4.6 Article

Uniaxially aligned electrospun cellulose acetate nanofibers for thin layer chromatographic screening of hydroquinone and retinoic acid adulterated in cosmetics

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1367, 期 -, 页码 141-147

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2014.09.043

关键词

Uniaxially aligned; Nanofibers; Electrospinning; Cellulose acetate; TLC

资金

  1. Silpakorn University Research and Development Institute, Thailand [SURDI 55/01/19, SURDI 56/01/11]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Uniaxially aligned cellulose acetate (CA) nanofibers were successfully fabricated by electrospinning and applied to use as stationary phase for thin layer chromatography. The control of alignment was achieved by using a drum collector rotating at a high speed of 6000 rpm. Spin time of 6 h was used to produce the fiber thickness of about 10 gm which was adequate for good separation. Without any chemical modification after the electrospinning process, CA nanofibers could be readily devised for screening hydroquinone (HQ) and retinoic acid (RA) adulterated in cosmetics using the mobile phase consisting of 65:35:2.5 methanol/water/acetic acid. It was found that the separation run on the aligned nanofibers over a distance of 5 cm took less than 15 min which was two to three times faster than that on the non-aligned ones. On the aligned nanofibers, the masses of HQ and RA which could be visualized were 10 and 25 ng, respectively, which were two times lower than those on the non-aligned CA fibers and five times lower than those on conventional silica plates due to the appearance of darker and sharper of spots on the aligned nanofibers. Furthermore, the proposed method efficiently resolved HQ from RA and ingredients commonly found in cosmetic creams. Due to the satisfactory analytical performance, facile and inexpensive production process, uniaxially aligned electrospun CA nanofibers are promising alternative media for planar chromatography. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据