Masami Shibukawa1, Hiroki Okutsu1, Shingo Saito1. 1. Graduate School of Science and Technology, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-Okubo, Sakura-ku, Saitama 338-8570, Japan.
Abstract
We determine the bulk liquid phase volumes in octadecyl-bonded silica (C18 silica) columns equilibrated with acetonitrile-water and methanol-water (0-19%(v/v)) binary mixed solvents by a liquid chromatographic method with inorganic ions used as probes. The solvent composition and the thickness of the interfacial liquid layer formed on the C18-bonded silica surface are then determined from the bulk liquid phase volume, the total liquid phase volume, the surface area of the C18 silica packing material, and the retention volumes of the isotopically labeled eluent components for the columns. We used two C18 silica packing materials having identical bonding structures but different pore sizes and surface areas. Our results show that various hydrophilic organic compounds as well as inorganic ions recognize the interfacial liquid layer as being different from the bulk phase. The behavior of the solute compounds exhibiting substantially weak retention in reversed-phase liquid chromatography or the so-called negative adsorption, such as urea, sugars, and inorganic ions, can rationally be interpreted with a partition between the bulk liquid phase and the interfacial solvation liquid layer. The structural properties of the solvent layer on the C18-bonded layer determined by liquid chromatography are consistent with the molecular dynamics simulation results that have been obtained by other researchers.
We determine the bulk liquid phase volumes in octadecyl-bonded silica (C18 silica) columns equilibrated with acetonitrile-water and methanol-water (0-19%(v/v)) binary mixed solvents by a liquid chromatographic method with inorganic ions used as probes. The solvent composition and the thickness of the interfacial liquid layer formed on the C18-bonded silica surface are then determined from the bulk liquid phase volume, the total liquid phase volume, the surface area of the C18 silica packing material, and the retention volumes of the isotopically labeled eluent components for the columns. We used two C18 silica packing materials having identical bonding structures but different pore sizes and surface areas. Our results show that various hydrophilic organic compounds as well as inorganic ions recognize the interfacial liquid layer as being different from the bulk phase. The behavior of the solute compounds exhibiting substantially weak retention in reversed-phase liquid chromatography or the so-called negative adsorption, such as urea, sugars, and inorganic ions, can rationally be interpreted with a partition between the bulk liquid phase and the interfacial solvation liquid layer. The structural properties of the solvent layer on the C18-bonded layer determined by liquid chromatography are consistent with the molecular dynamics simulation results that have been obtained by other researchers.
Separation and/or purification
of chemical substances in aqueous
solutions are frequently performed with hydrophobic materials. Among
them, alkyl-bonded silica beads are most widely used as packing materials
for reversed-phase liquid chromatography (RPLC) and solid-phase extraction.
The mechanism of separation in these reversed-phase systems has thus
been extensively studied by experimental and theoretical approaches,
especially focusing on the role of the interface between the alkyl-bonded
phase and the aqueous solution, as chemical separations occur at this
solid/liquid interface. Chromatographic and spectroscopic techniques
have provided valuable insights into the structure of the interface
between alkyl-bonded silica and the aqueous solution and qualitative
assessments of the role played by alkyl chain length, temperature,
solvent composition in solution, etc., on analyte retention.[1−11] On the other hand, microscopic details of the chromatographic interface
in RPLC have come from molecular dynamics (MD) simulation studies[12−22] and the distributions of the organic modifiers at the interface,
such as methanol and acetonitrile used to improve the resolution of
analyte compounds, have been shown quantitatively as a function of
the distance from the silica surface. In addition, it has been shown
that analytes are retained on the RPLC column through a combination
of partitioning into and adsorption onto the alkyl-bonded phase, in
which the relative contribution of partition and adsorption depends
on the size and polarity of the analyte molecules.[13,17−20]However, the results obtained by the simulation studies remain
to be fully substantiated by experiments. This is because most chromatographic
and spectroscopic methods cannot directly extract the information
for the effect of the interface on the analyte or solvent distribution
from the data obtained. On the other hand, we developed a new type
of liquid chromatography, surface-bubble-modulated liquid chromatography
(SBMLC), and demonstrated that SBMLC enables us to experimentally
determine the respective contributions of the liquid/bonded layer
