4.6 Article

Comparison of superficially porous and fully porous silica supports used for a cyclofructan 6 hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatographic stationary phase

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1365, Issue -, Pages 124-130

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2014.09.010

Keywords

Superficially porous particles; HILIC; Cyclofructan 6; FRULIC; Core-shell

Funding

  1. Welch Foundation [Y-0026]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A new HILIC stationary phase comprised of native cyclofructan-6 (CF6) bonded to superficially porous silica particles (2.7 p.m) was developed. Its performance was evaluated and compared to fully porous silica particles with 5 p.m (commercially available as FRULIC-N) and 3 p.m diameters. Faster and more efficient chromatography was achieved with the superficially porous particles (SPPs). The columns were also evaluated in the normal phase mode. The peak efficiency, analysis time, resolution, and overall separation capabilities in both HILIC and normal phase modes were compared. The analysis times using the superficially porous based column in HILIC mode were shorter and the theoretical plates/min were higher over the entire range of flow rates studied. The column containing the superficially porous particles demonstrated higher optimum flow rates than the fully porous particle packed columns. At higher flow rates, the advantages of the superficially porous particles was more pronounced in normal phase separations than in HILIC, clearly demonstrating the influence that the mode of chromatography has on band broadening. However, the minimum reduced plate heights (hmm) were typically lower in HILIC than in the normal phase mode. Overall, the superficially porous particle based CF6 column showed clear advantages over the fully porous particle columns, in terms of high throughput and efficient separations of polar compounds in the HILIC mode. (C)2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available