Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Insights into the Retention Mechanisms on Perfluorohexylpropylsiloxane-Bonded (Fluophase-RP) and Octadecylsiloxane-Bonded (Betasil C18) Stationary Phases Based on the Same Silica Substrate in RP-LC

  • Original
  • Published:
Chromatographia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The solvation parameter model is used to elucidate the retention mechanism on a perfluorohexylpropylsiloxane-bonded (Fluophase RP) and octadecylsiloxane-bonded (Betasil C18) stationary phases based on the same silica substrate with acetonitrile–water and methanol–water mobile phase compositions. Dewetting affects the retention properties of Fluophase RP at mobile phase compositions containing less than 20% (v/v) acetonitrile or 40% (v/v) methanol. It results in a loss of retention due to an unfavorable change in the phase ratio as well as changes in specific intermolecular interactions. Steric repulsion reduces retention of bulky solutes on fully solvated Betasil C18 with methanol–water (but not acetonitrile–water) mobile phase compositions but is not important for Fluophase RP. The retention of weak bases is affected by ion-exchange interactions on Fluophase RP with acetonitrile–water, and to a lesser extent, methanol-water mobile phases but these are weak at best for Betasil C18. The system constants of the solvation parameter model and retention factor scatter plots are used to compare selectivity differences for Fluophase RP, Betasil C18 and a perfluorophenylpropylsiloxane-bonded silica stationary phase Discovery HS F5 for conditions where incomplete solvation, steric repulsion and ion-exchange do not significantly contribute to the retention mechanism. Lower retention on Fluophase RP results from weaker dispersion and/or higher cohesion moderated to different extents by polar interactions since solvated Fluophase RP is a stronger hydrogen-bond acid and more dipolar/polarizable than Betasil C18. Retention factors for acetonitrile–water mobile phases are highly correlated for Fluophase RP and Betasil C18 except for compounds with a large excess molar refraction and weak hydrogen-bonding capability. Selectivity differences are more significant for methanol–water mobile phases. Retention factors on Fluophase RP are strongly correlated with those on Discovery HSF5 for acetonitrile–water mobile phases while methanol–water mobile phases retention on Fluophase RP is a poor predictor of the retention order on Discovery HS F5.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kiridena W, DeKay C, Koziol WW, Ali Z, Ahmed H, Poole CF (2006) Chromatographia 63:407–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Euerby MR, McKeown AP, Petersson P (2003) J Sep Sci 26:295–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Marchand DH, Croes K, Dolan JW, Snyder LR, Henry RA, Kallury KMR, Waite S, Carr PW (2005) J Chromatogr 1062:65–78

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Jinno K, Nakamura H (1994) Chromatographia 39:285–293

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Monde T, Kamiusuki T, Kuroda T, Ohkawa T, Fukube H (1996) J Chromatogr A 722:273–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Turowski M, Morimoto T, Kimata K, Monde H, Ikegami T, Hosoya K, Tanaka N (2001) J Chromatogr A 911:177–190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Yamamoto FM, Rokushika S (2000) J Chromatogr A 898:141–151

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sadek PC, Carr PW, Ruggio MJ (1987) Anal Chem 59:1032–1039

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Glatz H, Blay C, Engelhardt H, Bannwarth W (2004) Chromatographia 59:567–570

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Csato E, Fulop N, Szabo G (1990) J Chromatogr 511:79–88

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bell DS, Cramer HM, Jones AD (2005) J Chromatogr A 1095:113–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Poole CF (2003) The essence of chromatography. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  13. Poole CF, Poole SK (2002) J Chromatogr A 965:263–299

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Abraham MH, Ibrahim A, Zissimos AM (2004) J Chromatogr A 1037:29–47

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Vitha M, Carr PW (2006) J Chromatogr A 1126:143–194

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Valko K, Espinosa S, Du CM, Bosch E, M Roses, Bevan C, Abraham MH (2003) J Chromatogr A 933:73–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Reta M, Carr PW, Sadek PC, Rutan SC (1999) Anal Chem 71:3484–3496

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Poole CF, Ahmed H, Kiridena W, DeKay C, Koziol WW (2005) Chromatographia 62:553–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Poole CF, Kiridena W, DeKay C, Koziol WW, Rosencrans RD (2006) J Chromatogr A 1115:133–141

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Poole CF, Poole SK, Gunatilleka AD (2000) Adv Chromatogr 40:159–230

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hsieh MM, Dorsey JG (1993) J Chromatogr 631:63–78

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Abraham MH (1993) Chem Soc Revs 22:73–83

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Walter TH, Iraneta P, Capparella M (2005) J Chromatogr A 1075:177–183

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. McDonald PD (2003) Adv Chromatogr 42: 323–375

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kiridena W, Poole CF, Koziol WW (2004) J Chromatogr A 1060:177–185

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kiridena W, DeKay C, Villiere ND, Koziol WW, Poole CF (2005) Chromatographia 61:587–593

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Abraham MH, Roses M, Poole CF, Poole SK (1997) J Phys Org Chem 10:358–368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhao JH, Carr PW (1999) Anal Chem 71:2623–2632

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA

    C. F. Poole & H. Ahmed

  2. North America Analytical and Physical Sciences Laboratory, Flint Group, 4600 Arrowhead Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA

    W. Kiridena, C. DeKay & W. W. Koziol

Authors
  1. C. F. Poole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. W. Kiridena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. DeKay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. W. W. Koziol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. F. Poole.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Poole, C.F., Ahmed, H., Kiridena, W. et al. Insights into the Retention Mechanisms on Perfluorohexylpropylsiloxane-Bonded (Fluophase-RP) and Octadecylsiloxane-Bonded (Betasil C18) Stationary Phases Based on the Same Silica Substrate in RP-LC. Chroma 65, 127–139 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-006-0131-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-006-0131-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation