication of Cannabis. J AOAC Int. 2017;100(5):1356–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sativa vs. indica vs. hybrid: what’s the difference between Cannabis types? https://www.leafly.com/news/Cannabis-101/sativa-indica-and-hybrid-whats-the-difference-between-Cannabis-ty. Accessed 27 Sep 2017.
  9. 9.
    Hazekamp A, Fischedick JT. Cannabis—from cultivar to chemovar. Drug Test Anal. 2012;4(7–8):660–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lowry S, Ritter G, Woodruff H, Isenhour T. Selecting liquid phases for multiple column gas chromatography from their eigenvector projections. J Chromatogr Sci. 1976;14(3):126–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brighenti V, Pellati F, Steinbach M, Maran D, Benvenuti S. Development of a new extraction technique and HPLC method for the analysis of non-psychoactive cannabinoids in fibre-type Cannabis sativa L. (hemp). J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2017;143(Supplement C):228–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Escrivá Ú, Andrés-Costa MJ, Andreu V, Picó Y. Analysis of cannabinoids by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry in milk, liver and hemp seed to ensure food safety. Food Chem. 2017;228(Supplement C):177–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Patel B, Wene D, Fan ZT. Qualitative and quantitative measurement of cannabinoids in Cannabis using modified HPLC/DAD method. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2017;146:15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Backer B, Debrus B, Lebrun P, Theunis L, Dubois N, Decock L, et al. Innovative development and validation of an HPLC/DAD method for the qualitative and quantitative determination of major cannabinoids in Cannabis plant material. J Chromatogr B. 2009;877(32):4115–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harrington PDB, Wang X. Spectral representation of proton NMR spectroscopy for the pattern recognition of complex materials. J Anal Test. 2017;1(2):10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang X, Harrington PDB, Baugh SF. Effect of preprocessing high-resolution mass spectra on the pattern recognition of Cannabis, hemp, and liquor. Talanta. 2018;180:229–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Landry J, Malovichko G, Zhu X. High-throughput dose-response measurement using a label-free microarray-in-microplate assay platform. Anal Chem. 2015;87(11):5640–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vermeer LM, Higgins CA, Roman DL, Doorn JA. Real-time monitoring of tyrosine hydroxylase activity using a plate reader assay. Anal Biochem. 2013;432(1):11–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Takebayashi J, Iwahashi N, Ishimi Y, Tai A. Development of a simple 96-well plate method for evaluation of antioxidant activity based on the oxidative haemolysis inhibition assay (OxHLIA). Food Chem. 2012;134(1):606–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Metrani R, Jayaprakasha GK, Patil BS. Optimized method for the quantification of pyruvic acid in onions by microplate reader and confirmation by high resolution mass spectra. Food Chem. 2018;242(Supplement C):451–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Robert-Peillard F, Boudenne J-L, Coulomb B. Development of a simple fluorescence-based microplate method for the high-throughput analysis of proline in wine samples. Food Chem. 2014;150:274–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen P, Luthria D, Harrington PD, Harnly JM. Discrimination among panax species using spectral fingerprinting. J AOAC Int. 2011;94(5):1411–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Harrington PB. Fuzzy multivariate rule-building expert systems: minimal neural networks. J Chemom. 1991;5(5):467–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen Z, Zhang Z, Zhu R, Xiang Y, Harrington PB. Diagnosis of patients with chronic kidney disease by using two fuzzy classifiers. Chemometr Intell Lab Syst. 2016;153:140–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen Z, Gu A, Zhang X, Zhang Z. Authentication and inference of seal stamps on Chinese traditional painting by using multivariate classification and near-infrared spectroscopy. Chemometr Intell Lab Syst. 2017;171:226–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aloglu AK, Harrington PB, Sahin S, Demir C. Prediction of total antioxidant activity of Prunella L. species by automatic partial least square regression applied to 2-way liquid chromatographic UV spectral images. Talanta. 2016;161:503–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chen Z, Zhang X, Zhang Z. Clinical risk assessment of patients with chronic kidney disease by using clinical data and multivariate models. Int Urol Nephrol. 2016;48(12):2069–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Harrington PdB. Automated support vector regression. J Chemom. 2017;31(4):e2867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    de Boves Harrington P. Support vector machine classification trees. Anal Chem. 2015;87(21):11065–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    de Boves Harrington P. Support vector machine classification trees based on fuzzy entropy of classification. Anal Chim Acta. 2017;954:14–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lu W, Rankin JG, Bondra A, Trader C, Heeren A, Harrington PDB. Ignitable liquid identification using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry data by projected difference resolution mapping and fuzzy rule-building expert system classification. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;220(1):210–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chen Z, Zhang Z, Zhu R, Xiang Y, Yang Y, Harrington PB. Application of terahertz time-domain spectroscopy combined with chemometrics to quantitative analysis of imidacloprid in rice samples. J Quant Spectrosc Radiat Transfer. 2015;167:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    de Boves Harrington P. Statistical validation of classification and calibration models using bootstrapped Latin partitions. TrAC, Trends Anal Chem. 2006;25(11):1112–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Harrington PdB. Multiple versus single set validation of multivariate models to avoid mistakes. Crit Rev Anal Chem. 2018;48(1):33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    UV-visible spectroscopy. http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk/chemistry/3_8/3_8_7.html. Accessed 5 Sep 2017.
  36. 36.
    Harrington PD. Fuzzy grid encoded independent modeling for class analogies (FIMCA). Anal Chem. 2014;86(10):4883–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Harnly J, Chen P, Harrington PD. Probability of identification: adulteration of American Ginseng with Asian ginseng. J AOAC Int. 2013;96(6):1258–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Nonferrous Metals Society of China 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zewei Chen
    • 1
  • Peter de Boves Harrington
    • 1
    Email author
  • Steven F. Baugh
    • 2
  1. 1.Clippinger Laboratories, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Center for Intelligent Chemical InstrumentationOhio UniversityAthensUSA
  2. 2.Chemistry Mapping, Inc.GoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations