基于改进层次分析法的灵芝品质安全综合评价

中药材是中医药事业传承和发展的物质基础,灵芝是中国传统的中药材。该文通过改进的层次分析法(analytic hierarchy process,AHP)对灵芝质量安全进行综合评价,为灵芝种植"安全有效、质量可控"提供借鉴。根据中药材质量安全标准,基于样本波动大小和改进的AHP法,计算得到灵芝子实体质量安全指标(多糖、Pb、As、Hg、Cd)的权重;应用AHP综合加权指数法对关键生长期(4层、5层、6层)、典型种植区域(武夷山、长白山、大别山)灵芝子实体质量安全指标风险水平进行评价,并与目前广泛应用的内梅罗指数法计算得到的综合风险指数进行对比。结果表明:灵芝多糖、Pb、As、Hg、Cd等5种质量安全指标单项风险指数大致规律为:CdHg多糖AsPb,均低于中药材质量安全风险水平。改进AHP法得到灵芝质量安全风险指数范围是0.2376~0.7598,小于1,为安全级,内梅罗法得到的风险指数范围是0.2579~0.7292,也为安全级,2种方法比较总体差别不太明显,分析认为质量安全指标权重大的指标多糖、Hg、Cd,其单项风险指数也大。为了进一步对比2种方法优劣,将单项风险指数较大、权重较大的质量安全指标Hg、Cd分别跟单项风险指数较小、权重较小的质量安全指标Pb、As调换,对人体危害较大的质量安全指标Hg和Cd单项风险指数降低,对人体危害较小的Pb和As单项风险指数升高,结果显示综合质量安全风险指数显著降低,降低幅度达68.03%,采用改进AHP的加权综合指数法比内梅罗指数法更能准确反映灵芝质量安全风险状况。该研究不仅对灵芝质量安全评价具有较高借鉴价值,也为灵芝种植"产前、产中、产后"全程控制提供支撑。

Comprehensive evaluation on quality and safety of ganoderma lucidum based on improved analytic hierarchy process

Abstract: Traditional Chinese medicine is the material basis for the inheritance and development of traditional Chinese medical science, it is a strategic resource in the national economy and people''s livelihood. Ganoderma lucidum, as a traditional Chinese herbal medicine and edible fungus, has a long history in China. This paper explored on comprehensive evaluation method to quality and safety of ganoderma lucidum through improved AHP (analytic hierarchy process, referred to as AHP) method, it takes reference for ganoderma lucidum cultivation of safety and effectiveness. According to the fluctuations of sample size and improved AHP method, the calculation for quality and safety indicators (polysaccharide, Pb, As, Hg, Cd) of ganoderma lucidum''s fruiting body was based on the traditional Chinese medicinal materials quality safety standards, and through this method, we evaluated the risk levels of quality and safety indicators in typical planting areas, such as Wuyi mountain (Southeast of China), Changbai mountain (Northeast of China) and the Dabie mountain (South Central of China), which was based on AHP method key growth period (4 layers, 5 layers and 6 layers) by comprehensive weighted index, and compared with Nemerow index method widely used for the risk calculation. Besides, we compared it with the one calculated with the widely-used Nemerow index method. The results showed: 1) The general rules for quality and safety for five kinds of single index of ganoderma lucidum indicators (polysaccharide, Pb, As, Hg, and Cd) were Cd>Hg> polysaccharide >As>Pb, and they were lower than traditional Chinese medicinal materials quality and safety standards. 2) The quality risk index calculated with the improved AHP method ranged from 0.2376 to 0.7598, less than 1, for the safety level, while the one calculated with Nemerow index method ranged from 0.2579 to 0.7292, less than 1, for the safety level. On the whole, the difference was not significant. The analysis showed that the quota polysaccharide, Hg and Cd of heavier weight was larger in the single risk index. 3) In order to compare the advantages and disadvantages of these two methods further, we exchanged Hg and Cd of larger single risk index and weight with quotas Pb and As to the contrary. The risk index of more harmful quotas Hg and Cd decreased, while that of the less harmful quotas Pb and As increased. The results demonstrated that the comprehensive quality risk index declined by 68.03%. So the improved AHP method could more precisely reflect the quality risk of ganoderma lucidum than Nemerow index method. The research is a good reference to the quality safety evaluation of ganoderma lucidum and provides support for the whole course control of the plantation of it (including preproduction, production, and postproduction). We suggest that this research should continue to advance, which is based on commercial specification and grade standards of Chinese herbal medicines, an important criterion in clinical curative effect of traditional Chinese medicine for the quality standard of ganoderma lucidum, production process quality and safety grade control.