interface and the bonded phase to the overall retention of the compound
in the reversed-phase systems.[23−26] The experimental results obtained by SBMLC agreed
well with the observation from the MD simulation.[19,20,24]We have also shown that small inorganic
ions differentiate the
interfacial water formed on the surfaces of octadecyl-bonded (C18) silica particles from the bulk water and the chemical separation
of these solutes in aqueous media with C18 silicas can
be interpreted with a consistent mechanism, the partition between
the bulk water phase, and the interfacial water formed on the hydrophobic
surface.[27] In particular, it was demonstrated
that the phenomena of negative adsorption observed for some inorganic
ions on hydrophobic materials can be successfully explained by the
“bulk water-interfacial water partition,” and we can
determine the volume or the thickness of the interfacial water by
a liquid chromatographic method utilizing inorganic ions as probes,
the ion partition method.[27] In other words,
the phenomenon that the retention volumes of inorganic ions are less
than the total water volume in the column or the concentrations of
the ions in the solution become larger after contact with the hydrophobic
materials is caused by a weaker affinity of the ions for the interfacial
water than for the bulk water.It has so far been reported that
not only inorganic ions but also
some small hydrophilic compounds such as urea show retention volumes
obviously smaller than that of deuterium oxide on RPLC columns in
some water–organic solvent and pure water eluent systems.[27−33] These phenomena have been interpreted with ion exclusion or size-exclusion
mechanism assuming that hydrophilic molecules would have effective
sizes much larger than their own by strong hydration.[29−32] We have shown that this specifically weak retention of small hydrophilic
molecules should be attributed to their sensing of the interfacial
solvated liquid layer.[27,33] However, these specific phenomena
have not been fully addressed by theoretical or simulation studies.
We have thus investigated the retention behavior of some hydrophilic
molecules on two C18 silicas with identical bonded structures
but different pore sizes and surface areas. We used acetonitrile–water
and methanol–water mixed solvent media as the eluents and compared
the distribution coefficients calculated with the equations derived
from several different postulated retention models with one another.
It is shown that the retention of hydrophilic organic compounds as
well as inorganic ions on C18 silica columns can be successfully
interpreted with the partition between the bulk solution phase and
the interfacial solvated liquid layer, which consists not only of
the organic modifier but also of water. The thickness and composition
of the solvated liquid layer on the C18-bonded silica are
also estimated from the results obtained by the chromatographic analysis
and compared with those calculated by MD simulation studies. The results
obtained by this study provide experimental evidence on the picture
of the molecular distribution in the vicinity of an aqueous solution/alkyl
chain interface.
Experimental Section
Chemicals and Reagents
All chemicals used in this study
were obtained from commercial sources and were of reagent grade unless
otherwise stated. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) grade
acetonitrile and methanol were obtained from Kanto Chemicals (Tokyo,
Japan). Deuterated compounds for water (D2O), methanol
(CD3OH), and acetonitrile (CD3CN) for NMR use
were purchased from Wako Pure Chemicals (Tokyo, Japan). Water was
purified subsequently with Elix-Advantage 3-UV (Nihon Millipore, Tokyo,
Japan) and Arium 611 DI (Sartorius, Tokyo, Japan). The columns used
were Capcell Pak C18 UG120 and UG300 (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm,
Shiseido, Tokyo, Japan); the pore diameters of Capcell Pak C18 UG120
and UG300 were 120 and 300 Å, respectively.
Liquid Chromatographic
Analysis
Chromatographic measurements
were performed on an HPLC system consisting of a Tosoh (Tokyo, Japan)
model CCPM pump, a Rheodyne (Cotati, CA) model 7025 loading injector
fitted with a 20 μL sample loop, a Hitachi (Tokyo, Japan) model
L-7000 UV detector, and a Showa Denko (Tokyo, Japan) model RI-101
refractometric detector. The columns were thermostated at 298 K using
a Shiseido model Nanospace column oven. Water and aqueous solutions
of acetonitrile or methanol were used as eluents. For determining
the bulk liquid phase volume of a column, the eluents containing NaCl
and NaClO4 with ionic strength of 0.1 mol L–1 were used. All of the eluents were filtered through a 0.45 μm
membrane filter JHWPO 4700 (Nihon Millipore, Tokyo, Japan) and degassed
with an aspirator in a Yamato Scientific (Tokyo, Japan) model 2510J-MT
ultrasonic bath before use. Elutions were carried out at a constant
flow rate of ca. 0.5 mL min–1. The exact values
of the volumetric flow rate were measured using a buret designed to
prevent the vaporization of the solvent.Test solutions were
prepared by dissolving analyte compounds in the eluent to be used.
