4.5 Article

Capillary isotachophoresis for the analysis of ionic liquid entities

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 33, 期 13, 页码 1991-1996

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201000199

关键词

Analysis; Anions; Cations; Ionic liquids; Isotachophoresis

资金

  1. 7th Framework Programme within support for training and career development of researchers (MarieCurie) Networks for Initial Training (ITN) under the project MINILUBES [PITN-GA-2008-216011]
  2. Polish Ministry of Research and Higher Education [DS 8200-4-0085-10, NN204154436]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Simple, selective and sensitive isotachophoretic methods for the analysis of ionic liquid (IL) compartments were developed in this study. A leading electrolyte containing 10 mM L-histidine + 10 mM histidine hydrochloride and a terminating electrolyte containing 5 mM glutamic acid + 5 mM L-histidine were selected to separate nitrate(V), chlorate(V), hexafluorophosphate, dicyanimide, trifluoromethanesulfonate, phosphate(V) and bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide in anionic mode. In contrast. seven short-chain alkylimidazolium, alkylpyrrolidinium, alkylpyridinium and non-chromophoric tetraalkylammonium and tetraalkylphosphonium IL cations were separated with 10 mM potassium hydroxide + 10 mM acetic acid as leading electrolyte, and 10 mM + 10 mM acetate as terminating electrolyte. Both methods were optimized and validated with good analytical performance parameters. LOD was about 3-5 mu M, and the repeatability lay in the range of 1.06-5.59%. These methods were evaluated for their applicability to the analysis of soil samples and freshwater contaminated with ILs. In light of hitherto the absence of reports on the determination of non-chromophoric IL cations, this study delivers for the first time a universal method enabling analysis of these species. Moreover, as there is still significant lack of methodologies of IL anion analysis, the obtained results offer an interesting alternative in that matter.

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

4.5
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