4.5 Article

Retention properties of acetone-water mobile phases on a biphenylsiloxane-bonded silica stationary phase in reversed-phase liquid chromatography

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 45, 期 9, 页码 1487-1492

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.202200033

关键词

acetone; biphenyl stationary phases; retention mechanisms; reversed-phase liquid chromatography; selectivity; solvation parameter model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The solvation parameter model system constants and retention factors were used to interpret the retention properties of calibration compounds on a biphenylsiloxane-bonded stationary phase. The study compared the retention properties of acetone-water binary mobile phases with acetonitrile and methanol mobile phases. The results showed that acetone mobile phases have similar retention properties to acetonitrile but with selectivity differences that can be exploited in reversed-phase liquid chromatography method development on the stationary phase.
The solvation parameter model system constants and retention factors were used to interpret retention properties of 39 calibration compounds on a biphenylsiloxane-bonded stationary phase (Kinetex biphenyl) for acetone-water binary mobile phase systems containing 30-70% v/v. Variation in system constants, phase ratios, and retention factors of acetone-water binary mobile phases systems were compared with more commonly used acetonitrile and methanol mobile phase systems. Retention properties of acetone mobile phases on a Kinetex biphenyl column were more similar to that of acetonitrile than methanol mobile phases except with respect to selectivity equivalency. Importantly, selectivity differences arising between acetone and acetonitrile systems (the lower hydrogen-bond basicity of acetone-water mobile phases and differences in hydrogen-bond acidity, cavity formation and dispersion interactions) could be exploited in reversed-phase liquid chromatography method development on a Kinetex biphenyl stationary phase.

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