Eliminating Peak Distortion and Injection Solvent Effects in Chiral UPC2 Separations

Importance of the topic

Peak distortion in chiral UPC2 separations can compromise resolution, quantitation, and method robustness. Selecting an appropriate injection solvent that matches the mobile phase minimizes local equilibrium disruption and preserves enantiomeric peak shape.

• Chiral UPC2 relies on polysaccharide-based stationary phases sensitive to solvent polarity mismatches
• Distorted peaks reduce analytical accuracy in pharmaceutical and stereochemical applications
• Optimized sample solvent choice improves throughput and data quality

Objectives and study overview

This study evaluates how injection solvent polarity and analyte lipophilicity (cLog P) influence peak distortion for a series of chiral compounds on Trefoil AMY1 and CEL1 columns. Injection solvents ranged from nonpolar (heptane) to polar (methanol), with volumes from 1 to 9 µL.

Methodology and instrumentation

• System: Waters ACQUITY UPC2 with Partial Loop Needle Overfill injection
• Columns: Trefoil AMY1 and CEL1 (2.1×150 mm, 2.5 µm polysaccharide coatings)
• Mobile phase: CO₂ with MeOH/IPA (1:1) + 20 mM NH₃; flow 1.2 mL/min; 40 °C column; 10 °C sample tray
• Injection: 1–9 µL; analyte concentration ~0.4 g/L in MeOH, IPA, heptane, or mixtures
• Data handling: Empower 3; vials: TruView LCMS Certified

Key results and discussion

• Nonpolar solvents (heptane, heptane/IPA) effectively prevented peak distortion across a cLog P range of 0.7–6.9
• Compounds with cLog P 2.5–4.3 (praziquantel, econazole) exhibited minimal distortion due to strong retention and co-solvent buffering
• Highly polar solvents (IPA, MeOH) induced broadening and shouldering in low-cLog P analytes (e.g., guaifenesin)
• High-cLog P analytes (thioridazine, terfenadine) showed distortion only with the strongest polar solvent on moderately retaining phases
• Peak distortion was reproducible and linked to solvent/mobile phase polarity mismatch rather than overload
• Retention factor and co-solvent content have opposing effects: higher retention reduces distortion but lower co-solvent increases it

Benefits and practical applications

• Provides a solvent selection guideline for chiral UPC2 method development
• Enhances reliability in enantiomeric purity testing and preparative separations
• Eliminates need for complex supercritical fluid extraction vessels for sample dissolution
• Improves chromatographic throughput and reproducibility in QA/QC laboratories

Future trends and opportunities

Advances in chiral stationary phase chemistry will allow finer tuning of polar/apolar balance to further reduce distortion. Automated diluent matching, machine learning–driven solvent screening, and novel co-solvent additives promise to enhance robustness and broaden the range of analytes accessible by chiral UPC2.

Conclusion

Matching injection solvent polarity to the stationary phase and analyte properties is critical for minimizing peak distortion in chiral UPC2 separations. Nonpolar diluents such as heptane or heptane/IPA mixtures consistently deliver optimal peak shapes on Trefoil polysaccharide columns, improving method performance and data quality.

References

1. Fairchild JN. Simple Guidelines for Choosing the Right Injection Solvent for UltraPerformance Convergence Chromatography (UPC 2). Waters Technology Brief. 2014;720004981en.
2. Fairchild JN, Hill JF, Iraneta PC. Influence of sample solvent composition for SFC separations. LC GC North America. 2013;31(4):326–33.
3. Thompson JD, Brown JS, Carr PW. Dependence of thermal mismatch broadening on column diameter in high-speed liquid chromatography at elevated temperatures. Anal Chem. 2001;73(14):3340–7.
4. Broyles BS, Shalliker RA, Guiochon G. Visualization of viscous fingering in chromatographic columns. J Chromatogr A. 1998;822(2):173–87.
5. Neue UD, Mazza CB, Cavanaugh JY, et al. At-column dilution for improved loading in preparative chromatography. Chromatographia. 2003;57(Suppl):S121–2.
6. Enmark M, Asberg D, Shalliker R, Samuelsson J, Fornstedt T. A closer study of peak distortions in supercritical fluid chromatography as generated by the injection. J Chromatogr A. 2015;1400:131–9.
7. Price K, Clausen AM, Helmy R. Effect of injection diluent on a chiral separation on an amylose S-α-methylbenzylcarbamate chiral stationary phase. J Liq Chromatogr Rel Technol. 2008;31(15):2286–95.
8. Waters Corporation. ACQUITY UPC 2 Trefoil Columns Care and Use Manual. 2015;720004828en.