Untitled
Untitled
Untitled
Chromatography
CHROMATOGRAPHIC SCIENCE
SERIES
9. GLC and HPLC Determination of Therapeutic Agents (in three parts), Part 1 edited by
Kiyoshi Tsuji and Walter Morozowich, Parts 2 and 3 edited by Kiyoshi Tsuji
13. Liquid Chromatography of Polymers and Related Materials II, edited by Jack
Cazes and Xavier Delamare
14. Introduction to Analytical Gas Chromatography: History, Principles, and Practice,
John A.Perry
19. Liquid Chromatography of Polymers and Related Materials III, edited by Jack Cazes
21. Chromatographic Separation and Extraction with Foamed Plastics and Rubbers, G.
J.Moody and J.D.R.Thomas
28. HPLC in Nucleic Acid Research: Methods and Applications, edited by Phyllis R.
Brown
30. Modern Chromatographic Analysis of the Vitamins, edited by André P.De Leenheer,
Willy E.Lambert, and Marcel G.M.De Ruyter
33. Affinity Chromatography: Practical and Theoretical Aspects, Peter Mohr and Klaus
Pommerening
38. Chromatographic Theory and Basic Principles, edited by Jan Åke Jönsson
53. Chromatographic Analysis of Alkaloids, Milan Popl, Jan Fähnrich, and Vlastimil
Tatar
58. Liquid Chromatography—Mass Spectrometry, W.M.A.Niessen and Jan van der Greef
62. Diode Array Detection in HPLC, edited by Ludwig Huber and Stephan A.George
73. Chromatographic Detectors: Design, Function, and Operation, Raymond P.W. Scott
78. Handbook of HPLC, edited by Elena Katz, Roy Eksteen, Peter Schoenmakers, and
Neil Miller
81. Thin-Layer Chromatography: Fourth Edition, Revised and Expanded, Bernard Fried
and Joseph Sherma
Joseph Sherma
Bernard Fried
Lafayette College
Easton, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
This book has been designed as a practical, comprehensive laboratory handbook on the
topic of thin-layer chromatography (TLC). It is divided into two parts, the first of which
covers the theories and general practices of TLC (Chapter 1–13), while the second
(Chapters 14–31) includes applications based mainly on compound types. The book will
be a valuable source of information for scientists with a high degree of expertise in the
separation sciences, but because most chapters include considerable introductory and
background material, it is also appropriate for the relatively inexperienced
chromatographer.
Contributors to the book are recognized experts on the topics they have covered and
include many of the best-known and most knowledgeable workers in the field of TLC
throughout the world. As much as possible, we attempted to adopt a uniform style for
each chapter while still allowing authors the latitude to present their topics in what they
considered to be the most effective way. Consequently, in the applications chapters (14–
31), most authors have included the following sections: introduction, sample preparation,
layers and mobile phases, chromatographic techniques, detection, quantification, and
detailed experiments. Authors were encouraged to use many figures and tables and to be
as practical as possible except for the chapters devoted to theory (2, 3, and 10). The
literature covered by most authors includes mainly the period from 1975 to 1989. Some
of the more significant older literature has also been covered, but many authors refer to
the earlier comprehensive treatises by Stahl and Kirchner for this material. Authors have
been selective in their choice of references and present TLC methods that are most
suitable for laboratory work.
It is important to point out that the Handbook of Thin-Layer Chromatography has a
comprehensive, organized plan and, unlike many recent books in the field, is not a
random collection of chapters on “advances” or papers from a symposium. An earlier
laboratory handbook on TLC was written by Egon Stahl in 1965. We hope that our
handbook may have at least a small fraction of the impact in the near future that this
classic work had on the development and growth of TLC during the past 25 years. If the
book is well accepted and contributors cooperate, we hope to update coverage of all
important aspects of TLC with regular later editions.
Joseph Sherma
Bernard Fried
Contents
Glossary 1283
Directory of Manufacturers and Suppliers of Plates, Equipment, and 1293
Instruments for Thin-Layer Chromatography
Index 1295
Contributors
Joseph Sherma
Lafayette College, Easton, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
The purpose of this chapter is to present an overview of all important aspects of thin-
layer chromatography (TLC). It briefly reviews information and provides updated
references on topics covered in the remaining chapters in Part I and refers readers to the
specific chapters. It treats topics that are not covered in separate chapters, such as
sampling and sample preparation and the more classical procedures of TLC, in more
detail. A suggested source of additional information, both basic and advanced, on the
practice and applications of TLC is the primer written by Fried and Sherma (1).
A. Introduction to TLC
Thin-layer chromatography and paper chromatography comprise “planar
chromatography.” TLC is the simplest of all the widely used chromatographic methods to
perform. A suitable closed vessel containing solvent and a coated plate are all that are
required to carry out separations and qualitative and semiquantitative analysis. With
optimization of techniques and materials and the use of available commercial
instruments, highly efficient separations and accurate and precise quantification can be
achieved. Planar chromatography can also be used for preparative-scale separations by
employing specialized layers, apparatus, and techniques.
Basic TLC is carried out as follows. A small aliquot of sample is placed near one end
of the stationary phase, a thin layer of sorbent, to form the initial zone. The sample is then
dried. The end of the stationary phase with the initial zone is placed into the mobile
phase, usually a mixture of two to four pure solvents, inside a closed chamber. If the
layer and mobile phase were chosen correctly, the components of the mixture migrate at
different rates during movement of the mobile phase through the stationary phase. This is
termed development of the chromatogram. When the mobile phase has moved an
appropriate distance, the stationary phase is removed, the mobile phase is rapidly dried,
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 2
and the zones are detected in daylight or under ultraviolet (UV) light with or without the
application of a suitable visualization reagent.
Differential migration is the result of varying degrees of affinity of the mixture
components for the stationary and mobile phases. Various separation mechanisms are
involved, the predominant forces depending upon the exact properties of the two phases
and the solutes. The interactions involved in determining chromatographic retention and
selectivity include hydrogen bonding, electron-pair donor/electron-pair acceptor (charge
transfer), ion-ion, ion-dipole, and van der Waals interactions. Among the latter are
dipole-dipole (Keesom), dipole-induced dipole (Debye), and instantaneous dipole-
induced dipole (London) interactions.
Sample collection, preservation, and purification are problems common to TLC and all
other chromatographic methods. For complex samples, the TLC development will usually
not completely resolve the analyte from interferences unless a prior purification (cleanup)
is carried out. This is most often done by selective extraction and column
chromatography. In some cases substances are converted, prior to TLC, to a derivative
that is more suitable for separation, detection, and/or quantification than the parent
compound. TLC can cope with highly contaminated samples, and the entire
chromatogram can be evaluated, reducing the degree of cleanup required and saving time
and expense. The presence of strongly adsorbed impurities or even particles is of no
concern, because the plate is used only once (2).
Detection is simplest when the compounds of interest are naturally colored or
fluorescent or absorb UV light. However, application of a detection reagent by spraying
or dipping is required to produce color or fluorescence for most compounds. Absorption
of UV light is common for most aromatic and conjugated compounds and some
unsaturated compounds. These compounds can be detected simply by inspection under
254 nm UV light on layers impregnated with a fluorescence indicator (fluorescence
quench detection).
Compound identification in TLC is based initially on a comparison of Rf values to
authentic reference standards. Rf values are generally not exactly reproducible from
laboratory to laboratory or even in different runs in the same laboratory, so they should
be considered mainly as guides to relative migration distances and sequences. Factors
causing Rf values to vary include dimensions and type of chamber, nature and size of the
layer, direction of the mobile-phase flow, volume and composition of the mobile phase,
equilibration conditions, humidity, and sample preparation methods preceding TLC. See
Chapter 11 in Ref. 1 for a discussion of reproducibility in TLC. Confirmation of
identification can be obtained by scraping the layer and eluting the analyte followed by
infrared (IR) spectrometry, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectrometry, mass
spectrometry (MS), or other spectrometric methods if sufficient compound is available.
These methods can also be used to characterize zones directly on the layer (in situ).
B. History of TLC
The history of liquid chromatography, which dates back to the first description of
chromatography by Michael Tswett (3) in the early 1900s, was reviewed by Sherma (4).
Recent reviews of TLC were written by Ettre and Kalasz (5), Sherma (6), Kreuzig (7),
and Berezkin (8). TLC is a relatively new discipline, and chromatography historians
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 3
usually date the advent of modern TLC from 1958. A review by Pelick et al. (9) tabulates
significant early developments in TLC and provides translations of classical papers by
Izmailov and Schraiber and by Stahl.
