4.7 Article

Track-etched membrane-based dual-electrode coulometric detector for microbore/capillary high-performance liquid chromatography

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 1102, 期 -, 页码 46-52

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2019.12.045

关键词

Track-etched membrane filter; Coulometric detection; Microbore/capillary liquid chromatography; Electrochemical detector; Dual-electrode system

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [19K05543]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19K05543] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electrochemical flow cell containing track-etched microporous membrane electrodes was applied to a dual-electrode coulometric detector for microbore/capillary HPLC with a small injection volume and low eluent flow rate. The proposed flow cell with a 0.1-mm diameter inlet channel gave a detection volume of 0.08 nL per electrode, which was determined by the eluent flow through the electrode. For the dual-electrode detector, the calculated volume was 0.24 nL. The efficiency of electrooxidation of L-ascorbic acid increased as the flow rate decreased and was close to 100% when the flow rate was below 50 mu L min(-1), which is a common flow rate in microbore or capillary liquid chromatography. Catecholamines, such as noradrenaline, adrenaline, and dopamine, were detected by total conversion with two-electron oxidation in the potential range from 0.8 to 1.0 V vs. Ag/AgCl after separation with a microbore column. These peaks were accompanied by corresponding cathodic peaks derived from quasi-stable electrooxidation products of the catecholamines. The detection limits of noradrenaline, adrenaline, and dopamine were 0.1, 0.1, and 0.2 mu M, respectively. The RSD values for five replicate measurements of 5.0 mu M of these compounds were 0.9%, 0.7%, and 1.5%, respectively. Coulometric detection was also demonstrated by determination of catecholamines in pharmaceuticals. (C) 2019 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

4.7
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