Premium
Matrix‐assisted diffusion‐ordered spectroscopy: application of surfactant solutions to the resolution of isomer spectra
Author(s) -
Tormena Cláudio F.,
Evans Robert,
Haiber Stephan,
Nilsson Mathias,
Morris Gareth A.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
magnetic resonance in chemistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.483
H-Index - 72
eISSN - 1097-458X
pISSN - 0749-1581
DOI - 10.1002/mrc.3822
Subject(s) - chemistry , micelle , diffusion , pulmonary surfactant , sodium dodecyl sulfate , resolution (logic) , steric effects , aqueous solution , spectroscopy , analytical chemistry (journal) , matrix (chemical analysis) , chloroform , chromatography , organic chemistry , thermodynamics , biochemistry , physics , quantum mechanics , artificial intelligence , computer science
The component spectra of a mixture of isomers with nearly identical diffusion coefficients cannot normally be distinguished in a standard diffusion‐ordered spectroscopy (DOSY) experiment but can often be easily resolved using matrix‐assisted DOSY, in which diffusion behaviour is manipulated by the addition of a co‐solute such as a surfactant. Relatively little is currently known about the conditions required for such a separation, for example, how the choice between normal and reverse micelles affects separation or how the isomer structures themselves affect the resolution. The aim of this study was to explore the application of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) normal micelles in aqueous solution and sodium 1,4‐bis(2‐ethylhexyl)sulfosuccinate (AOT) aggregates in chloroform, at a range of concentrations, to the diffusion resolution of some simple model sets of isomers such as monomethoxyphenols and short chain alcohols. It is shown that SDS micelles offer better resolution where these isomers differ in the position of a hydroxyl group, whereas AOT aggregates are more effective for isomers differing in the position of a methyl group. For both the normal SDS micelles and the less well‐defined AOT aggregates, differences in the resolution of the isomers can in part be rationalised in terms of differing degrees of hydrophobicity, amphiphilicity and steric effects. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.