Skip to main content
. 2010 Oct 9;399(9):3211–3219. doi: 10.1007/s00216-010-4206-6

Table 1.

Calibration data for all the compounds examined (n = 6)

Compound Linear dynamic rangea (μg mL−1) Slope (a) S a Intercept (b) S b S xy Correlation coefficient, r 2 LOD (ng mL−1) LOQ (ng mL−1)
Flavonoids
 (±)-CA 0.5–10 10290 139 −744 804 1194 0.9993 103.2 309.6
 (−)-EC 0.5–10 11543 162 422 936 1389 0.9992 107.0 321.1
 RUT 0.05–5 33445 290 −700 703 1289 0.9997 15.4 46.2
 QUR 0.05–5 34721 337 − 1256 817 1497 0.9996 15.5 46.6
 HSD 0.1–10 18112 230 3789 1230 2192 0.9992 32.0 96.1
 NHSD 0.1–10 23060 247 1898 1319 2351 0.9994 31.5 94.4
 HST 0.1–10 25611 280 2429 1494 2664 0.9994 32.1 96.3
Isoflavones
 PUR 0.04–3 68987 725 564 543 991 0.9996 10.4 31.2
 GLY 0.02–1.5 74582 295 255 221 404 0.9999 3.9 11.7
 DA 0.04–3 91377 1019 603 763 1393 0.9995 11.0 33.1
 GT 0.07–3 65955 818 −1549 1226 2212 0.9994 20.4 61.3
 BIO 0.04–3 109929 784 1700 1041 2097 0.9997 12.5 37.5

aLinear regression analysis with the regression equation: Inline graphic, in which x is the concentration in μg mL−1 and y is the peak area. S a is the standard deviation of the slope, S b the standard deviation of the intercept, and S xy the residual standard deviation of the regression coefficient