Inorganic anions, urea, uracil, thiourea, nitroalkanes, and ketones
were detected with the UV detector, while n-alcohols,
nitriles, sugars, sugar alcohols, glycols, D2O, CD3CN, and CD3OH were monitored with the refractometric
detector. The detection signal was fed into a CDS-2 data analysis
system (LAsoft, Tokyo, Japan).
Determination of Specific
Surface Areas
Specific surface
areas and total pore volumes of the packing materials were determined
by nitrogen adsorption measurements performed on a Quantachrome (Kawasaki,
Japan) model NOVA-4200e. The weight of each column packing material
in the column was determined after the packing was quantitatively
transferred into a weighing bottle and then dried in an oven at 363
K until a constant weight was reached.
Results and Discussion
Determination
of the Volume of the Interfacial Liquid Layer
Formed on the Surface of the Alkyl-Bonded Phase
The bulk
liquid phase volume in an RPLC column, VBL, can be determined using small inorganic ions with the same charge
as probes according to the following equation[23−28,34]where Vjk is the retention volume of the probe
ion i obtained by elution with a solution of the
electrolyte
jk. This equation is derived from a theoretical consequence of the
ion partition model that the ratio of the distribution coefficients
or the retention factors of two ions with the same charge in a biphasic
system is constant regardless of the coexisting eluent electrolytes,
provided that the charge balance is satisfied in either phase.[34−36] Contrary to typical macroscopic organic–water biphasic systems,
there may be no distinct boundary at an interface on a nanometer scale.
Although the distribution of inorganic ions at the interface of the
C18-bonded phase and water has not yet been clarified,
it has been shown by MD simulation studies that the local concentration
of an inorganic ion at the air/water interface region continuously
changes from the bulk water phase toward the surface of the water
and the concentration profile depends on the type of ion.[37,38] Cations and anions can also distribute in a different manner at
the interface region due to the difference in the affinity to the
interface or the hydration structure so that the electric double layer
(EDL) is formed. This means that the charge balance may not hold in
a microscopic region very close to the interface. However, the charge
balance must hold for the overall EDL including the diffuse layer.
Therefore, if the VBL value obtained by eq does not depend on the
type of probe ions, it can be concluded that the probe ions recognize
the identical interfacial liquid layer, which includes EDL.The average concentration of an ion in the interfacial liquid layer
may differ from that in the bulk liquid phase and the distribution
equilibria of a probe anion A– between these two
phases in a single background electrolyte system consisting of a counter
cation Y+ (Na+) and co-anion X– (Cl– or ClO4–) can
be represented as follows in a similar manner to a macroscopic biphasic
partition system[35]where BL and IL denote the bulk liquid phase
and the interfacial liquid layer, respectively.As the probe
ions for determining the VBL values of
the C18 columns, we used univalent inorganic
anions, i.e., iodate, bromide, nitrate, iodide, and thiocyanate ions.
It was shown that the adsorption isotherm of methanol on C18-bonded silica was not affected by the addition of electrolytes,
while the type of electrolyte has an impact on the isotherm of acetonitrile
when the concentration of acetonitrile exceeds 20%(v/v).[39] In addition, an increase in the organic modifier
content in the eluent leads to a decrease in retention for the probe
ions (Supporting Information, Figure S-1), causing a decrease in the difference in the retention volume between
the ions. As a result, the precise determination of the VBL value according to eq was difficult for the system, of which the volume
fraction of the organic solvent in the eluent, ϕBL, is larger than 0.20 due to the extreme closeness of the retention
volumes of the probe ions. Therefore we determined the VBL values for the C18 columns equilibrated
with 0–19%(v/v) acetonitrile–water and methanol–water.
