4.3 Article

Preparation and chromatographic performance of chiral peptide-based stationary phases for enantiomeric separation

Journal

CHIRALITY
Volume 35, Issue 9, Pages 636-644

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/chir.23564

Keywords

chiral recognition; enantiomeric separation; peptide chiral stationary phase; phenylalanine; proline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study developed three new chiral stationary phases based on silica modified with peptides containing phenylalanine and proline. Successful analyses and characterizations were conducted using Fourier transform infrared spectra, elemental analysis, and thermogravimetric analysis. The enantioselective performance of the three chiral peptide-based columns was evaluated using 11 racemic compounds, and optimized enantiomeric separation conditions were established. The results showed that the CSP-1 column had good reproducibility (RSD = 0.73%, n = 5) and successfully separated the enantiomers of flurbiprofen and naproxen.
This study presents the development of three new chiral stationary phases. They are based on silica modified with peptides containing phenylalanine and proline. Successful analyses and characterizations were conducted using Fourier transform infrared spectra, elemental analysis, and thermogravimetric analysis. After this, the enantioselective performance of the three chiral peptide-based columns was evaluated. The evaluation used 11 racemic compounds under normal-phase high performance liquid chromatography mode. Optimized enantiomeric separation conditions were established. Under these conditions, the enantiomers of flurbiprofen and naproxen were successfully separated on CSP-1 column: the separation factor of these was 1.27 and 1.21, respectively. In addition, the reproducibility of the CSP-1 column was also investigated. The results of the investigation illustrated that the stationary phases have good reproducibility (RSD = 0.73%, n = 5).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available