Constituent Analysis and Quality Evaluation of Epimedii Folium from Different Species

Table 5

Quality sequencing of the 40 tested samples.

No.	ri	Ranking	Difference of ri (%)
S1	0.3840	38	17.73
S2	0.3778	39	19.06
S3	0.3974	35	14.85
S4	0.417	16	10.51
S5	0.4120	24	11.74
S6	0.4012	30	14.05
S7	0.4317	9	7.53
S8	0.4232	12	9.34
S9	0.4497	5	3.66
S10	0.4427	6	5.16
S11	0.4030	29	13.67
S12	0.4539	4	2.76
S13	0.4359	7	6.62
S14	0.4342	8	6.99
S15	0.4310	10	7.67
S16	0.4131	20	11.50
S17	0.4584	3	1.81
S18	0.4256	11	8.83
S19	0.4081	27	12.58
S20	0.4181	15	10.43
S21	0.4622	2	0.99
S22	0.4126	22	11.62
S23	0.4060	28	13.03
S24	0.4668	1	0.00
S25	0.4133	19	11.46
S26	0.4003	31	14.25
S27	0.4150	17	11.11
S28	0.3975	34	14.85
S29	0.3986	32	14.60
S30	0.3959	36	15.19
S31	0.4133	18	11.45
S32	0.4123	23	11.68
S33	0.4127	21	11.58
S34	0.4096	26	12.26
S35	0.4107	25	12.01
S36	0.3942	37	15.56
S37	0.4186	14	10.33
S38	0.3622	40	22.42
S39	0.3981	33	14.71
S40	0.4188	13	10.28