The VBL values obtained for a Capcell
Pak C18 UG120 column equilibrated with these binary solvent mixtures
are shown in Table . As seen in Table , the VBL values calculated from each
combination of two probe anions are in good agreement with one another.
This indicates that all of the probe ions used in this study detect
identical interfacial liquid layers. Some VBL values obtained from the combination of the retention volumes for
Br– and NO3– were discordant
with the values calculated from the other probe ion combinations because
the difference in the retention volume between Br– and NO3– was extremely small. We have
thus determined the VBL value as the mean
of the values calculated from the combinations of the retention volumes
for two probe anions except those for Br– and NO3–.
Table 1
VBL Values
(mL) Calculated from eq for the Capcell Pak C18 UG120 Column
probe
ion
ϕCH3CNBL
ϕCH3OHBL
0.00
0.01
0.05
0.09
0.19
0.00
0.01
0.05
0.09
0.19
IO3–/Br–
2.367
2.317
2.255
2.264
2.215
2.269
2.222
2.235
2.198
2.238
IO3–/NO3–
2.329
2.288
2.234
2.247
2.199
2.235
2.220
2.207
2.170
2.207
IO3–/I–
2.336
2.291
2.248
2.244
2.195
2.243
2.228
2.211
2.197
2.206
IO3–/SCN–
2.324
2.281
2.243
2.238
2.189
2.231
2.213
2.204
2.177
2.193
Br–/NO3–
2.257
2.230
(2.166)a
2.169
(2.076)a
2.171
2.217
2.124
2.076
(1.946)a
Br–/I–
2.306
2.266
2.240
2.218
2.157
2.217
2.234
2.183
2.196
2.153
Br–/SCN–
2.302
2.263
2.235
2.217
2.157
2.212
2.209
2.186
2.166
2.157
NO3–/I–
2.361
2.296
2.275
2.238
2.185
2.270
2.253
2.221
2.244
2.203
NO3–/SCN–
2.319
2.273
2.252
2.227
2.173
2.228
2.206
2.200
2.182
2.179
I–/SCN–
2.299
2.259
2.229
2.215
2.157
2.207
2.181
2.189
2.132
2.161
average
2.327
2.281
2.246
2.234
2.181
2.235
2.219
2.204
2.185
2.189
S.D.b
0.024
0.019
0.014
0.016
0.021
0.023
0.020
0.017
0.030
0.028
Outliers by Grubbs’ test
at a significance level of 0.05.
Standard deviation.
Outliers by Grubbs’ test
at a significance level of 0.05.Standard deviation.The
total liquid volume in the column or the void volume, V0, is given by the retention volume of D2O
obtained with pure water eluent. Therefore, the volume of
the liquid layer formed on the surface of the C18-bonded
phase, VIL, can be calculated asThe VIL values
thus obtained are shown in Table together with the V0 values,
surface areas, As, total pore volumes, Vpore, and bonding densities, ρ, of the
packing materials used.
Table 2
Interfacial Liquid
Layer Volume (VIL), Total Liquid Phase
Volume (V0), Surface Area (As), Pore
Volume (Vpore), and Bonding Density (ρ)
for the Capcell Pak C18 Columns
acetonitrile
methanol
ϕCH3CNBL
UG120
UG300
ϕCH3OHBL
UG120
UG300
0.00
0.424 ± 0.032
0.265 ± 0.022
0.00
0.430 ± 0.029
0.265 ± 0.022
0.01
0.468 ± 0.024
0.291 ± 0.032
0.01
0.440 ± 0.019
0.321 ± 0.013
VIL (mL)
0.05
0.498 ± 0.014
0.320 ± 0.026
0.05
0.463 ± 0.030
0.274 ± 0.031
0.09
0.516 ± 0.026
0.352 ± 0.009
0.09
0.485 ± 0.045
0.259 ± 0.042
0.19
0.563 ± 0.021
0.384 ± 0.027
0.19
0.470 ± 0.028
0.253 ± 0.047
V0 (mL)
2.744
3.158
2.659
3.158
As (m2 column–1)
378.05
248.86
399.13
248.86
Vpore (mL)
1.113
1.641
1.175
1.641
ρ (μmol m–2)a
2.5
3.7
2.5
3.7
manufacturer’s
data.
manufacturer’s
data.
