Cargando…

Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography

We compared the separation selectivities of 19 different hydrophilic interaction chromatography columns. The stationary phases included underivatized silica and hybrid particles, cyano‐bonded silica, materials with neutral ligands such as amide, diol, pentahydroxy, and urea, zwitterionic sorbents, a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gilar, Martin, Berthelette, Kenneth D., Walter, Thomas H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9545918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35347885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jssc.202200165
_version_ 1784804926188158976
author Gilar, Martin
Berthelette, Kenneth D.
Walter, Thomas H.
author_facet Gilar, Martin
Berthelette, Kenneth D.
Walter, Thomas H.
author_sort Gilar, Martin
collection PubMed
description We compared the separation selectivities of 19 different hydrophilic interaction chromatography columns. The stationary phases included underivatized silica and hybrid particles, cyano‐bonded silica, materials with neutral ligands such as amide, diol, pentahydroxy, and urea, zwitterionic sorbents, and mixed‐mode materials with amine functionalities. A set of 77 small molecules was used to evaluate the columns. We visualized the retention behavior of the different columns using retention time correlation plots. The analytes were classified as cations, anions, or neutral based on their estimated charge under the separation conditions. This involved adjusting the dissociation constants of the analytes for the acetonitrile content of the mobile phase and experimentally determining the pH of the mobile phase containing 70% acetonitrile. The retention correlation plots show that the selectivity differences strongly depended on ionic interactions. Comparisons of the neutral stationary phases (e.g., diol vs. amide) showed more similar selectivity than did comparisons of neutral columns versus columns with cation or anion exchange activity (bare silica or amine columns, respectively). The zwitterionic columns did not behave as perfectly neutral. The correlation plots indicated that they exhibited either cation or anion exchange activity, although to a lesser degree than the silica and amine‐containing stationary phases.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9545918
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95459182022-10-14 Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography Gilar, Martin Berthelette, Kenneth D. Walter, Thomas H. J Sep Sci Liquid Chromatography We compared the separation selectivities of 19 different hydrophilic interaction chromatography columns. The stationary phases included underivatized silica and hybrid particles, cyano‐bonded silica, materials with neutral ligands such as amide, diol, pentahydroxy, and urea, zwitterionic sorbents, and mixed‐mode materials with amine functionalities. A set of 77 small molecules was used to evaluate the columns. We visualized the retention behavior of the different columns using retention time correlation plots. The analytes were classified as cations, anions, or neutral based on their estimated charge under the separation conditions. This involved adjusting the dissociation constants of the analytes for the acetonitrile content of the mobile phase and experimentally determining the pH of the mobile phase containing 70% acetonitrile. The retention correlation plots show that the selectivity differences strongly depended on ionic interactions. Comparisons of the neutral stationary phases (e.g., diol vs. amide) showed more similar selectivity than did comparisons of neutral columns versus columns with cation or anion exchange activity (bare silica or amine columns, respectively). The zwitterionic columns did not behave as perfectly neutral. The correlation plots indicated that they exhibited either cation or anion exchange activity, although to a lesser degree than the silica and amine‐containing stationary phases. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-07 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9545918/ /pubmed/35347885 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jssc.202200165 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Separation Science published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Liquid Chromatography
Gilar, Martin
Berthelette, Kenneth D.
Walter, Thomas H.
Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography
title Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography
title_full Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography
title_fullStr Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography
title_full_unstemmed Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography
title_short Contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography
title_sort contribution of ionic interactions to stationary phase selectivity in hydrophilic interaction chromatography
topic Liquid Chromatography
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9545918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35347885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jssc.202200165
work_keys_str_mv AT gilarmartin contributionofionicinteractionstostationaryphaseselectivityinhydrophilicinteractionchromatography
AT berthelettekennethd contributionofionicinteractionstostationaryphaseselectivityinhydrophilicinteractionchromatography
AT walterthomash contributionofionicinteractionstostationaryphaseselectivityinhydrophilicinteractionchromatography