Quantification of Some Herbal Distillates’ Methanol to Evaluate a New Diagnostic Kit

Table 3

The average of gained results by both kit and GC methods. The results were shown based on mg/l.

Name of herbal distillate		A	B	C	D	E	F	Mean	Difference (%)
Mentha	MCA	479	293	375	208	243	365	327	9 (2.83)
	GC	477	294	375	200	202	361	318
Anethum graveolens L.	MCA	277	306	690	26	113	478	315	8 (−2.54)
	GC	259	294	770	26	112	479	323
Alhagi maurorum L.	MCA	215	433	74	238	387	329	279	3 (−1.06)
	GC	202	433	84	244	397	333	282
Medicago sativa L.	MCA	252	142	126	386	282	276	244	9 (3.83)
	GC	204	149	126	370	283	280	235
Cichorium intybus L.	MCA	229	232	107	238	205	278	215	6 (2.87)
	GC	205	236	103	234	199	275	209
Thymus serpyll um L.	MCA	N. S	94	74	155	45	201	114	7 (5.79)
	GC	N. S	87	71	157	41	247	121
Salix alba L.	MCA	53	93	73	N. S	N. S	106	81	8 (10.96)
	GC	44	90	71	N. S	N. S	86	73
Urtica dioica L.	MCA	327	261	124	514	283	252	294	8 (2.80)
	GC	289	268	117	525	271	243	286
Carum carvi L.	MCA	102	100	127	22	43	104	83	8 (10.67)
	GC	70	95	126	21	40	95	75
Fumaria officinalis L.	MCA	131	193	66	204	122	225	157	7 (4.67)
	GC	102	181	62	205	125	225	150

All values were not significant comparing two methods. MCA : modified chromotropic acid, GC : gas chromatography.