In 1938, Izmailov and Schraiber separated certain medicinal compounds on unbound
alumina or other adsorbents spread on glass plates. Because they applied drops of solvent
to the plate containing the sample and sorbent layer, the procedure was termed drop
chromatography. Meinhard and Hall in 1949 used binder to adhere alumina to
microscope slides, and these layers were used in the separation of certain inorganic ions
with the use of drop chromatography; this method was called surface chromatography. In
the 1950s, Kirchner and colleagues at the U.S. Department of Agriculture performed
TLC as we know it today. They used silica gel held on glass plates with the aid of a
binder, and plates were developed with the conventional ascending procedures used in
paper chromatography. Kirchner coined the term “chromatostrips” for his layers, which
also contained fluorescence indicator for the first time. Stahl introduced the term “thin-
layer chromatography” in the late 1950s. His major contributions were the
standardization of materials, procedures, and nomenclature and the description of
selective solvent systems for resolution of important compound classes. His first
laboratory manual (10) popularized TLC, and he obtained the support of commercial
companies (Merck, Desaga) in offering standardized materials and apparatus for TLC.
Quantitative TLC was introduced by Kirchner et al. in 1954 when they described an
elution method of determination of biphenyl in citrus fruits. Densitometry in TLC was
initially reported in the mid-1960s using commercial densitometers such as the Photovolt
and Joyce Loebl Chromascan. Plates with uniform, fine-particle layers were produced
commercially in the mid-1970s and provided impetus for the improvements in theoretical
understanding, practice, and instrumentation that occurred in the late 1970s and 1980s
and led to the methods termed high-performance thin-layer chromatography (HPTLC)
and instrumental HPTLC. Centrifugally accelerated preparative layer chromatography
(PLC) and overpressured layer chromatography (OPLC), which are the major forced-
flow planar chromatographic techniques, were introduced in the late 1970s.
These and other high-performance and quantitative methods caused a renaissance in
the field of TLC that is reflected in this Handbook. Although the major use of TLC will
probably continue to be as a general low-cost and low-technology qualitative and
screening method in laboratories worldwide, there is no doubt that TLC will continue to
evolve and grow in the new millennium as a highly selective, sensitive, quantitative,
rapid, and automated technique for analysis of all varieties of samples and analytes and
for preparative separations. To keep abreast of this inevitable progress in TLC, the
biennial reviews of advances in theory, practice, and applications by Sherma, the most
recent of which was published in 2002 (11), are indispensable.
The basic parameter used to describe migration in TLC is the Rf value, where
The classic Van Deemter equation and its modifications have been used to describe zone
spreading in GC and HPLC in terms of eddy diffusion, molecular diffusion, and mass
transfer. The efficiency of a zone in HPTLC is given by the equation
where N is the number of theoretical plates, Zf is the distance of solvent migration, and
Wb is the diameter of the zone (29). In contrast to column chromatography, in which all
solutes move the same distance, separated components migrate different distances in
TLC, and their zones are broadened to varying degrees. Therefore, N is dependent on the
substance migrating as well as on the migration distance, and efficiency must be reported
in terms of a compound with a specific Rf value such as 0.5 or 1.0.
Separation efficiency and capacity in TLC were discussed by Poole (13). Efficiency is
limited by less than optimal velocity of the mobile phase driven by capillary forces,
leading to zone broadening that is largely dominated by molecular diffusion. Mobile-
phase velocity decreases approximately quadratically with migration distance, resulting
in the migration of zones through regions of varying efficiency and the need to specify
plate height for the layer as an average value. For sorbents with narrow particle size
range, solvent front velocity is greater for coarse-particle layers than for layers with fine
particles (30). It has also been shown that for RP layers with bonded long-chain alkyl
groups, mobile phases with larger percentages of water will ascend very slowly, requiring
plates to be prepared from particles with a larger diameter (10–13 µm) than those used for
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 7
the usual HP layers (5 µm) or from sorbents with a lower degree of surface modification.
Polar-bonded sorbents, such as cyano or amino, are wetted by aqueous solvents (30).
Guiochon and coworkers (31–35) showed that for capillary flow TLC on fine-particle
(HP) layers, zone broadening is controlled by the size of the sorbent particles for short
migration distances and molecular diffusion for long migration distances. For large-
particle sorbent layers, the packing and slow mass transfer processes can both contribute
to broadened, irregularly shaped zones. High plate numbers can be generated on layers
with relatively large particles only with long migration distances, especially for solutes
with large diffusion coefficients. HPTLC layers produce the highest efficiency for short
migration distances of 5–6 mm, and efficiency eventually is poorer than for TLC as the
migration distance increases and molecular diffusion overtakes zone center separation to
become the limiting factor. Longer solvent front migration distances require layers with a
larger particle size to obtain a reasonable range of mobile-phase velocities and total
number of theoretical plates (13, 24). The results of these studies indicate that HPTLC
plates can produce more compact zones in a shorter development distance, increasing the
speed and detection limits of the zones. About 5000 theoretical plates can be obtained for
a 5–7 cm development on HPTLC plates, whereas a development distance of
approximately 15 cm is needed to obtain this number of plates for a layer with larger
particles (30). The experimental zone capacity for baseline separated peaks in a
chromatogram resulting from capillary controlled flow is about 12–14, and this is not
strongly dependent on the average particle size of the layer (13). Zone capacity for
forced-flow development is 30–40; for capillary controlled flow automated multiple
development (AMD), 30–40; and for two-dimensional (2-D) capillary flow,
approximately 100.
An equation (36) for resolution (Rs) of two zones in TLC by a single ascending
development is
where and are the capacity factors for the two solutes to be separated and N is the
number of theoretical plates. The subscript 2 refers to the zone with the higher Rf value.
As in the analogous resolution equation for HPLC, this equation includes terms related to
the efficiency of the layer, the selectivity of the TLC system, and the capacity of the
system (the zone positions on the layer). Resolution increases with the square root of the
layer efficiency (N), which depends linearly on the Rf value. In terms of zone position,
studies have shown that maximum resolution is obtained in the Rf range of 0.2–0.5 (30).
The most effective means for increasing resolution on a TLC or HPTLC layer with the
usual capillary flow, one-dimensional single development is to improve selectivity by
variation of the mobile phase, the choice of which is aided by systematic optimization
methods such as simplex, PRISMA, and others that have been developed (37) (see Chap.
3). Other approaches for increasing resolution include the use of capillary flow with
multiple or two-dimensional development or forced-flow development.
The foregoing discussion applies to capillary flow TLC, in which the migration
velocity of the mobile phase through the layer is controlled by capillary forces and
decreases as development distance increases (38). The optimum velocity necessary for
maximum efficiency is not realized in capillary flow TLC. In forced-flow planar
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 8
B. Sample Preparation
Sample preparation for TLC is covered in Chapter 4 of Ref. 1 with an emphasis on
biological samples. The only chapter on sample preparation specifically for TLC was
written by Sherma (45), but because of its date it does not contain modern methods. A
review paper on sample preparation for chromatographic analysis of plant material (46)
and two reports on instruments for sample preparation (47, 48) contain information on the
newest methods. Sections on sample preparation related to specific compound types will
be found in most of the applications chapters in Part II of this Handbook.
If the analyte is present in low concentration in a complex sample such as biological or
plant material, then extraction, isolation, and concentration procedures must usually
precede TLC. Because layers are not reused, it is often possible to spot cruder samples
than could be injected into an HPLC column, including samples containing irreversibly
sorbed impurities. On the other hand, any impurities that would comigrate with the
analyte and adversely affect its detection or cause a distorted or trailing analyte zone must
be removed prior to TLC. Isolation and/or preconcentration procedures for TLC are
similar to those used for GC and HPLC and include Soxhlet extraction (49), sonication
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 10
extraction (50), supercritical fluid extraction (SFE), and SPE. Purification of extracts is
accomplished by methods such as solvent partitioning, column chromatography,
desalting, and deproteinization.
and extractable into organic solvents at low pH. Basic compounds are extracted into
organic solvents at high pH and into water in their salt forms at low pH. In practice, the
pH should be at least two units below the pKa of an acid and two units above the pKa of a
base in order to have a large enough fraction of uncharged molecules to allow efficient
extraction into organic solvents. As an example, the mycotoxin patulin was determined in
apples, apple concentrate, and apple juice by extraction with ethyl acetate, cleanup by
partition with 1.5% sodium carbonate solution, and silica gel TLC-densitometry (55).
Other uses of liquid-liquid extraction in sample preparation are to remove oils, fats,
and lipids from samples if these compounds will interfere with subsequent TLC and to
concentrate sample solutions prior to spotting.
The sorbents available from Varian in their Bond Elute columns are illustrative of the
products of other SPE product manufacturers. These include the following.
