4.7 Article

Computational and experimental study on the influence of the porogen on the selectivity of 4-nitrophenol molecularly imprinted polymers

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 744, 期 -, 页码 68-74

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2012.07.020

关键词

Molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs); 4-Nitrophenol; Molecular modeling; HPLC; Selectivity

资金

  1. State Baden-Wurttemberg (Promotionsstipendium nach dem Landesgraduiertenforderungsgesetz
  2. LGFG)
  3. FEI Company (Eindhoven, Netherlands)
  4. German Science Foundation [INST40/385-F1UG]
  5. Struktur-und Innovationsfonds Baden-Wurttemberg

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In molecular imprinting the porogen plays a decisive role, as it not only affects the physical properties of the resulting polymer including its porosity, the specific surface area, and the swelling behavior, but also governs the stability of the prepolymerization complex, which in turn decisively determines the recognition properties of the resulting molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP). In this study, the influence of the porogen on the selectivity of MIPs was investigated. Therefore, bulk MIPs against 4-nitrophenol using 4-vinylpyridine (4-VP) as functional monomer and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EDMA) as crosslinker were prepared in acetonitrile and chloroform. The recognition properties of both MIPs were evaluated during chromatographic studies using the respective porogenic solvents as mobile phase for both MIPs. Along with the characterization of the morphology of the obtained polymers via SEM and BET analysis, the beneficial nature of chloroform as porogen for imprinting 4-NP was experimentally demonstrated and verified by findings obtained from complementary molecular dynamics simulations. Moreover, the application of chloroform as mobile phase for the MIP prepared in acetonitrile and vice versa clearly demonstrated the dependence of the resulting recognition properties on the selection of the mobile phase. (C) 2012 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