Recognition of the Interfacial
Liquid Layer by Organic Molecules
The VIL values shown in Table are the volumes of the interfacial
liquid layer including the double layer recognized by the probe anions
as the phase exhibiting a different affinity for the ions. To elucidate
whether organic molecules can also recognize the interfacial liquid
layer as inorganic ions do or not, the distribution coefficients of
various hydrophilic organic compounds were determined using the VIL and VBL values
according towhere VR is the
retention volume of an organic compound. Figure shows the plots of log D values of sugars, sugar alcohols, n-alcohols, ketones,
nitriles, nitroalkanes, glycols, uracil, urea, thiourea, inorganic
anions, and D2O obtained on a Capcell Pak C18 UG300 column,
log D(UG300), against those for a Capcell
Pak C18 UG120 column, log D(UG120), with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water. As seen in Figure , all of the plots fall on
a straight line with the slope of unity going through the origin,
which indicates that the D value of a solute compound
obtained on a Capcell Pak C18 UG300 column is equal to that on a UG120
column, although the retention volumes on these two columns are quite
different. The plots obtained with the other eluent systems also give
straight lines with the slope of unity going through the origin (Supporting
Information, Figures S-2 and S-3).
Figure 1
Values of log D for Capcell Pak C18 UG300
plotted against log D for Capcell Pak C18
UG120. The D values for organic compounds were determined
with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water and those for inorganic anions
were with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water containing 0.1 mol L NaCl and NaClO4. The error
bars represent the standard deviation of the measurements.
Values of log D for Capcell Pak C18 UG300
plotted against log D for Capcell Pak C18
UG120. The D values for organic compounds were determined
with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water and those for inorganic anions
were with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water containing 0.1 mol L NaCl and NaClO4. The error
bars represent the standard deviation of the measurements.These results reveal that the organic molecules also sense
the
interfacial liquid layer on the surface of C18 silica particles
that the inorganic ions do. It should be noted that the distribution
coefficients for a solute compound obtained on the two C18 silica columns are the same as each other only when they are calculated
using the VIL and VBL values. The distribution coefficient calculated by eq corresponds to the equilibrium
constant of the partition between the bulk phase and the interfacial
liquid layer. On the other hand, if the participation of water molecules
in the formation of the interfacial liquid layer could be assumed
to be negligible, the distribution coefficient should be given by
the following equationwhere VD is
the retention volume of D2O and Vorg is the volume of the organic solvent adsorbed on the
surface of the C18-bonded phase. Dorg is the distribution coefficient of a compound between the
bulk phase and the layer of the adsorbed organic solvent on the C18 silica surface. Figure shows the plots of the log Dorg values for Capcell Pak C18 UG300 vs the values for
UG120 obtained with the same eluent, 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water.
All of the plots obviously deviate from the straight line going through
the origin. The plots for some organic compounds as well as most of
the inorganic anions could not be shown in this figure because they
exhibit retention volumes smaller than VD so that Dorg values become
negative. The plots obtained with any other eluent systems do not
fall on a straight line with the slope of unity and the intercept
of zero.
Figure 2
Values of log Dorg for Capcell
Pak C18 UG300 plotted against log Dorg for Capcell Pak C18 UG120. The Dorg values
for organic compounds were determined with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
and those for inorganic anions were with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
containing 0.1 mol L NaCl and NaClO4.