Nonpolar extraction: C18, octadecyl; C8, octyl; C2, ethyl; CH, cyclohexyl;
PH, phenyl; CNE, end-capped cyanopropyl
Polar extraction: CN, cyanopropyl; 2OH, diol; SI, silica; NH2,
aminopropyl
Cation-exchange extraction: SCX, benzenesulfonic acid (strong); PRS,
propylsulfonic acid (strong); CBA, carboxylic acid (weak)
Anion-exchange extraction: SAX, quaternary amine (strong); PSA,
primary/secondary amine (pKa 10.1, 10.9); NH2, aminopropyl (weak);
DEA, diethylaminopropyl (weak)
Varian also supplies a covalent extraction phase (PBA, phenylboronic acid) for
nucleotides, nucleosides, carbohydrates, and catecholamines and specialty phases for
determination of grease, oils, fats, phenols, PAHs, organic acids, tricyclics,
benzodiazepines, Pharmaceuticals, explosives, pesticides, and neutral, basic, and acidic
drugs. Bond Elute sorbents are supplied in 50 mg to 10 g weights in cartridges up to 60
mL in volume.
Figure 1 shows a Speedisk (J.T.Baker) Positive Pressure Processor for semiautomated
elution of 1,3, and 6 mL SPE columns in batches of 1–48 samples. Totally automated
SPE systems are also available commercially (47).
SPE is used to concentrate solutes from dilute solution, e.g., to collect nonpolar
organic constituents on C18 cartridges. The analytes are recovered by elution from the
column with a few milliliters of an appropriate solvent and spotted for TLC. The
concentration factor obtained for this method, which has been termed “trace enrichment,”
is the ratio of the sample volume to the elution volume. SPE can also be used to purify
concentrated solvent extracts in place of classical large columns that require up to
hundreds of milliliters of elution solvents. A sequence of eluents of increasing strength
can be used to elute compounds with different polarities in different frac-
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 13
The following is an abbreviated guide to the SPE of different classes of sample analytes:
elution with the sample buffer and with an organic solvent, if necessary.
The analyte is eluted with a buffer at least 2 units above the analyte pKa, a
buffer of pH <2.8 for the CBA column, or a buffer of high ionic strength
(>0.1 M). Addition of an organic modifier such as methanol may improve
analyte recovery.
Examples of applications of SPE prior to TLC analysis include analysis for pesticides in
fruits and vegetables according to the official German multimethod S19 using SPE on
silica gel and amino cartridges prior to HPTLC with gradient elution AMD (60);
oxygenated cholesterol derivatives in plasma using silica gel SPE (61); quinoline and
quinuclidine alkaloids in pharmaceutical preparations using cation-exchange SPE (62);
rutin in glycerinic plant extracts using Envi-18 (Supelco) cartridges (63); and aflatoxins
in a variety of foods using phenyl, silica, C18, and Florisil-C18 cartridges (64). A strategy
for choosing SPE cartridge elution solvents based on the PRISMA TLC mobile-phase
optimization procedure was demonstrated for extraction of furocoumarin isomers and
flavonoid glycosides from medicinal and aromatic plants (65).
The use of immunoaffinity columns for sample cleanup is among the newest sample
preparation procedures. Immunoaffinity cleanup was used after methanol extraction for
determination of aflatoxins B-1, B-2, G-1, and G-2 in various food matrices by TLC-
densitometry (66).
Of the current sample preparation methods (46, 48), only SPE (above) and SEE have
had substantial use in combination with TLC. Automated Soxhlet extraction, microwave-
assisted extraction (MAE), and accelerated solvent extraction (ASE) have good potential
for preparing solid samples for TLC analysis, but published methods have not yet
appeared. Stahl first interfaced SEE with TLC in 1977, and there has been increasing
interest in developing new methods in recent years. Examples of SFE-TLC analyses
reported include cyanizine herbicide in soil (67); flavonoids in Scutellariae radix (68);
aloin and aloe-emodin in consumable aloe products (69); semivolatile compounds in
cassia and cinnamon (70); and residues of 20 pesticides of multiple classes in soil (71).
Hydroperoxides in combustion products were separated from solid matrices using SEE
with on-line transfer to TLC plates (72).
spotting for TLC (73). The ion retardation resin AG 11 A8 (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc.)
and mixed bed cation/anion-exchange resins (e.g., Bio-Rad AG 501) have been used
successfully for desalting samples prior to TLC.
7. Deproteinization
When proteins may interfere with TLC analysis, they must be removed by
deproteinization procedures. A suitable procedure for an approximate 50 µL sample of
serum involves addition of 100 µL of methanol to precipitate the protein followed by
shaking and centrifugation of the mixture to obtain a clear supernatant. The technique has
been used to deproteinize biological fluids prior to their analysis for drugs (74). Proteins
in samples such as serum, urine, tissue, and milk can be precipitated by addition of
trichloroacetic acid (75), perchloric acid, or sulfosalicylic acid followed by centrifugation
and removal of the supernatant, which may or may not require further cleanup prior to
TLC. Protein removal from various types of samples has also been carried out by pH
modification, denaturation with chaotropic agents or organic solvents, addition of a
compound that competes for binding sites, and the use of restricted-access media.
8. Derivatization
The preparation of derivatives in TLC was reviewed by Edwards (76), who documented
the application of derivatization techniques to a wide range of compounds including
amino acids, steroids, drugs, and environmental pollutants. Fluorescent derivatives for
TLC were reviewed by Wintersteiger (77).
One of the major advantages of TLC is the use of derivatization postchromatography
for the purpose of zone detection. This is normally achieved by spraying the layer with
(or dipping it into) a solution of an appropriate reagent or reagents and then drying or
heating to complete the reaction. Hundreds of such reagents have been described to cause
zones to absorb visible or ultraviolet radiation or to become fluorescent for organic
species in general or to react selectively with particular compound classes (see Sec.
VIII.A). Examples include spraying with ninhydrin reagent to produce purple spots for
amino acids, or with a solution of diazonium reagent (prepared from p-nitroaniline, HCl,
and sodium nitrite) to detect phenols and aromatic amines as orange zones.
Postchromatographic derivatization allows the reaction of all standards and samples
simultaneously under the same conditions, and the separation properties of the solutes are
not changed by the reaction.
Prechromatographic derivatization is advantageous when the parent compound is too
volatile for TLC but the derivative is less volatile, the derivative is easier to separate from
other sample constituents, the derivative has greater stability (e.g., resistance to oxidation
or decomposition), the derivative is more successfully extracted and/or cleaned up, or the
derivative is more sensitively and/or selectively detected. A disadvantage of
prederivatization is that the introduction of usually high molecular weight functional
groups into the derivative may equalize the chromatographic properties of similar
substances and make separation more difficult. In addition, prederivatization of each
sample prior to its application can be tedious and time-consuming, by-products of the
reaction may interfere with the TLC separation, or the presence of excess reagent may
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 17
9. Evaporation of Solutions
Most sample preparation procedures require concentration or evaporation to dryness of
sample extracts, combined partition solvent batches, or column effluents. It is important
that evaporations be carried out without loss or degradation of the analyte, and studies
may be required to determine which of the available methods is best to use in each
particular situation.
A common method of concentration uses a rotary evaporator with an attached round-
bottomed flask. A helpful variation is to place the solution in a Kuderna-Danish
evaporative concentrator flask with attached lower calibrated tube (Kontes), so that the
concentrate ends up in the tube and can be applied to the layer without transfer.
Nitrogen blowdown is the recommended method for concentration of small volumes
of volatile organic solvents. Gas is supplied to the sample, held in a tube or vial, through
Tygon tubing connected to a glass capillary. The sample is warmed in a 40–60°C water
bath to speed evaporation. Various commercial devices that allow simultaneous
blowdown of multiple samples are available.
with a high boiling point or polarity are difficult to remove from the sorbent during
application. If a small amount of solvent is retained after application, it can adversely
affect the separation by causing zone spreading or deformation or a different Rf value.
Care must be taken, however, because hot air used to dry solvent at the origin can
decompose labile substances on the surface of an active sorbent. A volatile sample
solvent promotes the production of small, regular initial zones, but containers must be
kept tightly sealed except when filling the sample application device.
Sorbent materials and layers are described in Chapter 4 of this Handbook and Chapter 3
of Ref. 1 and in a review paper (88) and an encyclopedia article (89).
A great variety of commercial precoated layers are available for TLC on glass, plastic,
or aluminum foil supports in 20×20 cm size. The most common layer thickness for
analytical TLC is 250 µm, but cellulose and polyamide layers are often 100 µm. For
mechanical stability, 0.1–20% of a gypsum (calcium sulfate), starch, or organic polymer
binder [e.g., poly(acrylic acid)] is added to the sorbent slurry from which the layer is cast.
