4.5 Article

Ionic strength effects on electrophoretic focusing and separations

Journal

ELECTROPHORESIS
Volume 31, Issue 5, Pages 910-919

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/elps.200900560

Keywords

Capillary electrophoresis; Ionic strength; ITP; Separation; Simulation

Funding

  1. Stanford School of Engineering Fellowship
  2. Mayfield Stanford Graduate Fellowship
  3. Office of Technology Licensing Stanford Graduate Fellowship
  4. Fulbright Fellowship
  5. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) [HR0011-06-1-0050]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a numerical and experimental study of the effects of ionic strength on electrophoretic focusing and separations. We review the development of ionic strength models for electrophoretic mobility and chemical activity and highlight their differences in the context of electrophoretic separation and focusing simulations We couple a fast numerical solver for electrophoretic transport with the Onsager-Fuoss model for actual ionic mobility and the extended Debye-Huckle theory for correction of ionic activity Model predictions for fluorescein mobility as a function of ionic strength and pH compare well with data from CZE experiments. Simulation predictions of preconcentration factors in peak mode ITP also compare well with the published experimental data We performed ITP experiments to study the effect of ionic strength on the simultaneous focusing and separation Our comparisons of the latter data With Simulation results at 10 and 250 mM ionic strength show the model is able to capture the observed qualitative differences in ITP analyte zone shape and order Finally, we present simulations of CZE experiments where changes in the ionic strength result in significant change in selectivity and order of analyte peaks Our simulations of ionic strength effects in capillary electrophoresis compare well with the published experimental data

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