Ali Zahraei1, Peter W F Arisz1, Alexander P van Bavel2, Ron M A Heeren1. 1. Maastricht MultiModal Molecular Imaging (M4I) Institute, Division of Imaging Mass Spectrometry, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 2. Shell Global Solutions International BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
A light oil was separated into four chromatographic fractions that serve as proxy for SARA fractions. The fractions were (semi)quantified on a rod by TLC-flame ionization detection and characterized on a plate with laser desorption ionization-mass spectrometry imaging (TLC-LDI-MS). Comparisons of (semi)quantitative TLC-FID and qualitative TLC-LDI-MS results showed that LDI-MS was most sensitive for detection of molecules in the polar P1 fraction, and, to some extent, for the aromatics fraction, while no signal was observed for the most polar P2 and saturates fractions. Based on these results, limits of the compositional space, as observed by the laser ionization technique, were evaluated. The molecular speciation between and within the spots of the aromatics and the P1 fractions were analyzed and interpreted in terms of oil-SiO2 versus oil-solvent interactions, as a function of molecular characteristics such as DBE, aromaticity (H/C ratio), heteroatom content, degree of alkylation, and shielding of heteroatoms. In addition, the high oil loading resulted in an interesting bifurcation of the aromatics spot, which implies that oil-oil interactions can be enforced and studied in the TLC model system.
A light oil was separated into four chromatographic fractions that serve as proxy for SARA fractions. The fractions were (semi)quantified on a rod by TLC-flame ionization detection and characterized on a plate with laser desorption ionization-mass spectrometry imaging (TLC-LDI-MS). Comparisons of (semi)quantitative TLC-FID and qualitative TLC-LDI-MS results showed that LDI-MS was most sensitive for detection of molecules in the polar P1 fraction, and, to some extent, for the aromatics fraction, while no signal was observed for the most polar P2 and saturates fractions. Based on these results, limits of the compositional space, as observed by the laser ionization technique, were evaluated. The molecular speciation between and within the spots of the aromatics and the P1 fractions were analyzed and interpreted in terms of oil-SiO2 versus oil-solvent interactions, as a function of molecular characteristics such as DBE, aromaticity (H/C ratio), heteroatom content, degree of alkylation, and shielding of heteroatoms. In addition, the high oil loading resulted in an interesting bifurcation of the aromatics spot, which implies that oil-oil interactions can be enforced and studied in the TLC model system.
The interface between oil and rock is
believed to be mainly governed
by polar components within the oil. These interactions alter the properties
of the interface and can make it difficult to extract oil from reservoir
rocks.[1,2] Crudeoil separation on silica-coated thin
layer chromatography (TLC) plates with direct laser desorption ionization
mass spectrometry (LDI-MS) readout[3] may
serve as a simple online model system to study oil interactions with
silica.[4] Ideally, fundamental knowledge
about the physical–chemical behavior of oil at interfaces can
be employed to improve oil recovery[2] and
processing technologies, but we must make the reservation beforehand
that subsurface conditions are far more complex and involve additional
interactions with brines and other minerals at elevated temperature
and pressure at geological time scales.Crudeoil is intrinsically
very complex and contains a plethora
of natural organiccompounds.[5−9] Structural complexity of hydrocarbon molecules includes their sizes
and shapes; naphthenic and aromatic ring systems, alkyl-substitution
patterns and N, O, and S containing polar functional groups such as
pyrrolic, pyridinic, quinolinic; hydroxyl, carbonyl, carboxyl; and
thiophenic, sulfide, and sulfoxide units, respectively.[10,11] The number of elemental compositions increases exponentially as
the molecular weight and heteroatom content in hydrocarboncompounds
each increase.[7,12,13] Tens of thousands of distinctive mass peaks with unique elemental
compositions can be identified by high-resolution Fourier transform
ion cyclotron resonance (FTICR) mass spectroscopy (MS) measurements
of crudeoils.[14]Each of the measured
elemental compositions is composed of numerous
isomeric structures, including different functional groups. Information
about isomeric structures cannot be assessed by mass spectra of (pseudo)molecular
ions alone, but, when combined with chromatographic separation, patterns
are expected that are based on the type of functional group and their
exposure or shielding by alkyl substituents, such as that convincingly
demonstrated for carbazole model compounds by Li and Larter et al.,[15] for example. Fractionation of crudeoils often
provides the opportunity to identify components that were not possible
to detect directly in the parent crudeoil.[16]One of the approaches for petroleum characterization is by
SARA
analysis, which classifies oils in terms of their proportion of saturates,
aromatics, resins, and asphaltenes fractions (SARA). SARA fractions
are separated based on their solubility (as described in IP-143) in
different solvents combined with their interaction with silica or
alumina particles.[5,17,18] The saturates fraction is composed of a mixture of linear, branched,
and cyclicalkanes. The aromatics fraction contains molecules with
one or more aromatic rings with attached saturated hydrocarbon side
chains. The resins fraction consists of polar molecules that dissolve
in alkane solvents such as heptane or pentane, while asphaltenes are
polar molecules that, by definition, precipitate in alkane solvents
such as pentane or heptane but dissolve in aromatic solvents such
as benzene, pyridine, or toluene.[19] TLC
is applied frequently as a rapid and convenient proxy for SARA fractions.[20,21]Iatroscan TLC-based analysis is typically coupled with flame
ionization
detection (FID) to quantify the fractions. TLC-FID can be employed
without considerable sample preparation, but a drawback of TLC-FID
is that it provides no information at the molecular level. TLCcombined
with LDI-FTICR-MS imaging is demonstrated as a direct chemical readout
of fractionated petroleum samples[3] but
no quantitative response factors are known for this technique.Here, we present the application and further validation of the
TLC-LDI-FTICR-MS imaging method presented by Smith et al.[3] to study molecular speciation resulting from
oil–SiO2, oil–solvent, and oil–oil
interactions that occur in a three-step chromatographic separation.
A light crudeoil sample was chosen with the expectation that light
oil produces less-complex data, compared to heavier oil types. The
response of TLC-LDI-MS imaging was compared with TLC-FID data and
optical observations of the developed TLC plate in order to (semi)quantify
and evaluate the limits of the compositional space that is observed
by LDI-MS. The TLC plate was imaged with a 16-fold-higher spatial
resolution, namely, with a raster size of 250 μm, compared to
1 mm used in the previous study, that allowed chemical speciation
both between and within chromatographic spots. Observed trends in
the chemical speciation were tentatively correlated with chemical
structures.
Experimental Section
Sample and Reagents
Xylene, toluene, n-heptane, and dichloromethane
(DCM), and methanol (MeOH) were purchased
from Sigma–Aldrich (Zwijndrecht, The Netherlands). A hydrophobic-type
petroleum sample (API, 41.6; density, 0.8179 g/cm3; viscosity,
3.2769 cP at 20 °C; and %S, 0.231%) was provided by Shell Global
Solutions International B.V. (The Netherlands).
