Micellar liquid chromatography of polyaromatic hydrocarbons using anionic, cationic, and nonionic surfactants: Armstrong model, LSER interpretation

Abstract

KeyWords Column liquid chromatography Micellar Liquid Chromatography Armstrong Model LinearSolvatTon Energy RelatTonshTp Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons SummaryThe capacity factors kof 28 polyaromatTc hydrocarbons (PAHs) were determTned by micellarlTquTd chromatography (CLM) Tn several mobiles phases containing anTonic (SDS), catTonic (CRAB), or non-Tonic (BrTj 35) surfactants. The mTcelle-water bTndTng constants KMwwere calculated via the Armstrong theory Linear solvation energy relationship (LSER) were used to corre late k and K,~wwith the PAHs solvatochromic descriptors. LSER correlation was convenient for k. were The most important factors appeared to be the size and basidty of the PAHs. In the reten tion of the PAHs, their volume interacted positively and their basidty negatively. LSER correla tion of KMwwas relatively poordue to the difficult and complex transfer PAHs from water to the micelles. The volume and basicity strongly influenced the KMw, depending on the surfactant.With SDS or Bri i 35, the ?AH sTze increased KMwwhereas its basTcTty decreased KMw The opposTte was observed wth CRAB.However, MLC is less efficient than conventional RPLC [11, 12].The addition of a small amount of organic modifier or an increase in the column temperature produced efficiencies similar to those obtained in RP-HPLC [13].MLC was used to separate plyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) of environmental interest [14 16]. In these papers, the influence of different parameters, such as the amount of the modifier and the column temperature, was investigated.In this work, three kinds of surfactants (anionic, cationic and non-ionic) are used to determine the solute-micelle binding constants of PAHs in MLC via the Armstrong retention model. The linear solvation energy relationships (LSER) model is also applied to characterise solute-micelle interactions with the three micelle types.

Selectivity of Brij-35 in Micellar Liquid Chromatographic Separation of Positional Isomers

“…LSER studies of MBC has shown to have pronounce effect by hydrophobicity as given by high coefficients for "υ" [20]. This type of effect can also be observed in a report by Mutelet et al [15], where υ values for Brij-35 (0.08 M), SDS (0.1 M), and CTAB (0.01 M), with 15% isopropanol as additive are 1.69 ± 0.13, 0.75 ± 0.08, and 0.56 ± 0.08, respectively.…”

Electrooxidation and Low-tech Determination of Pantoprazole on a Disposable Pencil Graphite Electrode by the use of Cationic Surfactant

“…42 In studied condition (at pH 7.0), PAN molecule exists as a mixture of uncharged (~75%) and partly negatively charged (~25%) forms. Considering the critical micelle concentration of CTAB, CMC CTAB = 8.7 × 10 -4 M, 43 at relatively higher concentration of surfactant (in our case 3 × 10 -4 M) added to the solution, the surface micelles are formed on the electrode surface. Therefore, it is expected that adsorption on the electrode surface is mainly maintained by hydrophobic interaction between neutral PAN molecules (~75%) and long hydrophobic tails of CTAB which dominates the coadsorption of PAN with CTAB on PGE surface.…”