Values of log Dorg for Capcell
Pak C18 UG300 plotted against log Dorg for Capcell Pak C18 UG120. The Dorg values
for organic compounds were determined with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
and those for inorganic anions were with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
containing 0.1 mol L NaCl and NaClO4.The chromatograms for mannitol,
urea, thiourea, and D2O obtained on a Capcell Pak C18 UG120
with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
are shown in Figure a. The chromatograms for the inorganic anions on the same column
obtained by elution with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water containing
0.1 mol L–1 NaClO4 are also shown in Figure b. It is clear from
these figures that the retention of mannitol and urea and most of
the inorganic anions exhibit smaller retention volumes than that of
D2O. The extremely small retention of these compounds observed
in RPLC has usually been interpreted by ion exclusion or size exclusion.[29−32] However, the effect of the fixed ionic groups, probably silanol
groups, on the Capcell Pak C18 columns can be suppressed by the addition
of electrolytes to the eluent at the ionic strength of 0.01 mol L–1 or above.[27] The possibility
of the size-exclusion effect on the inorganic ions is also excluded
because it cannot explain the dependence of the retention of ionic
solutes on the background eluent electrolytes.[27,33−35]
Figure 3
Chromatograms of some organic compounds (a) and inorganic
anions
(b) showing weak retention on a C18-bonded silica column.
Conditions: eluent, (a) 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water, (b) 10%(v/v)
acetonitrile–water containing 0.1 mol L NaClO4; flow rate, 0.5 mL min.
Chromatograms of some organic compounds (a) and inorganic
anions
(b) showing weak retention on a C18-bonded silica column.
Conditions: eluent, (a) 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water, (b) 10%(v/v)
acetonitrile–water containing 0.1 mol L NaClO4; flow rate, 0.5 mL min.Furthermore, the size-exclusion
effect cannot account for the retention
behavior of organic compounds on the C18 silica columns.
If the size exclusion is the predominant mechanism, the distribution
coefficient of a compound, DSE, should
be given bywhere Vint and Vpore are
the interstitial volume and the total
pore volume of the column, respectively. In Figure , the log DSE values of the organic compounds and inorganic anions obtained for
Capcell Pak C18 UG300 are plotted against the values for UG120. All
of the plots again deviate from the straight line going through the
origin, which indicates that the exceptionally small retention of
hydrophilic organic compounds and inorganic ions cannot also be interpreted
with the size-exclusion mechanism.
Figure 4
Values of log DSE for Capcell
Pak C18 UG300 plotted against log DSE for Capcell Pak C18 UG120. The DSE values
for organic compounds were determined with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
and those for inorganic anions were with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
containing 0.1 mol L NaCl and NaClO4.
Values of log DSE for Capcell
Pak C18 UG300 plotted against log DSE for Capcell Pak C18 UG120. The DSE values
for organic compounds were determined with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
and those for inorganic anions were with 10%(v/v) acetonitrile–water
containing 0.1 mol L NaCl and NaClO4.Capcell Pak C18 UG120 and UG300
are different from each other in
pore size, specific surface area, and bonding density as shown in Table . However, the distribution
coefficients of ions and hydrophilic solute compounds obtained with
these two columns should be the same since these two packing materials
have identical outermost surface chemical structures, which govern
the structure of the interfacial liquid phase, and the probe ions
and molecules used in this study can be assumed not to partition into
the alkyl-bonded layer.[24] The results shown
above reveal that Vint is too small, whereas VD and V0 are too large as the bulk liquid phase volume in an RPLC column.
It should be notified here that the solubilities of hydrophilic organic
molecules as well as inorganic ions in the interfacial liquid layer
formed on the surface of the C18 bonded phase are different
from those in the bulk liquid phase.
Solvent Composition and
Thickness of the Interfacial Liquid
Layer Formed on the Surface of Alkyl-Bonded Phase
The solvent
composition of the interfacial liquid layer formed on the surface
of the C18-bonded phase can be calculated according to
the following equation.[28,40]where ϕIL is the volume fraction
of the organic
modifier i in the interfacial liquid layer and VR, is the retention volume
of isotopically labeled organic solvent. The volume fractions of the
organic solvent in the bulk phase, ϕBL, were calculated from
the partial molar volumes of the organic solvent and water.[41,42] The dependence of ϕIL on ϕBL in acetonitrile–water
and methanol–water systems is illustrated in Figure . As seen in Figure , the concentration of the
organic solvent in the interfacial liquid layer is greater than that
in the bulk phase, and it is independent of the pore size of the packing
material in the range examined in this study.
Figure 5
Dependence of ϕiL on ϕim in acetonitrile–water
and methanol–water eluent
systems. The error bars represent the standard deviation of the measurements.
