Orthogonal separations of nicotine and nicotine‐related alkaloids by various capillary electrophoretic modes

Abstract

The migration behaviour of nicotine and related tobacco alkaloids was investigated using three different capillary electrophoretic (CE) modes. Novel separations were achieved both using microemulsion electrokinetic chromatography (MEEKC) and nonaqueous CE (NACE). Improved resolution compared to previous studies was obtained using free-solution CE (FSCE). Each technique resulted in different, orthogonal separation selectivity. The suitability of each method for application to the analysis of nicotine lozenges is discussed. The FSCE method was applied to the analysis of nicotine lozenges due to its compatibility with an established lozenge extraction solvent. The method used gave good injection precision and linearity. Good agreement of CE and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) results was obtained. The CE method is therefore considered suitable for the quantitative determination of nicotine in nicotine lozenges.

Recent advances in the development and application of microemulsion EKC

“…Separation of nicotine and related impurities by MEEKC. Test mix dissolved in electrolyte; 50 mm i.d.630 cm standard fused-silica capillary; sample injection 10 mbar for 5 s; 10 kV separation; 260 nm UV detection; 407C; electrolyte, 89% 10 mM tetraborate at pH 9.5 1 0.8% octane 1 3.3% SDS 1 6.6% butanol [23]. Migration order (quickest to slowest); cis/trans isomer, cotinine, nornicotene, anatabine, myosmine, nicotine.…”

Recent advances in microemulsion electrokinetic chromatography

“…A number of reports have investigated the effect of pH on MEEKC separations [10,28,33]. Typically a pH 21 . Separation conditions: sample injection, 2 s at 150 mbar; 20 kV; 48.5 cm650 mm ID fused-silica capillary; electrolyte, 0.8% w/w octane, 3.3% w/w surfactant, 6.6% w/w 1-butanol, 89.3% w/w 10 mM borate in water pH 9.2; surfactant: (A) SDS, (B) SDS+SDOSS (50/50 w/w), (C) SDS 1 Tween 21 (50/50 w/w), (D) SDS 1 MAPS (50/50 w/w); Reprinted from [26], with permission.…”

“…Studies have also been performed which compare MEEKC to other electrophoretic modes [18,[20][21][22]. Freesolution (FSCE) and nonaqueous CE (NACE), MEKC, and MEEKC separations of a range of methylquinolines have been compared [20], while the separation of nicotine and related impurities [21] was compared using MEEKC, NACE, and FSCE, with MEEKC offering the better selectivity.…”

“…Freesolution (FSCE) and nonaqueous CE (NACE), MEKC, and MEEKC separations of a range of methylquinolines have been compared [20], while the separation of nicotine and related impurities [21] was compared using MEEKC, NACE, and FSCE, with MEEKC offering the better selectivity. Figure 1 shows the separation of nicotine and a range of related substances by a MEEKC method.…”

“…Separation of a paraben test-mixture using low (pH 2.1) and high (pH 9.5) pH MEEKC. Testmix of Ac, 4-hydroxybenzoic acid; MP, methyl paraben; EP, ethyl paraben; PP, Propyl paraben; BP, butyl paraben; ISS, internal standard dissolved in electrolyte at 5 mg?mL 21 . Separation conditions: sample injection, 3 s at 120 mbar; 11 kV; 33 cm650 mm ID fused-silica capillary; 407C, 200 nm UV; electrolyte, 3.3% w/w SDS, 6.6% w/w 1-butanol, 0.8% w/w octane, 89.3% w/w aqueous buffer; buffer: (A) 50 mM phosphate buffer, pH 2.1, (B) 10 mM borate buffer, pH 9.2.…”