Plates with gypsum binder, which are known as “soft layers” and are designated with a
G, must be used with greater care than “hard” organic polymer-bound layers to avoid
abrasive conditions. Gypsum binder allows the use of sulfuric acid charring techniques,
and sample zones can be easily scraped from the glass support for subsequent elution of
compounds from the sorbent. Binder-free silica gel plates containing a small amount of
colloidal silica to aid layer adherence are also available. For detection of zones by
fluorescence quenching, plates are impregnated with indicator compounds (e.g.,
manganese-activated zinc silicate) that cause the layer to fluoresce uniformly when
exposed to 254 or 366 nm UV light. Glass is the most inert support material, and its
planarity is advantageous when the layer will be scanned for quantitative analysis.
Procedures and devices for preparing homemade plates are described in Chapter 3 of the
third edition of Fried and Sherma (1). Homemade plates, the quality of which is almost
never equivalent to that of commercial plates, are rarely made except when a needed
layer is not available or cost is a major consideration.
To remove extraneous materials that may be present due to manufacture, shipping, or
storage conditions, it is advisable to preclean plates before use. This has often been done
by predevelopment to the top with dichloromethane-methanol (1:1) or the mobile phase
to be used for the analysis. The following two-step HPTLC plate cleaning method has
been proposed (90) for surface residue removal in critical applications when optimum
sensitivity is required for detection and quantification: Develop the plate to the top with
methanol, air dry for 5 min, totally immerse the plate in a tank filled with methanol, air
dry for 5 min, oven dry for 15 min at 80°C, and cool in a desiccator before use. The
routine activation of adsorbents at 70–80°C for 30 min, or at a higher temperature, is
often proposed in the literature, but this treatment is not usually necessary for commercial
plates unless they have been exposed to high humidity. RP plates do not require
activation prior to use. Suggestions for initial treatment, prewashing, activation, and
conditioning of different types of glass- and foil-backed layers have been published (91).
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 19
A. Adsorbents
Silica gel is by far the most frequently used layer material for adsorption TLC. Some
characteristic properties, including porosity, flow resistance, particle size, optimum
velocity, and plate height, have been tabulated for three popular brands of silica gel TLC
and HPTLC plates (38). Separations take place primarily by hydrogen bonding or dipole
interaction with surface silanol groups by using lipophilic mobile phases, and analytes are
separated into groups according to their polarity. Typical properties of TLC silica gel are
a silanol group level of approximately 8 µmol/m2; pore diameter of 40, 60, 80, or 100 Å;
and specific pore volumes of 0.5–2.0 mL (89). Specific differences in the types and
distributions of silanol groups for individual sorbents may result in selectivity
differences, and separations will not be exactly reproducible on different brands of silica
gel layers (25). Other TLC adsorbents include aluminum oxide (alumina), magnesium
oxide [used mostly for carotenoid pigment separations (92)], magnesium silicate
(Florisil) (93), polyamide, and kieselguhr (94).
Alumina (95) is a polar adsorbent that is similar to silica gel in its general
chromatographic properties, but it has an especially high adsorption affinity for carbon-
carbon double bonds and better selectivity toward aromatic hydrocarbons and their
derivatives. The alumina surface is more complex than silica gel, containing hydroxyl
groups, aluminum cations, and oxide anions, and pH and hydration level alter separation
properties (25). It is available in basic (pH 9–10), neutral (7–8), and acid (4–4.5) forms.
The specific surface area of aluminas range from 50 to 250 m2/g (89). The high density of
hydroxyl groups (~13 µmol/m2) leads to a significant degree of water adsorption, and
alumina layers are usually activated by heating for 10 min at 120°C before use (89).
Poly amides 6 (Nylon 6; polymeric caprolactam) and 11 (polymeric undecanamide)
have surface—CO—NH—groups and show high affinity and selectivity for polar
compounds that can form hydrogen bonds with the exposed carbonyl groups. However,
depending on the type of analyte and mobile phase, three separation mechanisms can
operate with poly amide: adsorption, partition (normal- and re versed-phase), and ion
exchange. This has led to separations of compounds from a wide array of chemical
classes such as amino acids, phenols, phenolic compounds, carboxylic acids,
cyclodextrins (96), coumarins, and flavonoids (97). Polyamide has been impregnated
with various metal salts to improve the separation of sulfonamides (98). Separation
numbers for a series of higher fatty acids and alcohols were determined to be 8–12 for
polyamide and 4–9 for cellulose (99).
Homemade mixed sorbent layers have been used by various workers to increase the
resolution of certain samples compared to that obtained on the separate phases. Binary
layers that have been reported include silica gel-alumina (100), kieselguhr-alumina,
alumina-calcium sulfate, mag-nesia-kieselguhr, cellulose-silica gel, poly amide-silica gel,
polyamide-kieselguhr, poly amidecellulose, poly amide-glass powder (similar to silica
gel), silica gel-kieselguhr (101), and alumina-cellulose (102). The properties of these
mixed layers are usually somewhere between those of the two separate phases but are
impossible to predict or explain with certainty. Information on and applications of mixed
layers are mostly contained in older standard TLC texts and reviews.
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 20
C. High-Performance Layers
High-performance (HP) plates (10×10 or 10×20 cm) are produced from sorbents having
narrow pore and particle size distributions and an apparent particle size of 5–7 µm instead
of 8–10 µm for 20×20 cm TLC plates (23). Layer thickness is usually 100–200 µm for
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 21
HPTLC plates compared to 250 µm for TLC, but ultrathin (10 µm) layers of monolithic
silica gel have recently been described (110b).
High-performance layers are more efficient, leading to tighter zones, better resolution,
and more sensitive detection. Flow resistance is higher (migration time per centimeter is
slower), but overall development time is shorter because smaller migration distances are
used for HPTLC than for TLC (typically 3–8 cm versus 10–16 cm). The low flow rate
through fine-particle HPTLC plates led to the development of forced-flow methods.
Sample sizes are generally 0.2–1 µL for HPTLC and 1–3 µL for TLC, although the upper
levels of these ranges can be exceeded when spotting with the Linomat instrument or
using preadsorbent layers.
Silica gel is the most widely used type of HP plate, but other HP layers, including
bonded phases, are also commercially available. Among the newest layers are Merck’s
TLC and HPTLC silica gel 60 plates (60 Å pore size) with imprinted identification codes
for use in documentation when analyses are performed according to good manufacturing
practice (GMP) and good laboratory practice (GLP) standards (52). Merck also sells two
new HPTLC layers with spherical silica gel: HPTLC plates with LiChrospher Si60F254S
(0.2 mm layer thickness, 7–8 µm mean particle size), and HPTLC aluminum sheets with
Si60F254S Raman (0.1 mm layer thickness and 3–4 µm particle size). Layers with
spherical particles offer better efficiency, spot capacity, and detection limits than those
with nonspherical particles. The silica gel matrix on the sheets is designed to have the
least possible spectral interference for direct coupling of TLC with Raman spectrometry
(see Sec. VIII.B).
TLC and HPTLC are compared in Chapter 2 of Ref. 1.
D. Bonded Layers
Reversed-phase TLC, in which the stationary phase is less polar than the mobile phase,
was originally carried out on silica gel or kieselguhr layers impregnated with a solution of
paraffin, squalane, silicone oil, octanol, or oleyl alcohol. Analtech sells RP plates with
hydrocarbon liquid phase physically adsorbed onto the surface of a silica gel layer.
Impregnated plates of this kind require the use of aqueous and polar organic mobile
phases saturated with the stationary liquid, and they cannot tolerate the use of nonpolar
organic solvents, which will strip the coating from the support.
Bonded phases with functional groups chemically bonded to silica gel eliminate
stripping of the stationary liquid from the support by incompatible mobile phases.
Alkylsiloxane-bonded silica gel with CH3, C2H5, C8H17, and C18H37 (111) functional
groups are most widely used for RP-TLC of organic compounds (polar and nonpolar
homologous compounds and aromatics), weak acids and bases after ion suppression with
buffered mobile phases, and strong acids and bases using ion-pair reagents. Layers from
different companies but with the same bonded group can have different percentages of
carbon loading and give different results. The hydrophobic nature of the layer increases
with both the chain length and the degree of loading of the groups. Alkylsiloxanebonded
layers with a high level of surface modification are incompatible with highly aqueous
mobile phases and are used mainly for normal-phase separations of low-polarity
compounds (25). Problems of wettability and lack of migration of mobile phases with
high proportions of water have been solved by adding 3% NaCl to the mobile phase
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 22
(Whatman layers) or preparing “water-wettable” layers with a slightly larger particle size,
less exhaustive surface bonding, and a modified binder. The latter layers with a low
degree of surface coverage and more residual silanol groups exhibit partially hydrophilic
as well as hydrophobic character and can be used for RP-TLC and NP-TLC. Chemically
bonded phenyl layers are also classified as re versed-phase, but their use has only seldom
been reported in the literature.
