The enantioseparation of ten mandelic acid derivatives was performed by reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography with hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin (HP-β-CD) or sulfobutyl ether-β-cyclodextrin (SBE-β-CD) as chiral mobile phase additives, in which inclusion complex formations between cyclodextrins and enantiomers were evaluated. The effects of various factors such as the composition of mobile phase, concentration of cyclodextrins and column temperature on retention and enantioselectivity were studied. The peak resolutions and retention time of the enantiomers were strongly affected by the pH, the organic modifier and the type of β-cyclodextrin in the mobile phase, while the concentration of buffer solution and temperature had a relatively low effect on resolutions. Enantioseparations were successfully achieved on a Shimpack CLC-ODS column (150×4.6 mm i.d., 5 μm). The mobile phase was a mixture of acetonitrile and 0.10 mol L-1 of phosphate buffer at pH 2.68 containing 20 mmol L-1 of HP-β-CD or SBE-β-CD. Semi-preparative enantioseparation of about 10 mg of α-cyclohexylmandelic acid and α-cyclopentylmandelic acid were established individually. Cyclodextrin-enantiomer complex stoichiometries as well as binding constants were investigated. Results showed that stoichiomertries for all the inclusion complex of cyclodextrin-enantiomers were 1:1.

No abstract

Preparative enantioseparations of α-cyclopentylmandelic acid and α-methylmandelic acid by high-speed countercurrent chromatography (HSCCC) and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) were compared using hydroxypropy-β-cyclodextrin (HP-β-CD) and sulfobutyl ether-β-cyclodextrin (SBE-β-CD) as the chiral mobile phase additives. In preparative HPLC the enantioseparation was achieved on the ODS C18 reverse phase column with the mobile phase composed of a mixture of acetonitrile and 0.10 mol L−1 phosphate buffer at pH 2.68 containing 20 mmol L−1 HP-β-CD for α-cyclopentylmandelic acid and 20 mmol L−1 SBE-β-CD for α-methylmandelic acid. The maximum sample size for α-cyclopentylmandelic acid and α-methylmandelic acid was only about 10 mg and 5 mg, respectively. In preparative HSCCC the enantioseparations of these two racemates were performed with the two-phase solvent system composed of n-hexane-methyl tert.-butyl ether-0.1 molL−1 phosphate buffer solution at pH 2.67 containing 0.1 mol L−1 HP-β-CD for α-cyclopentylmandelic acid (8.5:1.5:10, v/v/v) and 0.1 mol L−1 SBE-β-CD for α-methylmandelic acid (3:7:10, v/v/v). Under the optimum separation conditions, total 250 mg of racemic α-cyclopentylmandelic acid could be completely enantioseparated by HSCCC with HP-β-CD as a chiral mobile phase additive in a single run, yielding 105-110 mg of enantiomers with 95-98% purity and 85-90% recovery. But, no complete enantioseparation of α-methylmandelic acid was achieved by preparative HSCCC with either of the chiral selectors due to their limited enantioselectivity. In this paper preparative enantioseparation by HSCCC and HPLC was compared from various aspects.

This work concentrates on the separation mechanism and application of chiral ligand exchange high-speed countercurrent chromatography (HSCCC) in enantioseparations, and comparison with traditional chiral ligand exchange high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The enantioseparation of ten aromatic α-hydroxyl acids were performed by these two chromatographic methods. Results showed that five of the racemates were successfully enantioseparated by HSCCC while only three of the racemates could be enantioseparated by HPLC using a suitable chiral ligand mobile phase additive. For HSCCC, the two-phase solvent system was composed of butanol-water (1:1, v/v), to which N-n-dodecyl-L-proline was added in the organic phase as chiral ligand and cupric acetate was added in the aqueous phase as a transition metal ion. Various operation parameters in HSCCC were optimized by enantioselective liquid-liquid extraction. Based on the results of the present studies the separation mechanism for HSCCC was proposed. For HPLC, the optimized mobile phase composed of aqueous solution containing 6 mmol L−1 L-phenylalanine and 3 mmol L−1 cupric sulfate and methanol was used for enantioseparation. Among three ligands tested on a conventional reverse stationary phase column, only one was found to be effective. In the present studies HSCCC presented unique advantages due to its high versatility of two-phase solvent systems and it could be used as an alternative method for enantioseparations.

The chromatographic retention mechanism describing relationship between retention factor and concentration of Cu(2+) (l-phenylalanine)2 using chiral ligand mobile phase was investigated and eight mandelic acid derivatives were enantioseparated by chiral ligand exchange chromatography. The relationship between retention factor and concentration of the Cu(2+) (l-phenylalanine)2 complex was proven to be in conformity with chromatographic retention mechanism in which chiral discrimination occurred both in mobile and stationary phase. Different copper(II) salts, chiral ligands, organic modifier, pH of aqueous phase, and conventional temperature on retention behavior were optimized. Eight racemates were successfully enantioseparated on a common reversed-phase column with an optimized mobile phase composed of 6 mmol/L of l-phenylalanine or N,N-dimethyl-l-phenylalanine and 3 mmol/Lof copper(II) acetate or copper(II) sulfate aqueous solution and methanol.