Proxy for SARA
Analysis by TLC-FID
TLC-FID was measured
on an Iatroscan MK-6S system (SES GmbH—Analysesysteme) that
was equipped with a rack with 10 coated silica rods (Chromarods).
The hydrogen flow rate of the FID was 160 mL/min; the air flow was
2 L/min. Just prior to use, the rods were burned clean by a series
of three blank runs. A dilution series of 14, 37, 121, and 500 μg
crudeoil per microliter of toluene was prepared and 1 μL of
the solutions was applied at the starting point of the rods with a
semiautomatic sample spotter (Model 3202). The rods were eluted sequentially
in development tanks (DT-150) first with n-heptane
for 40 min, second with a mixture of toluene/n-heptane
(80/20 (vol/vol)) for 12 min, and finally with a mixture of (95/5)
DCM/MeOH for 3 min. The developed rods were scanned with the Iatroscan
at a speed of 30 s per scan. The data were collected with SES-i-Chromstar
software.
TLC Development for MS Imaging Analysis
Silica gel
60 with a fluorescence indicator at 254 nm on TLCaluminum foil (Catalog
No. 56524–25EA, Sigma–Aldrich, The Netherlands) was
used with a pore volume of 0.75 mL/g. The sample was diluted in xylene
(1/1) and 4 μL was aliquoted at line 1 in Figure on the bottom of a TLC plate with a spot
size ∼2 mm in diameter. The first mobile phase consisting of n-heptane was eluted to line 4, followed by a mixture of
toluene/n-heptane (80/20 (vol/vol)) to line 3. Subsequently,
the DCM/MeOH (95/5 vol/vol) mobile phase was eluted to line 2. The
plate was dried at room temperature for at least 5 min after every
step. For reference MS measurement, a diluted oil sample was spotted
at line 5 after the fluorescence picture was taken.
Figure 1
(A) Image
of developed TLC plate in visible light, (B) fluorescence
with 254 nm UV, and (C) total ion count (heat map) from LDI FT-ICR-MS.
Photographs
were taken of the fully developed plate exposed by room light and
by fluorescent excitation with 254 nm UV light.
LDI-FTICR-MS
Imaging Analysis
Double-sided conductive
tape (3M Science, USA) was used to attach the back of the developed
TLC plate to a stainless-steel MALDI target. The LDI-FTICR-MS image
was recorded with a raster size of 250 μm without a matrix in
LDI-MS positive (+) ion mode on a SolariX XR FTICR mass spectrometer
(Bruker Daltonics GmbH, Bremen, Germany) equipped with a 9.4 T magnet.A frequency-tripled Nd:YAG laser (355 nm, 3.49 eV photons) was
employed for laser desorption directly from the TLC foil with 250
laser shots per position at a repetition rate of 1 kHz. The laser
spot size was ∼30 μm. The laser power and number of laser
shots were adjusted to obtain a signal with a sufficient signal-to-noise
ratio. Only the ions in the mass range set between m/z 250 and 600 were transferred with the quadrupole
ion-guide from the ion source into the FTICR cell. Such selective
ion accumulation in the FTICR cell made petroleum detection easier
as the signal-to-noise ratio increased significantly during the acquisition.[22] The selected mass window was taken similar to
the mass ranges reported in recent LDI-MS publications of crudeoils.[3,23] The signal of light oils with API values larger than 40 hardly exceeds m/z 600.[24] LDI
may form very abundant fullerenes above this mass that disturb the
ICR signal.[25]Spectra were acquired
with a 2 MW transient size and were zero-filled
with an additional 2 MW. The transient length was 1.82 s and gave
a resolving power of ∼350 000 at m/z 400. The mass spectra were externally calibrated using
the red phosphorus in LDI-MS positive mode immediately prior to the
experiment. After the experiment was completed, an internal recalibration
was performed by using the crudeoilN1 series spectrum in positive
mode. Peak lists were obtained with the Compass Data Analysis software
package (Bruker Daltonics) through the selection of peaks with a signal-to-noise
ratio of >5. Spectral interpretation was performed with the PetroOrg
(Corilo, Yuri. EnviroOrg, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL,
USA, 2013; http://software.petroorg.com).
PetroOrg Spectral Analysis
Peak lists of recalibrated
spectra were created with Bruker DataAnalysis based on exact theoretical
masses with a ±0.5 ppm error range. PetroOrg assignments were
made with a maximum error of 2.0, 1.5, and 2.5 ppm for the whole oil,
aromatics, and P1 spot, respectively. Normal boundary conditions for
petroleum data (CHNOS, where c = 0–100, h = 0–200, n = 0–5, o = 0–5, s = 0–4) were used
for these assignments. The data were filtered for a minimum of two
consecutive carbons per homologous series, which removed all noise
from single scattered data points. Data of assigned mass peaks can
be visualized by the software as relative abundance class plots and
iso-abundance-contoured plots of double bond equivalents (DBE = (c – h)/2 + n/2
+ 1[9]) versus the carbon number (#C).
Principal Component Analysis
Principal component analysis
(PCA) was performed with an in-house written toolbox (ChemomeTricks)
for MATLAB (The MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA).[26] Sqlite data were generated by the Bruker software and were peak-picked
with 0.0001 Da bin size, n2 of 16, smoothing 2, and a threshold of
5. Background pixels were removed manually from the entire image (Figure C) until a clear
separation was achieved between the aromatics and the P1 spots in
PC1.PCA of the selected region of the aromatics spot resulted
in a separation of the bottom and top zone by PC2, as shown in Figure B (shown later in
this work), and the top and bottom zones of the P1 spot were separated
by PC1, as shown in Figure C (shown later in this work).
Figure 6
RGB plots of three PCAs.
(A) PCA of the whole TLC LDI-MS image
with PC1+ (green), PC1– (red), and PC2+ (blue); the P1 and
aromatics spots are differentiated by PC1. (B) PCA of the aromatics
spot with PC2+ (red), PC2– (green), and PC1+ (blue); PC2 differentiates
the top and the bottom of the aromatics spot. (C) PCA of the P1 spot
with PC1– (red), PC1+ (green), and PC3+ (blue); PC1 differentiates
the top and the bottom of the P1 spot.
Results and Discussion
TLC-FID
Analysis
Previous studies show that TLC development
with a single mobile phase of 5% isopropanol in 95% heptane[3,27] yields a continuous separation with poorly defined borders of the
four proxy SARA fractions. In this study, four distinctly separated
chromatographic fractions were obtained[28,29] by a sequential
rod or plate development with n-heptane, 80/20 toluene/n-heptane, and 95/5 DCM/MeOH as the mobile phase. The solvents
subsequently eluted the fractions of saturates, aromatics, and the
polar P1 fraction that was a proxy for the resins from the origin
spot,[21,30,31] respectively.