Hydrophilic bonded silica gel containing cyano (112), amino (113), or diol (114)
groups bonded to silica gel through a trimethylene chain [—(CH2)3—] are compatible
with aqueous mobile phases and exhibit multimodal mechanisms. Polarity varies as
follows: unbonded silica> diol-silica>amino-silica>cyano-silica>reversed-phase
materials (89). Cyano layers can act as a normal or reversed phase, depending on the
characteristics of the mobile phase, with properties similar to a low-capacity silica gel
and a short-chain alkylsiloxane bonded layer, respectively (25). Amino layers are used in
NP and weak anion-exchange modes. In NP-TLC, compounds are retained on amino
layers by hydrogen bonding as with silica gel, but the selectivity is different. Charged
substances such as nucleotides or sulfonic acids can be separated by ion exchange using
acidic mobile phases. Although there is limited retention in RP-TLC, the separation of
oligonucleotides on amino layers based on differences in hydrophobic properties of the
compounds has been reported. Diol plates can operate with NP- or RP-TLC mechanisms,
depending on the mobile phase and solutes. Polar compounds show reasonable retention
by hydrogen bond and dipole-type interactions in the former mode, and in the RP mode
retention is low but higher than with amino layers. A study of mixed mechanisms on
cyano, amino, and diol layers was reported (115).
The newest approach is the preparation of molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) for
use as chiral stationary phases in TLC. For example, the direct separation of enantiomers
of adrenergic drugs on MIPs of (−)-pseudoephedrine and (−)-norephedrine was
demonstrated as a rapid, sensitive, and reliable method for quality control of these
compounds (121a). Beta-blocking drugs and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have
also been separated on molecularly imprinted chiral layers (121b).
Enantiomeric separations by TLC have been reviewed (122–124), and this topic is
covered in Chapter 17 of this Handbook.
F. Miscellaneous Layers
Cellulose has been surface-modified to produce RP (acetylated cellulose), weakly basic
anion-exchange [polyethyleneimine (PEI), aminoethyl (AE), diethylaminoethyl (DEAE),
and ECTEOLA], or weakly acidic cation-exchange [cellulose phosphate (P) and
carboxymethyl-cellulose (CM)] layers. These cellulose exchangers have open structures
that can be penetrated by large hydrophilic molecules such as proteins, enzymes, and
nucleic acids.
Polygram Ionex-25 precoated sheets (Macherey-Nagel) are polyester sheets coated
with a mixture of silica, a polystyrene-based strong acid cation-exchange or strong base
anion-exchange resin, and a binder. The cation exchanger has been used to separate and
identify amino acids in biological samples (125), and both are suited to inorganic ion
separations. A large variety of inorganic ion exchangers, such as titanium(IV) silicate
(126), have been prepared and used mostly for metal ion separations.
Size-exclusion gel TLC has been carried out on dextran (Sephadex) gels with
controlled pore sizes. These layers, which are used to estimate molecular weights and
separate and determine biological macromolecules (e.g., enzymes and serum proteins),
are used in totally swollen condition and developed continuously in the descending
direction.
Combination layers with a C18 strip adjacent to a silica gel layer (Whatman Multi-K
CS5) or a silica gel strip adjacent to a C18 layer (SC5) are available for 2-D TLC with
diverse mechanisms (RP phase and adsorption).
G. Preparative Layers
Preparative silica gel plates are available precoated with a layer thickness of 500–2000
µm. Particle size is typically 5–40 µm with a 25 µm average, but Mallinckrodt-Baker
manufactures a preparative plate with 5 µm spherical particles. Analtech offers a unique
tapered layer for capillary flow preparative separations (see Sec. V.D) and precast
HPTLC silica gel GF rotors (Fig. 2) with 1000–8000 µm nominal thickness for use with
the Cyclograph and Chromatotron centrifugal forced-flow PLC instruments (see Sec. XI).
V. APPLICATION OF SAMPLES
Samples and standards prepared for TLC are dissolved in an appropriate solvent at a
concentration that will allow eventual detection of the solutes of interest. Typically 1–5
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 24
B. Application of Spots
Instruments and techniques for a sample application are described in Chapter 5 of this
Handbook and Chapters of Ref. 1.
Samples and standards are applied to the layer as small round spots by using one of a
variety of application devices, for example, a wooden stick with flattened end, glass
capillary pipet, or syringe with a 90° needle tip. Drummond microcap micropipets,
available in virtually any size between 0.1 and 200 µL (Fig. 3), and 10–50 µL digital
microdispensers (Fig. 4) are highly recommended for manual applications for both
qualitative and quantitative TLC. For linear or circular HPTLC, initial zone diameter
should not exceed 1.5 mm for maximum resolution. Spots for HPTLC can be applied to
an exact layer position using a 100 or 200 nL Pt-Ir pipet held in a mechanical device that
electromagnetically brings the pipet into reproducible contact with the layer without
surface damage (Camag Nanomat). Camag and Desaga also supply completely
automated devices with which selectable volumes of samples and standards are applied
from vials
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 26
C. Formation of Bands
Bands or streaks of sample are applied manually, are applied automatically with the
Camag Linomat, are formed automatically during development by use of plates with a
preadsorbent or concentrating area (see Sec. IV.B), or are produced by predevelopment
on conventional plates. Manual application essentially involves placing a contiguous
series of spots from a syringe or micropipet side by side. Even with practice, it is difficult
to do this uniformly and reproducibly on a conventional plate. The Linomat, which is
based on movement of the plate underneath a fixed syringe from which a nitrogen
atomizer sprays the sample onto the origin at a constant rate, is advantageous because
larger sample volumes [40 µL or more (127)] can be concentrated during the application
process compared to other HPTLC devices, and variable volumes of the same standard
solution can be applied for calibration in densitometry.
In using preadsorbent plates, samples are spotted or streaked onto the preadsorbent
area, and narrow, accurately aligned, homogeneous bands form automatically at the
interface with the sorbent upon development. When laned or channeled plates are used,
the length of the band is confined within the channel. Sample application is fast and
simple for relatively large volumes (up to~50 µL for TLC and 25 µL for HPTLC). High
efficiency can be obtained for HPTLC by spotting larger volumes of dilute solutions
rather than nanoliter volumes of highly concentrated solutions. Crude samples can be
directly spotted, and salts and other impurities may be retained in the preadsorbent and
not interfere with sample resolution or detection. Figure 5 shows the sequence of zone
separation in various stages of development on a preadsorbent TLC plate.
The final method for forming initial bands is to concentrate a large spot into a line by
partial predevelopment of the layer with a strong solvent in which all components move
with the solvent front. After the plate is dried, it is developed with the mobile phase
needed to provide resolution.
It has been shown that bands give sharper separations and lower detection limits than
spots and are advantageous for densitometry because the length of the scanner light beam
can be made shorter than the length of the band (one-half to two-thirds of the original
band length). This method of aliquot scanning minimizes the need to exactly position the
zone within the beam.
Selection of mobile phases is discussed in Chapter 6 of Ref. 1 and in Ref. 25. Criteria and
strategies for optimization of mobile phases are covered in Chapter 3 of this Handbook,
Chapter 3 of the previous edition of this handbook written by a different author, and Refs.
25, 128, 129, and 130. Solvent systems for different compound classes are given in the
respective applications chapters in Part II of this Handbook and in the 29 CRC Handbook
of Chromatography volumes edited by J.Sherma and G.Zweig between 1972 and 1993.
The flexibility of TLC relative to HPLC is enhanced by the greater choice of solvents
available for preparing TLC mobile phases. The choice of solvents for HPLC is limited
by the re-quirements for their chemical and physical properties imposed by the nature of
the method. HPLC is a closed system operated under high pressure with on-line
detection, most often using a UV monitor, and the column is continually reused. Solvent
components with high vapor pressure (e.g., ethyl ether) or UV absorbance (benzene) or
those that might degrade the column (NaOH) are difficult to use in HPLC but are readily
applicable to TLC.
Single-development, capillary flow TLC typically produces <5000 theoretical plates
and a zone capacity for baseline-resolved peaks of 10–14 (38). Therefore, selectivity,
which is established by the choice of layer and mobile phase, is the most critical
parameter in achieving the required separation. Mobile phases for TLC are selected in
relation to the nature of the layer and mixture to be separated. The strength (polarity) of
the mobile phase influences the Rf range of the solutes, while the chemical classification
of the solvent components determines the interactions and selectivity of the system.
Single solvents and solvent mixtures have been classified according to elution strength in
relation to a particular sorbent. These “eluotropic series” are used along with knowledge
of the solubility (polarity) characteristics of the mixture to select the chromatographic
system to be used. As polarity increases, a solvent becomes stronger (increases Rf values)
in normal-phase TLC, whereas solvents that are strong for RP-TLC are less polar.
