The Column - June 2009 - 19

The Column Meeting Review unique properties, which offers both selectivity and efficiency. He also suggested that there is nothing wrong with SFC being seen as a technique with a number of ‘niche’ applications for which it is especially useful. He gave the example of how HILIC seems to be the current ‘flavour of the month’ and is being used for diverse applications when actually it is a niche application stationary phase — useful only for polar ionizable analytes — yet this has not stopped its acceptance. He suggested the Credit: Peter Myers community should embrace the fact that SFC for chiral analyses is an acceptable first port of call for analytes soluble in methanol, with the second choice of technique being sulphated cyclodextrin CE and then HPLC. Judge Peter Myers then asked the jury to respond. Discussion ensued, ending up with a vote by the jury, who almost unanimously accepted that SFC did indeed have a place in the toolbox of analytical separation tools. The day concluded with a final session of talks given by three academics — Dr Didier Thiébaut (Ecole Superieure de Physique et de Chimie Industrielles de la Ville de Paris), Dr Eric Lesellier (ICOA, University of Orleans, France) and Professor Pat Sandra — and one industrialist — Dr Michele Dal Cin, GSK, Italy. Dr Dal Cin talked about the GSK approach of using chiroptical detection (CD) for analytical and prep SFC for chiral screening with numerous examples of how UV detection combined with CD detection was especially useful for separations of both chiral and achiral components. Dr Dal Cin also detailed how successful SFC had been for scaling up from analytical to preparative scale using this screening system and combined detection strategy. Dr Lesellier talked about the application of SFC for achiral compounds and outlined his work to classify stationary phases using the Linear Solvation Energy Relationship (LSER) approach. He showed how his group had successfully achieved this classification of stationary phases and how this approach could be used in a screening system to facilitate stationary phase selection as the first point in method development. Dr Thiébaut’s talk in this session was an interesting overview on the new directions SFC has been taking in the petrochemical industry where he gave examples of applications of systems set up combining UV, FTIR, FID, AED and MS detection as well as systems using sub2 µm and ‘long’ columns for enhancing both speed and resolution. Other interesting systems outlined were the SFC–GC×GC system for separation in the first dimension of saturated and unsaturated hydrocarbons followed by a subsequent simultaneous separation of each fraction by GC. Professor Sandra gave the last talk in the session asking the question — SFC: panacea or pitfall? He explained how in 1995 Terry Berger had forecast that SFC would be a mainstay technique in modern analytical labs and that GC would be the first port of call for separations, with SFC being the second choice, followed by HPLC based on performance factors of speed, efficiency and detection options. Professor Sandra showed how this had not happened as forecast given the lack in both fundamental developments and instrumentation advances over recent years, meaning that SFC had not yet reached the acceptance of robustness akin to GC and HPLC. He went on to detail the reasons why these advances were important, given the potential of the technique, and gave examples of where E-mail contact: SFC methods had been successfully validated. These examples included how the employment of mobile phase compensation had addressed gradient sensitivity issues with Corona charged aerosol detection and evaporative light-scattering detectors (ELSD) and where comprehensive SFC was proving to be an efficient and promising technique for a variety of applications. He concluded by challenging the vendors to address the instrumentation issues and recent market instability as well as column irreproducibility and re-iterated his earlier conclusions about the place of SFC in the toolbox of techniques available for separation scientists. In conclusion, the meeting clearly highlighted the importance role training has in the enhancement of the fundamental understanding of SFC principles. Equally critical to the successful implementation of SFC are the further development/refinement of SFC hardware and stationary phase chemistry. This meeting was organized by the Separation Sciences interest group of the Analytical Division, Royal Society of Chemistry. More details about both presentations from this meeting can be found at 19 1 9 Contents Tips & Tricks 2 13 Vosloo Rainville and Mather 6 17 News Meeting Review 8 20 Market Trends & Analysis Events & Contacts

The Column - June 2009

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Column - June 2009

The Column - June 2009
Laboratory Equipment Qualification: Back to Basics
Market Trends and Analysis
Tips & Tricks: GPC/SEC
Confirming Peak Identification in Bioanalytical Studies Using Dual-Scanning MS Technology to Achieve ProductIon Confirmation
Meeting Review
The Column - June 2009 - The Column - June 2009
The Column - June 2009 - Laboratory Equipment Qualification: Back to Basics
The Column - June 2009 - 3
The Column - June 2009 - 4
The Column - June 2009 - 5
The Column - June 2009 - News
The Column - June 2009 - 7
The Column - June 2009 - Market Trends and Analysis
The Column - June 2009 - Tips & Tricks: GPC/SEC
The Column - June 2009 - 10
The Column - June 2009 - 11
The Column - June 2009 - 12
The Column - June 2009 - Confirming Peak Identification in Bioanalytical Studies Using Dual-Scanning MS Technology to Achieve ProductIon Confirmation
The Column - June 2009 - 14
The Column - June 2009 - 15
The Column - June 2009 - 16
The Column - June 2009 - Meeting Review
The Column - June 2009 - 18
The Column - June 2009 - 19
The Column - June 2009 - Events
The Column - June 2009 - 21