The most polar P2 fraction was a proxy for the asphaltenes, which
are nonmobile and remain at the origin of the plate.[21] The separation was performed both on a flat TLC plate that
is suitable for optical analysis and direct MS imaging readout, as
well as on an Iatroscan rod for semiquantitative TLC-FID analysis.TLC-FID analysis was used to estimate the sensitivity of LDI-MS
for the chromatographic fractions. By first approximation, when the
FID carbon-response factors for all fractions would be taken to be
unity, the quantification by TLC-FID indicated that the light crudeoil is composed of 59.8% saturates, 26.1% aromatics, 12.9% P1, and
1.1% P2. The accuracy of these numbers is discussed next.For
Iatroscan analysis, it is often assumed that the FID signal
increases linearly with the sample quantity and all carbon-response
factors are equal.[32−34] However, carbon-response factors are reduced by heteroatoms
in the organic structures.[35] Although the
heteroatom content of oil is limited to a few mass percent, it increases
steadily as the polarity of the fractions increases. Saturates are
almost-pure hydrocarbons with a carbon-response factor of 1.0; the
aromatics fraction contains some heteroatoms, while the P1 and P2
fractions contain substantial amounts; asphaltenes may contain even
more than 10 wt %,[36] respectively.
Therefore, it would be expected that the carbon-response factor decreases
in the order from saturates to P2.However, the work by Bisht
et al. revealed an opposite trend, where
the response of saturates is significantly lower than that of asphaltenes.[20] This reversed effect can be explained by the
loss of volatile compounds with boiling points[20] below 165 °C. The evaporation of volatiles probably
mainly occurs during the drying of the rods after the development
with the mobile phases. The amount of volatiles is most abundant in
the saturates fraction, followed by the aromatics fraction. Considering
the high polarity and relatively high molecular weight of P1 and P2,
the amount of volatiles can be ignored for these fractions. Our light
oil, which is rich in saturates, likely contains a relatively large
amount of volatile compounds. Therefore, the measured amounts of saturates
and aromatics were probably underestimated by the TLC-FID analysis.Considering the many uncertainties in the correction of the FID
signal, the carbon-response factors in this study were taken to be
equal for all fractions and a relatively large uncertainty in their
(semi)quantification was accepted. Therefore, the data derived from
TLC-FID were rounded to whole percentages in the following text. Nevertheless,
it was clear from the TLC-FID measurement that saturates make up the
bulk of the volume of this light crudeoil. The large amount of saturates
fits well with the small amount of asphaltenes, as indicated by P2.[37] These two fractions are inherently incompatible
with each other and asphaltenes would precipitate in situ, because
of the high saturates content in such types of light oil. The TLC-FID
results confirm the description that this was a type of hydrophobicoil with a polar fraction of ∼14%.
TLC Plate Images
A flat TLC plate was sampled with
a large amount of 1.6 mg (for comparison, Smith et al. applied 0.2
or 0.4 mg[3]) of oil at the origin position
“1” and developed subsequently with the three mobile
phases. Sample overloading and multilayer formation was not a major
concern, since enforcement of oil–SiO2 and oil–oil
interactions was the primary interest in this study, rather than obtaining
neat chromatographic separation of diluted oilcompounds.Figure shows three images of the same plate as observed in visible
light (Figure A),
fluorescent emission with 254 nm excitation light (Figure B), and by the heat map of
MS imaging, where the total ion count over the mass range m/z 250–600 was summed for each
pixel (Figure C).
The dotted lines indicate the original sample application position
(1) and the three solvent fronts of DCM/MeOH (2), toluene/n-heptane (3), and n-heptane (4) development.(A) Image
of developed TLC plate in visible light, (B) fluorescence
with 254 nm UV, and (C) total ion count (heat map) from LDI FT-ICR-MS.Isolated SARA-proxy spots with
some tailing between the spots were
observed for P2 at the dotted line labelled as “1”,
P1 just below the dotted line labelled as “2”, and aromatics
between the dotted lines labelled as “2” and “3”.
None of the applied readout techniques detected the saturates fraction.
The most striking feature in the images is the bifurcation of the
aromatics spot, which was split into two equal branches. Data in Figure S1 in the Supporting Information showed
that this phenomenon was completely absent for another oil type. Some
forcing in the chromatographic process leads to the observed demixing
of oilcompounds from the saturates and the aromatics fractions. The
capability to load a large amount of oil and study its development
in two dimensions as partially driven by oil–oil interactions
is a unique feature of the TLC plate model. The bifurcation phenomenon
weakened somewhat at lower sample loadings, and therefore could be
interpreted as an oil–oil interaction. Inspection of TLC separations
in other publications showed that this phenomenon is frequent, but
none of the papers discussed this effect.[3,27] Overlay
of the three images in Figure allows the comparison of optical and mass spectrometriccharacteristics
of the fractions, where enhanced examination in the bifurcation region
is of special interest.The colors of fractions in Figure A agree well with
the observations described by Pantoja
et al.:[38] colorless for saturates, yellow-orange
for aromatics, and brown for P1 and P2. However, the darkness of the
spots is a poor indicator for the sample concentrations, because of
large differences in light absorption properties of the oil fractions.
First of all, the saturates, which comprise 60% of the oil sample,
were not observed by either of the techniques (i.e., visible light,
absorbance of the UV 254 nm excited fluorescence light, nor LDI-MS).
The absence of any LDI-MS signal is explained by the absence of chromophores
in saturates that can absorb the 355 nm laser light. Improvement of
the LDI-MS signal by application of Ag-ion matrices[39] might be possible but was beyond the scope of this study.The aromatics fraction, which comprises 26% of the oil, showed
only a weak yellow band in visible light (Figure A). Examples of non-alkyl-substituted core
structures that absorb light of this wavelength are four-ring aromaticcompounds (C18H12, DBE of 12) as chrysene and
tetracene, which substances are colored golden-yellow and pale orange,
respectively. Fluorescence observed in Figure B after UV excitation revealed more details.