Retention in liquid chromatography is a complex process involving solute interactions in
both the mobile and stationary phases. Assorted models of varying complexity have been
proposed to attempt to explain and predict retention and separations, but the exact nature
of the mechanisms is still incompletely understood (see Sec. 4.5 in Ref. 131 for an
excellent discussion). Because of the similarity of results in comparable TLC and HPLC
systems (Sec. XIII), analogous retention mechanisms are probably operative in the two
methods.
Mobile phases are most often selected by consulting literature sources to find those
that were previously used for separation of the compounds of interest or similar
compounds. This is followed by a trial-and-error approach to modify the mobile phase for
the particular layer and other local conditions being used, if necessary.
Systematic and computer-assisted approaches to mobile-phase selection and
optimization have been developed based on solvent strength and selectivity parameters.
Mixtures of solvents that differ in their interaction mechanisms and selectivity effects are
used in these procedures, ranging from simple binary solvent combinations to mixtures of
three solvents with a fourth weak, non-selective strength-adjusting solvent. Snyder has
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 30
arranged solvents in eight selectivity groups and within a selectivity triangle to simplify
the systematic design of mobile-phase mixtures (see Ref. 25 for descriptions). Some of
the strategies for solvent optimization are the PRISM A method (37, 132), the mixture
design approach with the solvation parameter model (25, 133), a thermodynamic model
(134), the Snyder—Soczewinski model (134), simplex (37), quality factor (37), window
diagrams (25), overlapping resolution maps (25), and iterative procedures (25). The
PRISMA model, which is a three-dimensional geometrical design that correlates the
solvent strength and selectivity of the mobile phase, is the most successful and most
widely used. It involves selection of three to five solvents for construction of the model
plus a low, constant concentration of a modifier to improve the separation and reduce
tailing, if necessary. A structured trial-and-error approach is used that is described in
detail for use in TLC in Ref. 135. A fully automatic method for selection of mobile
phases for silica gel TLC was described for tetrahydroisoquinolines and corresponding 1-
ones using LSChrom software based on the Snyder theory (135a).
A. Linear Development
Development of a TLC plate is most often carried out in the ascending mode by
immersing the lower edge of the plate in the mobile phase in a rectangular glass chamber
(N-chamber) (see A and B in Fig. 6). Chambers made from pressed glass, as shown in
Fig. 6, or lightweight sheet glass are available commercially. “Saturated” or
“unsaturated” chamber conditions can be used for development. In the former case, the
mobile phase is poured into a chamber lined with a filter paper sheet or saturation pad,
and the chamber is covered for a period of time (typically 15 min) to allow vapor
equilibration. The chamber is quickly opened, the plate with applied initial zones is
inserted, and the tank is covered again. For development under unsaturated conditions,
mobile phase is poured into a chamber containing no paper liner, the plate is inserted, and
the chamber is covered immediately. The chamber becomes progressively more saturated
with increasing duration of the separation. Unsaturated chambers usually result in higher
Rf values and lower efficiency (38).
Conditions inside TLC chambers during development with solvent mixtures are
complicated because of the presence of three phases: the layer, liquid mobile phase, and
vapor. Evaporation and condensation processes continually occur, and mobile-phase
gradients are formed because the more polar components will be sorbed preferentially by
the hydrophilic layer, causing the remaining solvent to be depleted in this solvent (solvent
demixing). These gradients, which are not deliberately chosen or controlled as are
mobile-phase gradients in HPLC (and occasionally in TLC; see Chap. 6), are detrimental
to reproducibility of analyses but cause areas of different selectivity along the length of
the layer that can be exploited for improving separations. Development times,
separations, reproducibilities, and Rf values can be very different for the same systems in
saturated and unsaturated N-chambers. Different types and sizes of developing chambers
and small changes in the mobile-phase composition and/or temperature and relative
humidity during development may cause dramatic changes in the retention characteristics
of the compounds to be separated (40). Development conditions must be controlled and
recorded if reproducible results are to be obtained from day to day in one laboratory or
between laboratories. Procedures for standardizing TLC results have been described (142,
143). The most reproducible ascending capillary flow development conditions for TLC
and HPTLC plates are achieved using the Camag Automatic Developing Chamber
(ADC).
The bottom of the Camag twin-trough N-chamber is bisected by a glass ridge running
along its center. It is used as a conventional saturated or unsaturated chamber by placing
mobile phase only on the side where the plate will be inserted (4–20 mL is used
depending on the plate size). In a second mode, one side is filled with mobile phase and
the plate is placed into the other, empty, side. After equilibration of the chamber space
and layer with vapors, development is started
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 33
C. Multiple Development
Thin-layer chromatography with multiple development often allows separation of
complex mixtures or closely related substances not resolvable with a single development.
The plate is repeatedly developed in the same direction, with the mobile phase dried
between runs. Each subsequent development achieves zone reconcentration as the trailing
edges of the zones move closer to the fronts, resulting in narrower bands and greater
efficiency, resolution, and sensitivity. The classic multiple development method involves
repeated development with the same mobile phase for the same distance. As an example
of its use, double development was required for silica gel HPTLC assay of potassium
salicylate in diuretic tablets and capsules (150).
Multiple development can also be performed with a change in the solvent composition
and/ or migration distance for each step in order to optimize the separation of certain
mixture components. Compounds that are difficult to separate require a large number of
developments with a selective solvent that initially produces low Rf values; maximum
zone center separation has been shown to occur when the zones have migrated 63.2% of
the development distance (151). Quantitative measurement can be made at the end of any
development stage when the different elements are separated optimally. The zone-
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 35
D. Continuous Development
Continuous development is another technique that increases separating power relative to
conventional ascending unidimensional development. The top end of the plate is
extended outside of the chamber so that mobile phase evaporates and its flow is
continuous. Weak solvents are used to increase selectivity, and development distances are
kept short so that development time does not become excessive. The method has been
used mostly with HPTLC plates, for which Regis makes the Short Bed/Continuous
Development (SB/CD) Chamber.
It has been shown that minimum analysis time is always shorter for continuous
development than for conventional development when conditions are analyzed (157).
Optimum conditions for the continuous TLC separation of steroids in terms of analysis
time, plate length, and mole fraction of a binary mobile phase were determined using the
overlapping resolution maps technique (158).
Although the SB/CD chamber is specified for use in the latest edition of the U.S.
Pharmacopeia (USP 24/NF 19, p. 1917), the method has little current use.
E. Two-Dimensional Development
In 2-D TLC, a sample is spotted in the corner of a layer and developed sequentially at
right angles using two mobile phases that provide complementary retention mechanisms,
with drying between the runs. With the correct choice of mobile phases, sample
components will be distributed over the entire surface of the layer, increasing resolving
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 36
power by almost the square of that obtained in a one-dimensional system. The zone
capacity will increase from 10–20 for capillary flow TLC to 100–250 for capillary flow
2-D TLC (30). Predicted zone capacity for 2-D TLC with forced flow or AMD is
approximately 1500 (13), but this has not been tested. If the same mobile phase is used in
both directions, or different mobile phases that result in differences in intensity rather
than true orthogonality, the zones become distributed along the diagonal between the two
development directions rather than over the whole surface, leading to a resolution factor
of only because of the increased migration distances for the sample. The use of
bilayer plates and chemically bonded layers that separate according to different
mechanisms depending upon the nature of the mobile phase (both described above), as
well as other types of specialized layers (see below), are advantageous for 2-D TLC.
Disadvantages of the 2-D method include difficulty with interpretation of results,
reduced reproducibility compared to one-dimensional TLC, poorer detection sensitivity
because of greater diffusion during two developments, and the inability to carry out
reliable in situ quantification because standards cannot be developed together in both
directions and slit-scanning densitometers are designed to measure zones in a single layer
track. Electronic scanning with a video densitometer is a possible solution, but routine,
accurate, and precise quantitative analyses of 2-D chromatograms have not been
demonstrated.
Computer-assisted methods were described for mobile-phase selection and
optimization of mixtures of eight pesticides (159) and 10 antihistamines (160) in 2-D
TLC.
Recent applications of 2-D TLC include the following separations: penicillium fungal
extract on a cyano-derivatized silica gel layer (161); opiates on HPTLC silica gel (162);
PAHs on C8 and diol mixed phases (163); fatty acids on urea- and silver nitrate-
impregnated silica gel for the first and second dimensions, respectively (164); parabens
and carboxylic acid additives in pharmaceutical formulations on silica gel, with paraffin
impregnation after the first run (165); and saponins on mechanically connected silica gel
and C18 plates (166). Overpressured development has been occasionally used in 2-D TLC
(167), and mass spectrometry to identify the separated zones (168).