Dependence of ϕiL on ϕim in acetonitrile–water
and methanol–water eluent
systems. The error bars represent the standard deviation of the measurements.It should be noted that water is also a component
of the interfacial
liquid layer on C18 silica. As described in a previous
paper,[27] there is little possibility that
the solvated water phase is formed on the residual silanol groups
of the packing materials used in this study. The interfacial liquid
layer detected by inorganic ions and hydrophilic organic compounds
is considered to be a liquid layer consisting of the organic solvent
and water around the hydrophobic moieties. MD simulation and EPR studies
have shown that the alkyl chains tend to collapse and fold on the
silica surface in water-rich solvent systems, meaning that the interfacial
liquid layer is formed on the surface of a dense collapsed C18-bonded layer.[9,13,15] Acetonitrile and methanol molecules can be intercalated into the
grafted C18 chains. However, the amounts of these hydrophilic
organic modifiers partitioning into the alkyl-bonded phase are negligibly
smaller than those of the modifiers accumulated on the surface of
C18 chains.[24] We have thus calculated
the solvent composition and the thickness of the interfacial liquid
layer by assuming that the octadecyl group is not a component of the
interfacial liquid layer in the water-rich binary solvent systems
used in this study.The thickness of the interfacial liquid
layer, L, can be calculated from the VIL value
and the surface area of the packing material in the column, As, and is given asWe measured the specific surface area of each
packing material by the BET method using nitrogen gas and obtained
the As value by multiplying it by the
weight of the packing material in the column (Table ). The specific surface areas of the C18 silica materials were calculated using 20.5 Å2 for the value of the nitrogen molecular area according to Kazakevich
et al.[43] Dependence of the thickness of
the interfacial liquid layer on the concentration of the organic solvent
obtained for acetonitrile–water and methanol–water systems
are shown in Figure a and b, respectively. In acetonitrile–water mixtures, the
thickness of the interfacial liquid layer increases with an increase
in the volume fraction of the organic solvent in the eluent, whereas
it appears to be almost constant in methanol–water systems
independent of the concentration of methanol, although the reliability
of the data for the methanol–water systems is not very high
due to low precision in the determination of the VBL value at a high concentration of methanol. This may
be attributed to the difference in particular microstructures between
the two solvents. The water/alcohol cases are dominated by hydrogen-bonding
effects, while the water/acetonitrile mixtures are influenced by the
clustering of the acetonitrile molecules around nonpolar solutes or
surfaces.[21,22,44] Acetonitrile
may form an adsorbed multilayer, while methanol shows no specific
self-accumulation.
Figure 6
Thickness of the interfacial liquid layer as a function
of the
volume fraction of organic solvent in acetonitrile–water (a)
or methanol–water (b) eluent system. The error bars represent
the standard deviation of the measurements.
Thickness of the interfacial liquid layer as a function
of the
volume fraction of organic solvent in acetonitrile–water (a)
or methanol–water (b) eluent system. The error bars represent
the standard deviation of the measurements.Figure shows that
the interface thickness is approximately independent of the pore diameter
of the C18-bonded material. It has been concluded from
the results obtained by MD simulation that an organic solvent distributes
nearer to the surface, which creates a gradient in solvent composition
perpendicular to the surface and influences the retention of the solute
compounds. Klatte and Beck reported that the structure of C18 chains in contact with a 50 mol % methanol–water mixture
is nearly identical to that observed for the chains in a vacuum and
methanol is preferentially segregated to the surface.[21] They defined overall interface thickness as the distance
between the first bulk behavior in the density profile of the solvent
and the first location where the chain density is that of the bulk
octadecane and estimated it to be an extent of nearly 10 Å. On
the other hand, Rafferly et al. calculated the thickness of the interfacial
region on a C18 silica surface, defined by the range where
the total solvent density falls between 10 and 90% of its bulk value,
to be ca. 5 and 10 Å for 33 mol % methanol–water and acetonitrile–water,
respectively.[12] Gritti also estimated the
thickness of the interfacial region on a C18 silica surface
equilibrated with mixtures of acetonitrile and water using a semiempirical
approach based on MD simulation and demonstrated that the interfacial
region thickens from 7 to 16 Å as the concentration of acetonitrile
increases from 5 to 60%.[45] The values for
the thickness of the interfacial liquid layer obtained by our liquid
chromatographic method and MD simulations have the same order of magnitude.