There was a zone that emitted bright blue fluorescent light at the
top and the inside of the bifurcated spot, and there was a dark band
at the bottom and outside of the spot. The dark band coincided both
with the yellow band in Figure A and the LDI-MS signal in Figure C.The blue fluorescent light zone
stretched significantly further
inward in the bifurcation cavity in Figure B than indicated by the location of the yellow
band in the visible light image and the band of the LDI-MS signal
in Figures A and 1C. Apparently, inside the bifurcation gap, there
is a family of molecules that does not absorb any visible light and
does not ionize with 355 nm laser light, but that becomes fluorescent
when excited with 254 nm UV light. Emission of bright blue fluorescent
light after UV excitation is characteristic for molecules with small
aromaticcores.[40] It can be concluded from
the optical properties that oil molecules with aromaticcores composed
of less than four aromatic rings migrated toward the top of the aromatics
spot.The dark band at the bottom and outside of the bifurcated
aromatics
spot in Figure B was
caused either by absorption of incoming UV excitation light or by
absorption of emitted fluorescent visible light of chromophores in
the aromatic molecules. The dark band coincided with the yellow-colored
band in Figure A and
the LDI-MS signal in Figure C. Apparently, the molecules in this band also interact strongly
with 355 nm laser light, resulting in desorption and ionization of
those molecules. These observations were indicative for the presence
of stronger chromophores in the dark zone, but the exact mechanism
for the dimmed light remains inconclusive. The light absorption might
be caused by larger aromaticcore structures, the absorption of which
is known to scale with their size. However, it also might be the specific
(conjugated) functional groups that are harboring lone pair electrons
from heteroatoms in the oil molecules contributing to the light absorption.The P1 fraction represented 13% of the oil, as quantified by TLC-FID.
The P1 spot in Figures A and 1B gave the darkest bands in the visible
and fluorescent light images, indicating that many P1 molecules had
substantial light extinction coefficients. The bright background fluorescence
from the silica plate made it impossible to infer conclusions about
fluorescent properties of the P1 and P2 fractions. Although the P1
content (13%) in the oil is lower than the aromatics fraction (26%), Figure C shows that the
strongest LDI-MS signal came from the P1 fraction. Apparently, the
oil molecules in the P1 fraction were desorbed and ionized more efficiently
by the LDI-MS process than the aromatics fraction. This result also
implies that a large and probably a major portion of the aromatics
fraction remained undetected by LDI-MS.The small amount of
only 1% P2 fraction still provided dark spots
in Figures A and 1B. The lack of signal from the P2 fraction can be
attributed to its low concentration, combined with the large binding
energy of polar molecules with the silica surface,[28,41] which could diminish desorption efficiency on LDI.
LDI-MS Imaging
The previous section concluded that
the largest fraction of our light crudeoil was not detected by LDI-MS,
and some inferences were derived from optical properties. The next
challenge is to establish the molecular space that was probed by LDI-MS
and to link molecular characteristics with speciation on the TLC plate. Figure shows the LDI-FTICR mass spectra of the entire crudeoil
and the spots from the aromatics and P1 fractions. All samples were
measured under identical experimental conditions and the ratio of
the total abundance of the aromatics to the P1 fraction was ∼1:2,
which also quantified the result in the heat map in Figure C.
Figure 2
FTICR mass spectra of
the whole oil, and the spots of the aromatics
and the P1 fraction.
FTICR mass spectra of
the whole oil, and the spots of the aromatics
and the P1 fraction.The base peaks in spectra of the P1 and aromatics spots were
identified
as C20H19N1 (m/z 273.1512) and C27H33N1 (m/z 371.2607), respectively.
Both peaks belonged to the same homologue series of the N1 class with
DBE 12. Although no isomer information is obtained by LDI-MS, carbazoles
derivatives are usually the most abundant N1 class compounds in crudeoils[42] and, therefore, these mass peaks
can tentatively be assigned to benzocarbazolecore structures with
4 and 11 additional C atoms as methylene groups in alkyl substituents,
respectively. This simple example clearly illustrates that, within
one compound class and type (i.e., the same heteroatom content and
DBE), the molecules with increasing alkyl substitution were more mobilized
under normal phase chromatographicconditions. This trend fully agrees
with the results of other studies[15,28] and will be
used for further interpretation.The example in Figure visualizes, in more detail, the capability
of MS imaging to study how N1 DBE 12 compounds with C4 through C10
alkyl substitution were distributed over the P1 and the aromatics
spot. Again, no isomer information was obtained by LDI-MS, but it
can be expected that compounds with N atoms that were shielded by
alkyl substituents at their vicinal positions move with the mobile
phase to the aromatics spot, while isomers equal to the number of
CH2– groups but with exposed N atoms were more retained
by the silica stationary phase through hydrogen bonding.[15]
Figure 3
Distribution of N1 DBE12 compounds between the aromatic
spot (top)
and the P1 spot (bottom).
Distribution of N1 DBE12compounds between the aromatic
spot (top)
and the P1 spot (bottom).Next to the major mass peaks of the N1 DBE 12 ion series,
the crudeoil spectrum may contain thousands of other mass peaks. The mass spectra
were processed by PetroOrg software, which assigns elemental compositions
to mass peaks and also groups the assigned mass peaks into heteroatom
classes. PetroOrg software has the option to summarize the signals
of radical cations (M+ •) and protonated
ions (M•H+) that both can be formed as
follows by LDI of the same molecular species.[43] The possibility of at least two ionization pathways required some
further evaluation of LDI-MS spectra, which is done in the Supporting Information.Figure shows the class distribution of the sum of radical
cations and protonated ions of the N1, hydrocarbon (HC), O1, N1O1,
S1, N1S1, and N2 classes, as measured by LDI-MS imaging for the whole
oil, the aromatics, and the P1 fractions. The class selection was
based on two criteria. First, the relative abundance was at least
1% in either one of the three spectra. Second, only relative abundances
of more than 0.5% were reported.
Figure 4
Class distribution plot from summed intensities
of radical cations
and protonated ions.
Class distribution plot from summed intensities
of radical cations
and protonated ions.In all samples, the N1 class was most prevalent, followed
by the
hydrocarbonclass. It was striking that the six major classes of the
whole oil were also the major classes in both the P1 and the aromatics
fractions. The minor N2 class was not detected above 0.5% abundance
in the aromatics fraction. As observed through the selective LDI-MS
ionization filter, the applied chromatography provided the resolution
to separate heteroatom free saturates from polar heteroatom-bearing
molecules, but the partitioning of the latter over the aromatics and
the P1 fractions was gradual and could not be specified on the heteroatom
class.Closer comparison of the relative abundances in Figure shows that the N1,
N1O1, and
N2 classes were enriched in the P1 fraction, while the HC, O1, and
S1 classes were enriched in the aromatics fraction. The relative abundance
of the N1S1 class was approximately the same in all three samples.