Two-dimensional TLC along with multiple unidimensional, programmed multiple,
and automated multiple development were covered in an encyclopedia article (169).
this ring. From analytical TLC separations in saturated or unsaturated tanks, mobile
phases can be transferred via analytical ultramicro U-RPC and M-RPC (separation
distance 8 cm, average layer particle size 11 µm) to preparative U-RPC and M-RPC (10
cm, 14–15 µm), respectively, if the mobile-phase strength and selectivity are kept
constant. The sample is applied as a circle in the center of the layer. Preparative RPC is
covered in Chapter 11 of this Handbook.
Overpressured layer chromatography (OPLC) (see Chap. 7 in this Handbook) was
invented to overcome the changing velocity of the mobile phase in the plate and to
eliminate the vapor phase present in capillary development TLC. The process is as
follows (5): Samples are applied to the dry layer, which is placed into the pressurized
development chamber. The layer is tightly covered and is sealed on its sides by an elastic
membrane (plastic sheet), which is pressurized by an inert gas or water cushion. The
mobile phase is delivered directly to the layer by pumping at constant velocity through a
slit in the membrane.
Modes of OPLC include linear, two-directional, long-distance, and circular. The
delivery point of the mobile phase is varied for each of these. Use of commercial plates
with sealed edges prevents the mobile phase from running off the plate in the linear
mode. On-line operation for analysis of one sample involves mobile-phase flow from the
OPLC apparatus directly to an HPLC detector; the plate is dried after development and is
then scanned separately in off-line linear analysis of multiple samples. On-line OPLC is
most similar to HPLC, but linear off-line OPLC of up to 18 samples with a run distance
of 18 cm on a 20×20 cm plate is most commonly used. Two-directional OPLC is used
with less complex samples for separation of up to 70 samples over an 8 cm run distance.
Samples are applied on two parallel, vertical origin lines in the center of the layer, and
mobile phase enters from a channel in between and simultaneously develops the samples
toward the sides of the plate. Long-distance OPLC extends the migration distance by
employing three to five stacked plates with slits to direct mobile phase from one plate to
the next. Samples are spotted in a radial pattern around the center of the plate for circular
OPLC. Mobile phase enters at the center, and low Rf compounds are especially well
resolved in this mode. A statistical method of mobile-phase selection was developed
specifically for OPLC (170), and the PRISMA method can also be used with unsaturated
chambers for the initial trial-and-error experiments.
The latest instrument for analytical and semipreparative OPLC is the Personal Basic
System (BS) 50 (OPLC-NIT Engineering Ltd., Budapest, Hungary) (171). It consists
basically of a separation chamber and a liquid delivery system. The separation chamber
contains a holding unit, hydraulic unit, layer cassette, and drain valve, and there is a
pumping system to deliver the mobile phase and hydraulic liquid. The entire apparatus
and development process are computer-controlled, and external pressure (up to 50 bar),
mobile-phase flow rate and volume, and development time can be automatically
programmed. With this OPLC apparatus, minimum values of reduced plate height are
2.1–3.5, depending on the operating conditions and layer properties. The corresponding
range for a good HPLC column is 2.0–2.5, so efficiencies are comparable under optimum
conditions (39).
The principles, techniques, and instrumentation for OPLC are reviewed in Refs. 39
and 172.
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 38
G. Gradient Development
The three types of gradients that have been used the most in TLC are mobile phase,
stationary phase, and temperature. Planned mobile-phase gradients must be distinguished
from the natural, uncontrolled gradients resulting from solvent demixing during
development. AMD, mentioned in Section VII.C, involves development in a commercial
instrument with a “universal gradient” starting with the most polar (strongest) mobile
phase and becoming increasingly weaker in order to form focused, well-resolved zones.
The horizontal DS-Chamber (Chromdes, Lublin, Poland) is a Teflon sandwich
chamber that is often used with stepwise gradient development (increasing mobile-phase
strength) (173). The use of mobile-phase gradients was reported for separations of
pigments by RP- and NP-TLC (174, 175); phenolic acids on silica, propylamine, and diol
layers (176); and alkaloids on sodium bicarbonate-impregnated silica gel (177).
Strategies for computer-aided optimization of gradient elution programs were published
(178, 179).
Stationary-phase gradients involve a continuous or discontinuous change of sorbent
composition, and they are used much less than mobile-phase gradients. Discontinuous
gradients are produced by treating different layer areas with different reagents to alter the
separation mechanism or by casting layers with different sorbent regions. The latter can
be commercial bilayer plates (described above) or layers made by using a modified
sorbent spreader. As an example, 2-D TLC with a sorbent gradient (C18 and silica gel)
was applied to the analysis of saponins (166).
Most TLC is performed at room temperature in nonthermostatted chambers, but recent
use of temperature-controlled TLC by one research group has been reported. These
workers have described homemade and commercial devices that provide a temperature
gradient for separations of chiral and nonchiral compounds (180), technical problems
associated with temperature-controlled TLC (181), and studies of the interactions
between native cyclodextrins and n-alcohols (182) and the retention and separation of
cholesterol and bile acids (183) using thermostatted RP-TLC.
Gradient development in TLC is described in Chapter 6 of this Handbook.
Detection and qualitative evaluation are covered in Chapters 8 and 9, respectively, of Ref.
1, in Ref. 184, and in Chapter 8 of this Handbook.
ethanol with heating at 120°C (for lipids), 10% sulfuric acid in ethanol with heating for
2–3 min (general reagent), and fluorescamine (amino acids).
Methods for documentation of TLC results are described in Chapter 9 of Ref. 1 and
Chapter 8 of this Handbook. Procedures were described for true color
photodocumentation of 254 nm and 366 nm UV-irradiated chromatograms (231) and
optimized black-and-white and color photography of colored, fluorescent, and
fluorescence-quenched zones (232). A video image archival system made use of
integrating cameras (233). A system comprising a computer, digital image scanner, and
black-and-white and color printers was described for documenting visible TLC spots but
not those detected under UV light (234). Commercial photographic and video
documentation instrumentation for colored, fluorescent, and quenched zones is available
from commercial sources, including Camag (235, 236). Various paper brands were tested
for printing and color stability characteristics and the effects on archiving of
chromatograms produced from the Camag video system using an ink jet printer (237).
X. QUANTIFICATION
Quantitative TLC is the subject of Chapter 10 of Ref. 1. The theory and techniques of
densitometric TLC are elaborated in Chapter 10 of this Handbook, and instrumental
aspects of quantification are presented in Chapter 5. Quantification of lipids and
hydrocarbons and some other types of compounds has been carried out on rods of silica
gel or other sorbent with direct interfacing to a flame ionization detector (FID) (the
Chromarod or Iatroscan system). TLC-FID is covered in Chapter 13 and Chapter 19 on
hydrocarbons in Part II of this Handbook but not in this chapter.
A. Introduction
Visual comparison of the spot intensity of a definite sample aliquot with the intensities of
simultaneously developed reference spots containing known weights of analyte is a
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 44
simple, direct method for quantitative analysis. The method is only semiquantitative, with
accuracy and precision in the 10–30% range, but this level is often adequate for the
purpose intended. Visual comparison works best if amounts near the detection limit are
applied and the sample is closely bracketed by standards. Visual estimation is specified in
various pharmacopoeias for purity testing of both drug active raw materials and
formulated products (238).
B. Zone Elution
The zone elution method involves the following steps: drying the layer, locating the
separated analyte zone, scraping the portion of layer containing the analyte, collecting the
sorbent, eluting the analyte from the sorbent, and measuring against standards by an
independent microanalytical method such as solution absorption or fluorescence
spectrometry, GC, HPLC, or voltammetry.
The chromatogram is dried to remove the mobile phase, components of which might
intefere in the determinative step. The conditions of drying must not cause loss of the
analyte by volatility or decomposition. Zones are located by direct observation for
compounds that are naturally colored or fluorescent or those that quench fluorescence on
phosphor-containing layers. Other compounds must be located by application of a
visualizing reagent to samples that are chromatographed simultaneously on outside lanes
of the layer to serve as a guide for the areas of the layer that are removed by scraping.
The zones are scraped and transferred carefully to a suitable container. The analyte is
eluted from the sorbent using a solvent that provides complete, or at least reproducible,
recovery.
The zone elution quantification method is tedious and time-consuming and is likely to
be inaccurate because of difficulties in locating the exact zone boundaries, loss of sorbent
during scraping and collection, nonreproducible or incomplete elution from the sorbent,
and background interferences due to eluted impurities from the sorbent. These errors are
minimized if standards and samples are chromatographed, scraped, and eluted together as
consistently as possible, and if an equal-size blank area of layer is scraped and eluted in
the same way. Prewashing the layer by development with an appropriate solvent will help
to minimize the blank value.
An apparatus was described to facilitate sample elution without transfer of the solid; a
total solvent volume of only 60 µL was used, and recoveries were >90% (239). Camag
sold the Eluchrom automatic elution instrument for a number of years, but it has been
discontinued.
