1993
DOI: 10.1002/chir.530050711
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison between cellulose and amylose tris(3,5‐dimethylphenylcarbamate) chiral stationary phases for enantiomeric separation of 17 amidotetralins

Abstract: Direct enantiomeric separations of 17 chiral amidotetralins by means of high performance liquid chromatography were performed on stationary phases composed of tris(3,5-dimethylphenylcarbamate) derivatives of cellulose and amylose, coated on silica gel. The enantiomers of 15 out of 17 amidotetralins were resolved with a resolution of more than 1.5 by at least one of the chiral stationary phases. The stationary phases showed complementary results with regard to the separation of the amidotetralins, that is, pair… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A different geometry and/or size of the helical groove, which may be influenced by the addition of polar organic modifiers to the mobile phase, is probably the main reason for different separation properties of both CSPs. 17,18 For both CSPs, a mobile phase preferably consisting of n-hexane with 2-propanol, ethanol, or methanol as mobile phase modifiers (1-20%) is recommended. 16 Small amounts of diethylamine (0.1-1%) for polar basic solutes 19 and of trifluoroacetic acid (0.025-1%) for acidic solutes 20 may be added to the mobile phase as tailing suppressors.…”
Section: Conditions Affecting Separation By Hplcmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A different geometry and/or size of the helical groove, which may be influenced by the addition of polar organic modifiers to the mobile phase, is probably the main reason for different separation properties of both CSPs. 17,18 For both CSPs, a mobile phase preferably consisting of n-hexane with 2-propanol, ethanol, or methanol as mobile phase modifiers (1-20%) is recommended. 16 Small amounts of diethylamine (0.1-1%) for polar basic solutes 19 and of trifluoroacetic acid (0.025-1%) for acidic solutes 20 may be added to the mobile phase as tailing suppressors.…”
Section: Conditions Affecting Separation By Hplcmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The tris(3,5-dimethylphenylcarbamate) derivative of amylose (AD) is reported to possess a complementary character to its cellulose analogue (OD) for the enantioseparation of certain analytes [34]. On polysaccharide stationary phases, hydrogen bonding and -interactions are supposed to be the major analyte-chiral stationary phase interactions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As can be seen in Table II, the best k' and Rs factors were obtained with 2-propanol; (2) stronger solvents such as alcohols, compete more effectively for the chiral and achiral sites on the CSP than the solute. Enantiomeric resolution increased as the size of the alcohol increased, with 2-propanol giving the best resolution, probably because of steric hindrance of the larger alcohols [26]. In the case of amylose tris-3,5-dimethylphenylcarbamate (AD CSP), the best results were obtained when lower alcohols (ethanol) were added to the mobile phase.…”
Section: ]-( -)-(R)mentioning
confidence: 97%