In terms of oil–SiO2 interactions, these results
can be interpreted that the group of N-containing molecules was more
strongly bound by the silica and therefore ended up in the more-retained
P1 fraction, while O1 and S1 molecules behaved more like hydrophobic
entities that express less interaction with silica and dissolved better
in the 80/20 toluene/n-heptane mobile phase.Figure shows the DBE versus carbon number plots for the summed
intensities of protonated and radical cations of the seven selected
heteroatom classes for the whole oil and the spots of the aromatics
and the P1 fractions. The contoured plots of the whole oil resemble
the weighted sum of the plots for the P1 and aromatics fractions,
where fraction weights are given in Figure . In the case of the HC, O1, and S1 classes,
the aromatics fraction contributed more to the whole oil signal, whereas
in the case of the N1, N1O1, N1S1, and N2 classes, the P1 fraction
was more prevalent.
Figure 5
DBE versus #C plots of summed intensities of radical cations
and
protonated ions of the seven most-abundant classes.
DBE versus #C plots of summed intensities of radical cations
and
protonated ions of the seven most-abundant classes.Comparison of the P1 versus the aromatics fraction
shows that the
contoured plots overlap to a great extent, which is in agreement with
the rather similar relative class distributions in Figure . Table lists abundance weighted parameters for
the molecular weight, number of carbon atoms, DBE and H/C ratio per
heteroatom classes in the aromatics, and the P1 fractions. Generally,
most of the parameter values per class differ by <10% between both
fractions, but several systematic trends can be observed that differentiate
them. Except for the O1 class, all H/C values are smaller in the P1
fraction, which indicates that the polar behavior of P1 molecules
is at least partially related to their aromaticity.
Table 1
Abundance Weighted Average Data of
Molecular Weight, Carbon Number, DBE, and H/C, As Derived from PetroOrg
for the Aromatics and the P1 Fractions
Abundance
Weighted Average Molecular Weight
Abundance
Weighted Average #C
Abundance
Weighted Average DBE
Abundance
Weighted Average H/C
class
aromatic
P1
Δ(Ar. – P1)
aromatic
P1
Δ(Ar. – P1)
aromatic
P1
Δ(Ar. – P1)
aromatic
P1
Δ(Ar. – P1)
N1
421
382
39
31
28
3
13.9
14.9
–0.9
1.21
1.06
0.15
HC
388
423
–35
30
32
–3
15.4
16.9
–1.5
1.06
1.06
0.00
O1
411
440
–28
30
32
–2
15.9
15.4
0.5
1.05
1.15
–0.10
N1
O1
448
433
15
32
31
1
16.9
15.5
1.4
1.15
1.10
0.05
S1
398
410
–12
28
29
–1
15.7
17.2
–1.5
1.02
0.93
0.10
N1 S1
437
400
37
30
28
3
16.8
17.2
–0.4
1.15
0.89
0.26
N2
489
35
19.5
1.07
All the N-containing classes
in the aromatics fraction are of higher
molecular weight, combined with a lower degree of aromaticity (H/C).
The higher molecular weights of 421, 448, and 437 Da versus 382, 433,
and 400 Da for N1, N1O1, and N1S1, respectively, implied that higher
degrees of alkylation of N-compounds reduced the silica interaction
and improved the solubility in the mobile phases,[15,28] as was illustrated by Figure . The H/C ratios for the corresponding classes were 1.21,
1.15, and 1.15 versus 1.06, 1.10, and 0.89, respectively. The effect
of aromaticity is well-established by the normal-phase chromatographic
retention of the N1 class alkylcarbazoles (DBE 9) and benzocarbazoles
(DBE 12) model compounds on silica.[15] Benzocarbazoles
are much more retained, compared to tetramethyl carbazoles, i.e.,
both C16N1 compounds but different types with DBE 12 versus DBE 9,
which emphasizes a significant increase in adsorption strength by
the addition of more-aromaticC atoms in N-compounds. The adsorption
strength of asphaltenes to silica was also reported to increase with
increasing aromaticity of the molecules.[28]In contrast, lower molecular weight (388 Da versus 425 Da)
combined
with lower DBE (15.4 versus 16.9) were observed for the HCclass in
the aromatics fraction, while the H/C ratio of 1.06 was similar in
both fractions. Apparently, the partitioning of nonpolar aromatichydrocarbon molecules between silica and the mobile phase is dependent
on molecular size and absolute number of DBEs. A similar effect was
observed for the S1 class, although the different H/C ratio of 1.02
versus 0.89 implied that an aromaticity effect may also play a role.The O1 class displayed a higher aromaticity, combined with a lower
molecular weight for the aromatics fraction. This may point to a different
functionality of the O atom in both fractions. For example, the P1
fraction may contain more phenolicoxygen while the aromatics fraction
may contain more-aromaticfluorenone or furan derivatives.Strong
interactions of NO classes from asphaltenes with SiO2 have
been reported.[4,44] This was the class
with the highest molecular weight in the aromatics fraction, which
supports the strong binding of N1O1 functionalities.Note that
the observed H/C values in the range of 0.89–1.21
were very low, especially for a light oil type. All H/C ratios for
classes from the P1 fraction were smaller than 1.15, which is a common
value for the most aromatic oil fraction, namely, the asphaltenes.[36] This result emphasizes the strong bias of LDI-MS
for compounds with condensed aromatic structures and that LDI-MS only
detects the small subfraction of molecules that easily ionize with
two 3.5 eV photons.Principal component analysis (PCA) is frequently
employed to elucidate
and visualize individual m/z features
that are related to the major differences in an MS image plot such
as Figure C. Figure A shows an RGB-score plot image wherein the P1 and aromatics
fractions are separated along the first principal component (PC1)
in the PC1+ and PC1– directions, respectively. This report
mainly explored the visualization of score plot images, and therefore
the PCA interpretation was limited to a high-level analysis. The top-30
mass peaks with the highest weighted scaled loadings are listed with
their structural details in Table . All reported DBE values were integer values indicating
that the observed masses were radical cations.
