Determination of liquid chromatography/flame ionization detection response factors for alcohols, ketones, and sugars
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.
KeywordsLC/FID FID Nebulizer interface LC/FID response
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.
- 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
- 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
- 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.
- 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
- 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
- 24.Kosch J. Total hydrocarbon analysis using flame ionization detector. Environmental Instrumentation and Analysis Handbook. Wiley; 2005. p. 147–56.Google Scholar
- 26.Veloo PS. Studies of combustion characteristics of alcohols, aldehydes and ketons. University of Southern California. 2011(Dissertation):1–221.Google Scholar
- 29.Falbe J, Regitz MRÖMPP. Lexikon Chemie, 10. Auflage, 1996-1999: Band 2: Cm - G. In: Thieme; 2014.Google Scholar