4.6 Article

Super/subcritical fluid chromatography chiral separations with macrocyclic glycopeptide stationary phases

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 978, Issue 1-2, Pages 185-204

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9673(02)01356-0

Keywords

enantiomer separation; supercritical fluid chromatography; subcritical mobile phase; stationary phases; SFC; amino acids; sulfoxides; chiral; macrocyclic glycopeptide

Funding

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM 53825] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The chiral recognition capabilities of three macrocyclic glycopeptide chiral selectors, namely teicoplanin (Chirobiotic T), its aglycone (Chirobiotic TAG) and ristocetin (Chirobiotic R), were evaluated with supercritical and subcritical fluid mobile phases. A set of 111 chiral compounds including heterocycles, analgesics (nonsteroidal antiinflamatory compounds), beta-blockers, sulfoxides, N-protected amino acids and native amino acids was separated on the three chiral stationary phases (CSPs). All separations were done with an outlet pressure regulated at 100 bar, 31 degreesC and at 4 ml/min. Various amounts of methanol ranging from 7 to 67% (v/v) were added to the carbon dioxide along with small amounts (0.1 to 0.5%, v/v) of triethylamine and/or trifluoroacetic acid. The Chirobiotic TAG CSP was the most effective closely followed by the Chirobiotic T column. Both columns were able to separate, partially or fully, 92% of the enantiomers of the compound set. The ristocetin chiral selector could partially or baseline resolve only 60% of the enantiomers tested. All separations were done in less than 15 min and 70% were done in less than 4 min. The speed of the separations is the main advantage of the use of SFC compared to normal-phase HPLC. In addition, SFC is advantageous for preparative separations with easy solute recovery and solvent disposal. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science 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