2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2012.11.075
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative characterization of hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography columns by linear solvation energy relationships

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
48
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
3
48
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recently, two additional molecular descriptors on electrostatic interactions were introduced by Chirita et al [33] to the LSER model for the investigation of the chromatographic behaviors of zwitterionic stationary phases. Using this modified LSER model, Schuster et al [34,35] comparatively characterized 23 HILIC columns at pH 3.0 and 5.0. The resulting correlation coefficients (R 2 ) of LSER equations ranged from 0.487 to 0.854, indicating that LSER models had certain limitation to characterize the broad set of columns.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, two additional molecular descriptors on electrostatic interactions were introduced by Chirita et al [33] to the LSER model for the investigation of the chromatographic behaviors of zwitterionic stationary phases. Using this modified LSER model, Schuster et al [34,35] comparatively characterized 23 HILIC columns at pH 3.0 and 5.0. The resulting correlation coefficients (R 2 ) of LSER equations ranged from 0.487 to 0.854, indicating that LSER models had certain limitation to characterize the broad set of columns.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Basic and weak basic solutes displayed a continuous decreased retention when the water content in mobile phase increased, acting as steep decrease from 5% to 20% of water volume fraction, then exhibiting weak retention and slight decrease over 20% of water volume fraction. This retention mode was typical HILIC behavior, mainly from the change of partitioning between predominantly organic mobile phase and water enriched layer on the surface of stationary phase [38], although the retention was a result of hydrophilic-partition mechanism, adsorption mechanism and possible electrostatic interactions [39][40][41][42][43][44].…”
Section: Water Content In Mobile Phasementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The retention mechanism in HILIC is supposed to involve partitioning of analytes between a mostly organic mobile phase and a water layer at the surface of the stationary phase. 37,38 Mechanism also accepted in the literature is the interaction of polar groups with water molecules from mobile phase, giving an "empirical wall" of water molecules near the silica surface.…”
Section: Chromatographic Analysis Of Shl Injectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The retention mechanism in HILIC is supposed to involve partitioning of analytes between a mostly organic mobile phase and a water layer at the surface of the stationary phase. 37,38 Mechanism also accepted in the literature is the interaction of polar groups with water molecules from mobile phase, giving an "empirical wall" of water molecules near the silica surface. 39 Furthermore, a recent study 40 concluded by molecular dynamics that the ratio between the local water mole fraction at and near the surface and the nominal water mole fraction grew nonlinearly with the decrease of water content in the mobile phase.…”
Section: Chromatographic Analysis Of Shl Injectionmentioning
confidence: 99%