Advertisement

Determination of liquid chromatography/flame ionization detection response factors for alcohols, ketones, and sugars

  • Christian Becker
  • Maik A. JochmannEmail author
  • Torsten C. Schmidt
Research Paper
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

In the past, the main focus of flame ionization detector (FID) response studies was set on investigations of gas chromatography (GC) relevant analytes such as aliphatic hydrocarbons and selected functional groups. Only a few data are available for liquid chromatography (LC)/FID responses. Within this research paper, we present the FID response factors for a LC/FID system with an aqueous eluent as mobile phase. The study focus on the most common analytes of LC/FID studies in the past as well as several compounds that are not directly GC compatible because of their polarity. Furthermore, the range of substances was extended to isomers, poly-alcohols, and sugars to obtain more detailed information of the influence of hydroxyl groups on the recorded response. The data show a group-specific correlation of response factors with a correlation coefficient (R2) for, e.g., alcohols and ketones of 0.99. Constant contribution factors of functional groups as mentioned in several GC/FID response studies and prediction models were observed to a limited extent. Interactions of sugar analytes with water showed that transfer of GC/FID to LC/FID data cannot be done in general. The underlying mechanisms revealed several new aspects, which have to be taken into account for future response prediction models, especially of small molecules. Interactions between eluent and analytes show that LC/FID response prediction is more complex and requires more than simple addition of functional group contributions.

Keywords

LC/FID FID Nebulizer interface LC/FID response 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

The authors declare that no human participants and/or animals were involved in research. The authors declare that no data, text, or theories by others are presented without citation.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Holm T. Aspects of the mechanism of the flame ionization detector. J Chromatogr A. 1999;842(1–2):221–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9673(98)00706-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ackman RG. Fundamental groups in the response of flame ionization detectors to oxygenated aliphatic hydrocarbons. J Chromatogr Sci. 1964;2(6):173–9.  https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/2.6.173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Saint Laumer JY, Cicchetti E, Merle P, Egger J, Chaintreau A. Quantification in gas chromatography: prediction of flame ionization detector response factors from combustion enthalpies and molecular structures. Anal Chem. 2010;82(15):6457–62.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac1006574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jorgensen AD, Picel KC, Stamoudis VC. Prediction of gas chromatography flame ionization detector response factors from molecular structures. Anal Chem. 1990;62(7):683–9.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00206a007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smith RM, Burgess RJ. Superheated water - a clean eluent for reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography. Anal Commun. 1996;33(9):327–9.  https://doi.org/10.1039/ac9963300327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yang Y. Subcritical water chromatography: a green approach to high-temperature liquid chromatography. J Sep Sci. 2007;30(8):1131–40.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilson ID. Investigation of a range of stationary phases for the separation of model drugs by HPLC using superheated water as the mobile phase. Chromatographia. 2000;52:S28–34.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02493117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yarita T, Nakajima R, Otsuka S, Ihara T, Takatsu A, Shibukawa M. Determination of ethanol in alcoholic beverages by high-performance liquid chromatography-flame ionization detection using pure water as mobile phase. J Chromatogr A. 2002;976(1–2):387–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9673(02)00942-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chienthavorn O, Smith RM. Buffered superheated water as an eluent for reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography. Chromatographia. 1999;50(7–8):485–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02490746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Becker C, Jochmann MA, Schmidt TC. An overview of approaches in liquid chromatography flame ionization detection. Trends Anal Chem. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2018.10.038.
  11. 11.
    Fu Y, Song RJ, Yao N, Long YD, Huang TB. Separation of some alcohols, phenols and caboxylic acids by coupling of subcritical water chromatography and flame ionization detection with post-column splitting. Chin J Anal Chem. 2007;35(9):1335–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang L, Kujawinski DM, Jochmann MA, Schmidt TC. High-temperature reversed-phase liquid chromatography coupled to isotope ratio mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2011;25(20):2971–80.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rcm.5069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Neff WE, Byrdwell WC. Soybean oil triacylglycerol analysis by reversed-phase high performance liquid-chromatography coupled with atmospheric-pressure-chemical-ionization mass spectrometry. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 1995;72(10):1185–91.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02540986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Neff WE, Jackson MA, List GR, King JW. Qualitative and quantitative determination of methyl esters, free fatty acids, mono-, di-, and triacylglycerols via HPLC coupled with a flame ionization detector. J Liq Chromatogr Relat Technol. 1997;20(7):1079–90.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10826079708010960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Musumarra G, Pisano D, Katritzky AR, Lapucha AR, Luxem FJ, Murugan R, et al. Prediction of gas chromatographic response factors by the PLS method. Tetrahedron Comput Methodol. 1989;2(1):17–36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5529(89)90026-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tong HY, Karasek FW. Flame ionization detector response factors for compound classes in quantitative analysis of complex organic mixtures. Anal Chem. 1984;56(12):2124–8.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00276a033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maggs RJ. A commercial detector for monitoring the eluent from liquid chromatographic columns. Chromatographia. 1968;1(1–2):43–8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02259010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Scott RPW, Lawrence JG. An improved moving wire liquid chromatography detector. J Chromatogr Sci. 1970;8(2):65–71.  https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/8.2.65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sternberg JC, Gallaway, W.S. and Jones, D.T.L. The mechanism of response of flame ionization detectors. Gas chromatography: Third International Symposium Held Under the Auspices of the Analysis Instrumentation Division of the Instrument Society of America, June 13–16, 1961. Academic; 1962. p. 231–67.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Scanlon JT, Willis DE. Calculation of flame ionization detector relative response factors using the effective carbon number concept. J Chromatogr Sci. 1985;23(8):333–40.  https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/23.8.333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Halasz I, Schneider W. Quantitative gas chromatographic analysis of hydrocarbons with capillary column and flame ionization detector. Anal Chem. 1961;33(8):978–82.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60176a034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dietz WA. Response factors for gas chromatographic analyses. J Chromatogr Sci. 1967;5(2):68–71.  https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/5.2.68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Young E, Smith RM, Sharp BL, Bone JR. Liquid chromatography-flame ionisation detection using a nebuliser/spray chamber interface. Part 2. Comparison of functional group responses. J Chromatogr A. 2012;1236:21–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2012.02.035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kosch J. Total hydrocarbon analysis using flame ionization detector. Environmental Instrumentation and Analysis Handbook. Wiley; 2005. p. 147–56.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Perkins G, Laramy RE, Lively LD. Flame response in the quantitative determination of high molecular weight paraffins and alcohols by gas chromatography. Anal Chem. 1963;35(3):360–2.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60196a028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Veloo PS. Studies of combustion characteristics of alcohols, aldehydes and ketons. University of Southern California. 2011(Dissertation):1–221.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lam K-Y, Ren W, Pyun SH, Farooq A, Davidson DF, Hanson RK. Multi-species time-history measurements during high-temperature acetone and 2-butanone pyrolysis. Proc Combust Inst. 2013;34(1):607–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2012.06.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Szwarc M, Taylor JW. Pyrolysis of acetone and the heat of formation of acetyl radicals. J Chem Phys. 1955;23(12):2310–4.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1740745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Falbe J, Regitz MRÖMPP. Lexikon Chemie, 10. Auflage, 1996-1999: Band 2: Cm - G. In: Thieme; 2014.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Becker
    • 1
    • 2
  • Maik A. Jochmann
    • 2
    Email author
  • Torsten C. Schmidt
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.BGB Analytik AGBöcktenSwitzerland
  2. 2.Instrumental Analytical ChemistryUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  3. 3.Centre for Water and Environmental Research (ZWU)University of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations