Comparison of existing strategies for keeping symmetrical peaks in on-line Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography x Reversed-Phase Liquid Chromatography despite solvent strength mismatch

Abstract

In two-dimensional liquid chromatography, the combination of hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) and reversed-phase liquid chromatography (RPLC) is very attractive due to the complementarity of their separation mechanisms. On-line comprehensive HILIC x RPLC is well-known to give rise to a large retention space coverage when dealing with ionisable compounds. However, method development in on-line HILIC x RPLC is challenging due to the reversed solvent strength between both dimensions, which can greatly affect the peak shapes in the second RPLC dimension, and thus the separation quality and the method sensitivity. In the present contribution, we compared four strategies designed to avoid this problem: (1) flow splitting, which consists in reducing the injection volume in the second dimension (2D), (2) on-line dilution with a make-up flow and (3) on-line dilution with Active Solvent Modulation (ASM), which both consist in reducing the solvent strength of the injected fractions, and (4) Total Breakthrough Strategy, which we recently proposed. Unlike the three preceding strategies, this latter one consists in injecting large volumes of strong solvent in 2D. The performance of each strategy was evaluated for sub-hour separations of a tryptic digest in on-line HILIC x RPLC. In this work, we considered the critical case for which the same column internal diameters (i.e. 2.1 mm here) are used in both dimensions. Peak capacity, peak shapes and peak intensities were considered for this evaluation. The highest peak capacity could be achieved with Total Breakthrough Strategy while the lowest one with on-line dilution using ASM. Peak intensities were usually higher with on-line dilution approaches (make-up flow and ASM). However, despite the presence of breakthrough, peak intensities were approximately 7-fold higher with Total Breakthrough Strategy than with flow splitting.