However, these values for the interface thickness reported by the
MD simulation studies may not be compared directly with the L values obtained in this study since the L value gives the average limit of distance from the C18-bonded phase surface at which molecules and ions can sense the interfacial
liquid layer and it probably involves the thickness of the solvation
shell of a probe ion.The L value determined
in this study is the average
thickness of the mixed solvent layer consisting of the organic modifier
and water. We then tentatively estimated the ϕCHIL values for 10%(v/v)
and 20%(v/v) acetonitrile/water eluent systems from solvent density
profiles obtained by recent MD simulation studies (Figure in ref (17) and Figure in ref (19), respectively) assuming that the thickness of
the interfacial mixed solvent layer is given by the L value. The ϕCHIL values thus obtained are 0.25 and 0.41 for
ϕCHBL = 0.10 and 0.20, respectively. Both of these values are
in good agreement with the values shown in Figure , which indicates that the interfacial liquid
layer recognized by inorganic ions and hydrophilic small organic molecules
is consistent with that suggested by MD simulation. It has been shown
in RPLC with organic solvent–water mixed solvent systems that
the interfacial region at the alkyl-bonded phase surface is enriched
in the organic component in the eluent. However, this does not imply
that the interfacial region is made up of a simple distinct layer
of the adsorbed organic solvent as revealed by the MD simulation studies,
but only shows that the alkyl-bonded phase has a preferential affinity
for the organic solvent. The structural properties of the interfacial
liquid layer can be investigated experimentally by liquid chromatography
using inorganic ions and small hydrophilic molecules as probes.
Conclusions
We have determined the bulk liquid phase volumes
of two RPLC columns
packed with two C18 silica packing materials having identical
bonded structures but different pore sizes and surface areas equilibrated
with acetonitrile–water and methanol–water (0–19%(v/v))
binary mixed solvents by the ion partition method. The VBL value obtained for every system is smaller than the
total liquid phase volume in the column, indicating that a liquid
layer functioning as a part of the stationary phase exhibiting different
affinity for inorganic ions from the bulk phase exists on alkyl-bonded
silica surfaces. A comparison of the distribution coefficients of
hydrophilic organic compounds calculated with the equations derived
from different postulated models indicates that the interfacial liquid
layer formed on the hydrophobic surface also shows a different affinity
for organic molecules from the bulk liquid phase. It has been reported
that some organic compounds such as urea as well as inorganic ions
exhibit retention volumes smaller than D2O in RPLC. Our
results reveal that these observations can be rationally accounted
for by partition between the bulk eluent phase and the interfacial
liquid layer on the hydrophobic surface. The significant small retention
of hydrophilic compounds is not caused by the size-exclusion effect
but by a weaker affinity of the molecules for the interfacial liquid
layer than for the bulk eluent solvent.We calculated the volume
of the interfacial liquid layer from the
bulk liquid phase volume determined by the liquid chromatographic
method using inorganic ions as probes and estimated the solvent composition
of the interfacial layer from the retention volumes of the isotopically
labeled eluent components. The thickness of the interfacial liquid
layer was also determined from the interfacial layer volume and the
surface area of the packing material in the column. Both of the values
for the solvent composition and thickness of the interfacial liquid
layer agree well with the values obtained by MD simulation studies
that have so far been reported. The thickness of the interfacial layer
increases with an increase in the concentration of the organic modifier
in acetonitrile–water mixtures, whereas it is essentially constant
in methanol–water eluent systems. The formation of an adsorbed
multilayer or self-assembled cluster of acetonitrile on the surface
of the hydrophobic C18-bonded phase may explain the difference
in the thickness of the interfacial liquid layer observed in these
two organic modifiers. The results obtained in the present study show
that hydrophilic organic molecules as well as inorganic ions differentiate
the interfacial liquid layer formed on the hydrophobic surfaces from
the bulk liquid phase.