4.7 Article

Improving separation optimization in capillary electrophoresis by using a general quality criterion

Journal

TALANTA
Volume 208, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2019.120399

Keywords

Capillary electrophoresis; Optimization; pH; Prediction; Quality criterion; Separation

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [RTI2018-097411-B-I00]
  2. Cathedra UB Rector Francisco Buscarons Ubeda (Forensic Chemistry and Chemical Engineering)
  3. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnica (ANPCyT) [3597, 0553]
  4. Universidad Nacional de La Plata [UNLP 11X/836, 11N/790]
  5. Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper we extend the use of the quality criterion t' to optimize separations in capillary electrophoresis (CE). The theoretical parameter t' takes into account not only the relative separation between a given pair of compounds but also their separation from the neutral species migrating with the electroosmotic flow (EOF). Furthermore, it can be composed for complex mixtures as a global multicriterium optimization function T', for a rapid, simple and reliable selection of optimized separation conditions by mathematical maximization. Here, we demonstrate the applicability of T' using as a variable the electrophoretic mobility (m(e)) for the optimization of pH in the separation of a mixture of amyloid beta (A beta) peptide fragments. In addition, it is shown the versatility of T' using other variables related to m(e), which do not require experimental measurements. This is the case with ionizable compounds as the A beta peptide fragments, whose charge-to-mass ratios can be calculated if accurate pK(a) values are available in the literature. The excellent performance of T' for A beta peptide fragments is further validated optimizing the pH for the separation of mixtures of harmala alkaloids (HAlks) and quinolone antibiotics.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available