4.5 Article

Investigation of the separation of heterocyclic aromatic amines by reversed phase ion-pair liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry: The role of ion pair reagents on LC-MS/MS sensitivity

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2005.03.044

Keywords

heterocyclic aromatic arnines; liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry; ion-pair reagents

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Reversed phase ion-pair chromatography (RP-IPC) of seven heterocyclic aromatic amines encompassing quinoline (IQ, MeIQ), quinoxaline (MeIQx), pyridine (PhIP) and carboline derivatives (A alpha C, Harman, Norharman) was carried out with formate as counter ion in an aqueous eluent with acetonitrile as organic modifier. TSKgel ODS-80TS was used as the stationary phase. With the aim of acquiring a better insight into the mutual influence of ion-pair reagent and the organic modifier upon solute retention, the study was performed by using an experimental design approach able to evidencing the effect of the simultaneous variation of the two factors. A model for the chromatographic behavior of the amines is proposed that includes classical ion-pair mechanism involving fon-nate in the case of MeIQx, PhIP, Harman and Norharman. A competitive ion-exchange mechanism was hypothesized to govern retention of quinoline compounds, whereas electrostatic interactions and hydrogen bond formation with the silanols of the stationary phase were judged to be responsible for the retention of A alpha C. Further, the chromatographic behavior of the analytes using the formic acid-ammonium formate buffer in the mobile phase was compared with that observed using acetic acid-ammonium acetate buffer. The method based on the use of RP IPC with tandem mass spectrometry when the eluent contained formate buffer at pH 2.8 exhibited higher detectability with respect to that achieved using the acetate buffer. (c) 2005 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

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available