Table 2
Top-30 Scaled Loadings of PC1 of the
Entire TLC LDI-MS Image in Figure A
P1 Fraction
in PC1+ (Green in Figure 6A)
Aromatics
Fraction in PC1– (Red in Figure 6A)
rank
m/z (exp)
scaled loading
formula
class
#C
H/C
DBE
rank
m/z (exp)
scaled loading
formula
class
#C
H/C
DBE
1
273.1512
34.6
C20H19N1
N1
20
0.95
12
1
272.1557
–6.1
C21H20
HC
21
0.95
12
2
287.1668
23.4
C21H21N1
N1
21
1.00
12
2
286.1713
–6.1
C22H22
HC
22
1.00
12
3
301.1825
13.7
C22H23N1
N1
22
1.05
12
3
291.1979
–5.6
C21H25N1
N1
21
1.19
10
4
339.1983
10.5
C25H25N1
N1
25
1.00
14
4
317.2134
–5.5
C23H27N1
N1
23
1.17
11
5
353.2138
9.9
C26H27N1
N1
26
1.04
14
5
331.2290
–5.3
C24H29N1
N1
24
1.21
11
6
323.1668
8.6
C24H21N1
N1
24
0.88
15
6
300.1868
–5.1
C23H24
HC
23
1.04
12
7
309.1511
8.2
C23H19N1
N1
23
0.83
15
7
345.2444
–5.1
C25H31N1
N1
25
1.24
11
8
325.1826
8.2
C24H23N1
N1
24
0.96
14
8
366.2333
–4.9
C28H30
HC
28
1.07
14
9
327.1982
7.7
C24H25N1
N1
24
1.04
13
9
303.1978
–4.8
C22H25N1
N1
22
1.14
11
10
313.1826
7.7
C23H23N1
N1
23
1.00
13
10
312.1868
–4.7
C24H24
HC
24
1.00
13
11
367.2294
7.1
C27H29N1
N1
27
1.07
14
11
326.2023
–4.6
C25H26
HC
25
1.04
13
12
315.1980
7.0
C23H25N1
N1
23
1.09
12
12
277.1821
–4.6
C20H23N1
N1
20
1.15
10
13
337.1824
6.7
C25H23N1
N1
25
0.92
15
13
340.2179
–4.5
C26H28
HC
26
1.08
13
14
299.1667
6.7
C22H21N1
N1
22
0.95
13
14
359.2600
–4.5
C26H33N1
N1
26
1.27
11
15
274.1545
5.9
C19(13C)H19N1
N1
20
0.95
12
15
284.1556
–4.4
C22H20
HC
22
0.91
13
16
351.1981
5.9
C26H25N1
N1
26
0.96
15
16
352.2177
–4.2
C27H28
HC
27
1.04
14
17
365.2133
5.8
C27H27N1
N1
27
1.00
15
17
314.2024
–4.2
C24H26
HC
24
1.08
12
18
341.2137
5.5
C25H27N1
N1
25
1.08
13
18
373.2755
–4.2
C27H35N1
N1
27
1.30
11
19
379.2290
5.5
C28H29N1
N1
28
1.04
15
19
288.1869
–4.1
C22H24
HC
22
1.09
11
20
288.1702
5.2
C20(13C)H21N1
N1
21
1.00
12
20
274.1713
–4.1
C21H22
HC
21
1.05
11
21
311.1668
5.0
C23H21N1
N1
23
0.91
14
21
270.1401
–4.0
C21H18
HC
21
0.86
13
22
295.1354
4.7
C22H17N1
N1
22
0.77
15
22
371.2600
–3.9
C27H33N1
N1
27
1.22
12
23
381.2449
4.3
C28H31N1
N1
28
1.11
14
23
354.2333
–3.9
C27H30
HC
27
1.11
13
24
395.2606
4.3
C29H33N1
N1
29
1.14
14
24
289.1823
–3.9
C21H23N1
N1
21
1.10
11
25
393.2448
3.9
C29H31N1
N1
29
1.07
15
25
368.2488
–3.9
C28H32
HC
28
1.14
13
26
285.1511
3.8
C21H19N1
N1
21
0.90
13
26
305.2134
–3.9
C22H27N1
N1
22
1.23
10
27
375.1978
3.7
C28H25N1
N1
28
0.89
17
27
298.1712
–3.8
C23H22
HC
23
0.96
13
28
377.2135
3.4
C28H27N1
N1
28
0.96
16
28
338.2023
–3.8
C26H26
HC
26
1.00
14
29
363.1977
3.3
C27H25N1
N1
27
0.93
16
29
399.2907
–3.6
C29H37N1
N1
29
1.28
12
30
349.1824
3.3
C26H23N1
N1
26
0.88
16
30
380.2487
–3.6
C29H32
HC
29
1.10
14
RGB plots of three PCAs.
(A) PCA of the whole TLC LDI-MS image
with PC1+ (green), PC1– (red), and PC2+ (blue); the P1 and
aromatics spots are differentiated by PC1. (B) PCA of the aromatics
spot with PC2+ (red), PC2– (green), and PC1+ (blue); PC2 differentiates
the top and the bottom of the aromatics spot. (C) PCA of the P1 spot
with PC1– (red), PC1+ (green), and PC3+ (blue); PC1 differentiates
the top and the bottom of the P1 spot.All of the top 30 PC1+ loadings for the P1
fraction belonged to
the N1 class with an average H/C of 0.98 ± 0.03 and a DBE of
14.0 ± 0.5, where the error is the standard error of the mean,
±(t ×
σ/n1/2) at p =
0.05. The top 30 PC1– loadings for the aromatics fraction consisted
of 18 HCclass mass peaks with an average H/C of 1.03 ± 0.04
and a DBE of 12.8 ± 0.5 and 12 N1 class masses with an average
H/C of 1.21 ± 0.04 and a DBE of 10.9 ± 0.4. From these results,
it can be concluded that the presence of an N atom, in combination
with a relatively high degree of aromaticity, results in stronger
retention.The PCA interpretation can be extended with analyses
of higher
PCA functions and mass peaks of other heteroatom classes with lower
loadings. However, processing the large amount of information generated
by such analysis of oil data was outside the scope of our study. The
PCA not only confirmed the results in Figures and 6, namely, that
the N1 class with high aromatic signature was specific for the P1
fraction and HCclass elements were specific for the aromatics fraction,
but the added value of PCA is the identification of those (top-30)
specific features that contribute most to the differentiation between
both fractions. The colored bands in the plots imply that PC loadings
reveal information about groups of oilconstituents that express similar
SiO2 interactions.MS imaging with high spatial resolution
allows performing PCA to
study chemical speciation within the individual aromatics and P1 spots,
as illustrated by Figures B and 6C. The first figure shows that
the top and the bottom of the curved shaped aromatics spot are differentiated
by PC2. The corresponding 30 highest loadings are listed in Table , which are all radical
cations. All loading for the most-retained bottom zone described by
PC2– were N1-class components, while all loading for the top-zone
described by PC2+ are HC-class components. In conclusion, within the
aromatics spot, N1-containing compounds were slightly more retained
by the silica and therefore they were concentrated in a rather narrow
band at the bottom of the spot.
Table 3
Top-30 Scaled Loadings
of PC2 of the
Aromatics Spot in Figure B
Top
of Aromatics Spot in PC2+ (Red in Figure 6B)
Bottom
of Aromatics Spot in PC2– (Green in Figure 6B)
rank
m/z (exp)
scaled loading
formula
class
#C
H/C
DBE
Rank
m/z (exp)
scaled loading
formula
class
#C
H/C
DBE
1
288.1869
11.1
C22H24
HC
22
1.09
11
1
367.2294
−9.0
C27H29N1
N1
27
1.07
14
2
274.1713
8.9
C21H22
HC
21
1.05
11
2
289.1823
−8.1
C21H23N1
N1
21
1.10
11
3
314.2024
7.9
C24H26
HC
24
1.08
12
3
313.1826
−7.9
C23H23N1
N1
23
1.00
13
4
302.2024
7.5
C23H26
HC
23
1.13
11
4
327.1982
−7.5
C24H25N1
N1
24
1.04
13
5
276.1869
7.1
C21H24
HC
21
1.14
10
5
353.2138
−7.5
C26H27N1
N1
26
1.04
14
6
290.2025
7.1
C22H26
HC
22
1.18
10
6
369.2448
−7.0
C27H31N1
N1
27
1.15
13
7
342.2334
6.8
C26H30
HC
26
1.15
12
7
341.2137
−7.0
C25H27N1
N1
25
1.08
13
8
316.2179
6.8
C24H28
HC
24
1.17
11
8
355.2292
−6.8
C26H29N1
N1
26
1.12
13
9
328.2180
6.7
C25H28
HC
25
1.12
12
9
303.1978
−6.7
C22H25N1
N1
22
1.14
11
10
356.2489
6.6
C27H32
HC
27
1.19
12
10
381.2449
−6.4
C28H31N1
N1
28
1.11
14
11
300.1868
6.4
C23H24
HC
23
1.04
12
11
277.1821
−6.3
C20H23N1
N1
20
1.15
10
12
368.2488
6.4
C28H32
HC
28
1.14
13
12
291.1979
−6.1
C21H25N1
N1
21
1.19
10
13
370.2644
6.1
C28H34
HC
28
1.21
12
13
299.1667
−6.0
C22H21N1
N1
22
0.95
13
14
354.2333
5.7
C27H30
HC
27
1.11
13
14
343.2290
−6.0
C25H29N1
N1
25
1.16
12
15
286.1713
5.6
C22H22
HC
22
1.00
12
15
357.2445
−5.9
C26H31N1
N1
26
1.19
12
16
340.2179
5.5
C26H28
HC
26
1.08
13
16
273.1512
−5.9
C20H19N1
N1
20
0.95
12
17
330.2335
5.2
C25H30
HC
25
1.20
11
17
339.1983
−5.9
C25H25N1
N1
25
1.00
14
18
344.2490
5.2
C26H32
HC
26
1.23
11
18
317.2134
−5.4
C23H27N1
N1
23
1.17
11
19
366.2333
5.0
C28H30
HC
28
1.07
14
19
371.2600
−5.3
C27H33N1
N1
27
1.22
12
20
304.2181
4.8
C23H28
HC
23
1.22
10
20
275.1666
−5.1
C20H21N1
N1
20
1.05
11
21
382.2643
4.5
C29H34
HC
29
1.17
13
21
301.1825
−5.0
C22H23N1
N1
22
1.05
12
22
396.2796
4.5
C30H36
HC
30
1.20
13
22
315.1980
−4.9
C23H25N1
N1
23
1.09
12
23
358.2645
4.3
C27H34
HC
27
1.26
11
23
329.2135
−4.8
C24H27N1
N1
24
1.13
12
24
380.2487
4.2
C29H32
HC
29
1.10
14
24
287.1668
−4.8
C21H21N1
N1
21
1.00
12
25
394.2642
4.1
C30H34
HC
30
1.13
14
25
395.2595
−4.7
C29H33N1
N1
29
1.14
14
26
352.2177
4.1
C27H28
HC
27
1.04
14
26
383.2600
−4.1
C28H33N1
N1
28
1.18
13
27
408.2796
3.9
C31H36
HC
31
1.16
14
27
409.2752
−4.0
C30H35N1
N1
30
1.17
14
28
326.2023
3.8
C25H26
HC
25
1.04
13
28
397.2751
−3.9
C29H35N1
N1
29
1.21
13
29
398.2953
3.6
C30H38
HC
30
1.27
12
29
331.2290
−3.6
C24H29N1
N1
24
1.21
11
30
318.2336
3.6
C24H30
HC
24
1.25
10
30
385.2755
−3.5
C28H35N1
N1
28
1.25
12
Figure C shows
that the bottom and top of the P1 spot are differentiated by PC1. Table lists the corresponding
30 highest scaled loadings, which, again, are all radical cations.
The PC1– loadings for the top zone were all N1 class compounds
with an average H/C of 1.07 ± 0.03 and a DBE of 13.3 ± 0.4.
The highest PC1+ loadings corresponding to the bottom-zone encompass
also 13 N1-class compounds, which were characterized by a higher degree
of aromaticity that was reflected by an average H/C of 0.84 ±
0.06 and a DBE of 16.2 ± 0.08. Also, this result again confirms
that the degree of aromaticity is an important parameter that determines
the retention on silica. The remaining top-30 PC1– loadings
were 16 highly aromatic hydrocarbons with an average H/C of 0.99 ±
0.05 and a DBE of 14.8 ± 0.7 and one N1 O1-class compound.
Table 4
Top-30 Scaled Loadings of PC1 of the
P1 Spot in Figure C
Bottom
of the P1 Spot in PC1+ (Green in Figure 6C)
Top
of the P1 Spot in PC1– (Red in Figure 6C)
rank
m/z (exp)
scaled loading
formula
class
#C
H/C
DBE
rank
m/z (exp)
scaled loading
formula
class
#C
H/C
DBE
1
309.1511
5.2
C23H19N1
N1
23
0.83
15
1
301.1825
–11.7
C22H23N1
N1
22
1.05
12
2
323.1668
4.1
C24H21N1
N1
24
0.88
15
2
353.2138
–11.2
C26H27N1
N1
26
1.04
14
3
295.1354
3.2
C22H17N1
N1
22
0.77
15
3
367.2294
–10.7
C27H29N1
N1
27
1.07
14
4
359.1664
2.1
C27H21N1
N1
27
0.78
18
4
287.1668
–9.3
C21H21N1
N1
21
1.00
12
5
373.1819
1.8
C28H23N1
N1
28
0.82
18
5
339.1983
–9.3
C25H25N1
N1
25
1.00
14
6
347.1665
1.6
C26H21N1
N1
26
0.81
17
6
315.1980
–8.9
C23H25N1
N1
23
1.09
12
7
345.1509
1.5
C26H19N1
N1
26
0.73
18
7
327.1982
–8.5
C24H25N1
N1
24
1.04
13
8
364.2177
1.5
C28H28
HC
28
1.00
15
8
341.2137
–8.2
C25H27N1
N1
25
1.08
13
9
336.1868
1.4
C26H24
HC
26
0.92
15
9
381.2449
–7.7
C28H31N1
N1
28
1.11
14
10
361.1821
1.4
C27H23N1
N1
27
0.85
17
10
355.2292
–6.7
C26H29N1
N1
26
1.12
13
11
350.2023
1.3
C27H26
HC
27
0.96
15
11
313.1826
–6.2
C23H23N1
N1
23
1.00
13
12
378.2332
1.2
C29H30
HC
29
1.03
15
12
329.2135
–5.9
C24H27N1
N1
24
1.13
12
13
374.2021
1.2
C29H26
HC
29
0.90
17
13
395.2606
–5.3
C29H33N1
N1
29
1.14
14
14
337.1824
1.2
C25H23N1
N1
25
0.92
15
14
369.2448
–4.5
C27H31N1
N1
27
1.15
13
15
366.2333
1.2
C28H30
HC
28
1.07
14
15
393.2448
–4.1
C29H31N1
N1
29
1.07
15
16
324.1868
1.2
C25H24
HC
25
0.96
14
16
379.2290
–4.0
C28H29N1
N1
28
1.04
15
17
352.2177
1.1
C27H28
HC
27
1.04
14
17
325.1826
–4.0
C24H23N1
N1
24
0.96
14
18
338.2023
1.1
C26H26
HC
26
1.00
14
18
343.2290
–3.8
C25H29N1
N1
25
1.16
12
19
310.1545
1.1
C22(13C)H19N1
N1
23
0.83
15
19
383.2604
–3.5
C28H33N1
N1
28
1.18
13
20
333.1509
1.1
C25H19N1
N1
25
0.76
17
20
407.2603
–3.1
C30H33N1
N1
30
1.10
15
21
360.1867
1.1
C28H24
HC
28
0.86
17
21
299.1667
–2.8
C22H21N1
N1
22
0.95
13
22
322.1712
1.1
C25H22
HC
25
0.88
15
22
357.2445
–2.8
C26H31N1
N1
26
1.19
12
23
376.2177
1.0
C29H28
HC
29
0.97
16
23
421.2759
–2.6
C31H35N1
N1
31
1.13
15
24
310.1712
1.0
C24H22
HC
24
0.92
14
24
340.2017
–2.5
C24(13C)H25N1
N1
25
1.00
14
25
380.2487
1.0
C29H32
HC
29
1.10
14
25
365.2133
–2.5
C27H27N1
N1
27
1.00
15
26
371.2235
0.9
C26H29N1O1
N1O1
26
1.12
13
26
302.1857
–2.4
C21(13C)H23N1
N1
22
1.05
12
27
324.1700
0.9
C23(13C)H21N1
N1
24
0.88
15
27
382.2482
–2.4
C27(13C)H31N1
N1
28
1.11
14
28
447.2902
0.9
C33H37N1
N1
33
1.12
16
28
288.1702
–2.4
C20(13C)H21N1
N1
21
1.00
12
29
392.2486
0.9
C30H32
HC
30
1.07
15
29
423.2913
–2.3
C31H37N1
N1
31
1.19
14
30
370.2644
0.9
C28H34
HC
28
1.21
12
30
273.1512
–2.3
C20H19N1
N1
20
0.95
12
PCA
of LDI-MS images confirmed that the retention of N-class compounds
was favored by a low degree of alkylation, large aromaticcore structures,
and nitrogen-containing heteroatom classes. Figures B and 6C show that
the heteroatom content was not distributed uniformly over the proxy
SARA spots but that heteroatom classes were concentrated in chromatographic
bands. The identification of this phenomenon implies that accurate
TLC-FID quantification should take chromatographic banding of heteroatom
classes into account. The lack of such correction may explain some
of the variance observed when TLC-FID results are correlated with
other techniques.Finally, we want to speculate about the origin
of the bifurcation
of the aromatics spot in Figures , 3, and 6. Obviously, the high sample loading enforced some sort of oil–oil
interactions. The effect might result from enhanced viscosity caused
by locally high concentrations of dissolved high-molecular-weight
saturates as paraffins or waxes, for example. Dissolution of such
compounds would increase the viscosity of the otherwise low viscous n-heptane mobile phase and, consequently, locally reduced
the mobility of the liquid phase. Experiments with lower sample loadings
indeed showed higher mobility of the bifurcation spot. When the solvent
front of the second elution with 80/20 toluene/n-heptane
hits the tail of the saturates fraction, the viscosity would locally
increase and slowed down or even blocked further solvent flow. However,
this simple description does not explain the presence of the blue
fluorescent molecules inside the bifurcation gap. Apparently, more-complex
molecular interactions occur in concentrated systems. Such interactions
can be studied by MS imaging, whereas in regular liquid chromatography,
they would give rise to undesired viscous finger effects.
Conclusions
Comparison of (semi)quantitative TLC-FID and qualitative TLC-LDI
mass spectroscopy imaging results demonstrated that, for light oil,
only a minor fraction of the compositional space of all oilcomponents
is observed by LDI-MS. The two-photon ionization mechanism at 355
nm only provides information about the oilcomponents with ionization
energies of <7.0 eV, which are compounds with alkyl-substituted
condensed aromatic rings. LDI-MS with a 355 nm laser source efficiently
ionized a subfraction of the P1 and aromatics, which was emphasized
by the low H/C values of the observed classes in the aromatics (average
1.11) and especially the P1 (1.04) fractions. In our experiment, no
saturates or P2 were detected.Despite the fact that the molecular
space that was probed by LDI-MS
is limited to polar aromatic molecules, our results demonstrated that
TLC-LDI-FTICR-MS imaging was a suitable model to study oil–SiO2 and oil–solvent interactions of those compounds that
were detected. With high spatial resolution chromatographic trends
in retention behavior could be monitored and were shown to be dependent
on molecular features as the degree of alkylation and the degree of
aromaticity. Although the online readout provides no direct information
about isomers, based on examples such as the differentiation of one
type of compounds over both the P1 and the aromatics spots, tentative
conclusions can be inferred about shielded versus exposed functional
groups. In addition, high sample loading was possible on the silica
plate to enforce oil–oil interactions between different oil
groups, as manifested by the bifurcation phenomenon. It was demonstrated
that MS imaging data of oilcould be analyzed much deeper by principal
component analysis, which could reveal a wealth of information.
Authors: Luciana A Terra; Paulo R Filgueiras; Lílian V Tose; Wanderson Romão; Douglas D de Souza; Eustáquio V R de Castro; Mirela S L de Oliveira; Júlio C M Dias; Ronei J Poppi Journal: Analyst Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 4.616
Authors: Anna Smaniotto; Luciano Montanari; Cristina Flego; Andrea Rizzi; Eugenio Ragazzi; Roberta Seraglia; Pietro Traldi Journal: Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Vanessa G Santos; Maíra Fasciotti; Marcos A Pudenzi; Clécio F Klitzke; Heliara L Nascimento; Rosana C L Pereira; Wagner L Bastos; Marcos N Eberlin Journal: Analyst Date: 2016-04-25 Impact factor: 4.616