Despite its inconvenience, the basic TLC elution method, usually combined with UV-
vis absorption or fluorescence spectrometry, is used advantageously to separate and
quantify a great variety of analytes in laboratories not equipped with a densitometer. The
spot elution method continues to be prescribed in some assay methods in the U.S.
Pharmacopeia.
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 45
C. Slit-Scanning Densitometry
In situ measurement of zones with a densitometer is the preferred method for quantitative
TLC with maximum accuracy, precision, selectivity, and sensitivity. Densitometry in
TLC is reviewed in Ref. 240.
Substances separated by TLC or HPTLC are quantified by in situ measurement of
absorbed visible or UV light or emitted fluorescence upon excitation with UV light.
Absorption of UV light is measured either on regular layers or on layers with
incorporated phosphor, the latter resulting in dark zones on a fluorescent background
(fluorescence quenching). Only those substances that have absorption spectra overlapping
the excitation spectrum of the phosphor will be detected and quantifiable by this method.
Although it has been claimed in the literature that better quantitative results are obtained
for direct measurement of UV absorption, more analyses have been reported based on
fluorescence quenching (e.g., 52).
Scanning densitometers manufactured by different companies (e.g., Desaga) (Fig.8)
have many common features. Halogen or tungsten lamps are used to provide light for the
visible region, deuterium lamps for the UV region (absorption measurement), and
mercury or xenon arc sources or a laser (241, 242) for fluorescence excitation. Filters or
monochromators (prism or grating) are employed for wavelength selection, and a
photomultiplier tube or photodiode detector for signal measurement. The plate, mounted
on a movable stage controlled by stepping motors, is scanned with a fixed beam of
monochromatic light in the form of an adjustable rectangular slit, the height of which is
matched to the width of the largest spot or band. Most reported analyses have involved
HPTLC plates and single-wavelength, single-track linear reflectance scanning, but
transmission scanning is sometimes used (243). Signal diminution (absorbance) or
increase (fluorescence) between the zone and a blank area of the layer is the measurement
upon which quantitative analysis is based. The use of laned plates causes the initial and
developed zones to be present in accurately known track locations, which is
advantageous for setting up and operating both manual and automatic scanners.
Single-beam scanners may produce chromatograms with drifting baselines due to
irregular or impure layers. Double-beam scanners are able to eliminate general plate
background effects, but these are no longer manufactured or used to any extent. In dual
wavelength scanning (175, 244), two monochromators alternately furnish the sample lane
with a reference wavelength (minimal absorbance by the analtye zone) and a sample
wavelength (maximum absorbance by the analyte). The reference wavelength cancels out
background interferences contributed by the sample and corrects for layer irregularities.
Zigzag (flying spot) scanning (244, 245), which uses a spot of light that moves over the
zones with swings that correspond to the length of the slit, provides more reproducible
readings for zones with irregular shapes or nonuniform concentration distributions. It has
been claimed that simultaneous measurement of transmission and reflection will also
diminish the effects of noise arising from an inhomogeneous plate background and
improve sensitivity, but use of this procedure is seldom reported. A rapid, high-resolution
fiber-optic diode array HPTLC scanner was described recently (246).
Computer-controlled densitometers can perform a number of functions: data
acquisition by scanning over an entire plate following a preselected geometric pattern
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 46
with control of all scanning parameters; automated peak searching and optimization of
scanning for each fraction located; multiple-wavelength scanning to find, if possible, a
common wavelength for all substances to be
will lead typically to relative standard deviation (RSD) values in the range of 0.5–3% in
quantitative HPTLC using a modern commercial computer-controlled densitometer.
The ability to spot unknowns and standards on the same plate and subject them to the
same chromatographic conditions (in-system calibration) is an inherent advantage of
quantitative TLC compared to sequential elution column chromatography. Systematic
errors are minimized, an internal standard is less often required, and accuracy and
precision values compare very favorably to those of GC and HPLC. Automatic
instruments for sample application are necessary for the highest precision and accuracy in
quantitative TLC. Because signal response is related to spot size for a fixed weight of
analyte (247), it is usually recommended to apply a fixed volume of the sample and
standard solutions of different concentrations to produce zones of constant size but
varying intensity. However, the application of constant volumes appears not to be
necessary for good results on laned preadsorbent plates if the developed bands spread
across the width of each lane or when narrow bands are directly applied with the Linomat
spray-on apparatus. In these cases, different volumes of a single standard solution can be
applied.
Compared to absorption, fluorescence densitometry (248) has the advantages of higher
sensitivity (often low picogram levels), calibration curves with a wider linear range (102–
103), and improved selectivity because few compounds fluoresce and characteristic
excitation and emission wavelengths can be chosen. Enhanced sensitivity has been
obtained by impregnation of the dry plate with an antioxidant to reduce quenching from
oxidation reactions or with a fluorescence-enhancing liquid such as paraffin, glycerol, or
Triton X prior to scanning. Nonfluorescent compounds can often be converted to
fluorescent compounds by pre- or postchromatographic derivatization with a fluorogenic
reagent (e.g., dansyl chloride) or by treatment with ammonium hydrogen carbonate
vapors at 100–150°C for 1–12 h to produce a reproducible fluorescent product. One of
the most successful areas for application of fluorodensitometry is the quantification of
toxins, e.g., deoxynivalenol in cereal products (249) (see Chapter 32 on toxins in Part II
of this Handbook).
Absorption of light by zones on TLC plates is not described adequately by the
LambertBeer law that is usually applied to solution spectrometry, because of the diffuse
reflectance (scattering) by the sorbent particles. The Kubelka-Munk equation, which
includes both light absorption and scattering coefficients, is usually applied as the basis
of in situ TLC quantification, especially when reflected light is employed. This equation
predicts a nonlinear relationship between the detector signal for reflectance
measurements (peak area or height) and the amount of analyte (weight or concentration).
Calibration curves obtained in practice using the reflectance or transmission scanning
mode are unique for each analyte, have an intercept greater than (0, 0), and are essentially
linear at low weights but tend to curve toward the weight axis at higher weights. If the
calibration plot obtained by linear regression does not have a sufficiently high correlation
coefficient (r value), then application of lower standard weights can be tried or the
calibration curve can be fit to a polynomial function using the densitometer software. The
external standardization method, with interpolation of the weight or concentration of
unknowns from the calibration curve, has been used most often for quantitative
densitometry. The internal standardization quantification method is used only
occasionally, and the standard addition method not at all. The data pair sample
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 48
Video scanners have certain advantages, including rapid data collection over the entire
layer surface, simple design with virtually no moving parts, and unique software
approaches for archiving and comparing chromatograms (258). However, current
instruments are not capable of illuminating the plate uniformly with monochromatic light
of selected wavelength, are less sensitive, and provide lower resolution for chromatogram
recording than slit-scanning densitometers. Video densitometers can measure visible
spots that are colored, fluorescent, or quench fluorescence on F-layers (259) in
transmittance and reflectance modes (260), but they cannot perform spectral analysis. In
addition to a CCD camera, video densitometry has been carried out using a flat-bed
scanner and commercial software (261). With improvements in electronic scanning, it is
very possible that video densitometers will replace mechanical scanning densitometers at
some time in the future, with especially great potential for evaluation of 2-D
chromatograms (13).
Two approaches for using TLC data as a pilot method for mobile-phase optimization in
HPLC are correlation between retention parameters and thermodynamic description of
adsorption systems with mixed mobile phases (273). The first method was used in a study
involving silica gel, C18, C8, diol, NH2, and CN layers, 62 pesticide standards, and a real
sample by correlating k′p retention values from TLC to k′c values for HPLC by linear
regression. Good results of transfer were obtained except with silica gel and diol, with
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 52
which some restrictions were needed because the HPLC and TLC sorbents were not of
equal activity (274).
Multistep gradient elution RP-TLC on paraffin-impregnated silica gel of the colored
pigments in red wine was shown to accurately predict the mobile-phase gradient for the
same separation in C18-HPLC (275). Successful transfer studies were also published for
phenol and its methyl and chloro derivatives on bonded amino, cyano, and diol stationary
phases (276) and for choosing binary gradient programs for HPLC of raw products in a
synthesis research laboratory (277).
The term “murtimodal” has been used in two ways, to designate layers such as cyano-
derivatized silica gels that can operate with two or more mechanisms (278) (see Sec.
IV.D) and, in the context of this section, to specify multidimensional separations that are
performed by on-line coupling of TLC, HPTLC, or OPLC with another technique in
order to improve the separation capacity available from either of the individual methods.
In the past, reports of the direct coupling of GC, SFE, and supercritical fluid
chromatography to TLC have appeared, but recent publications are limited to combining
HPLC and TLC.
Although the TLC-HPLC combination has been performed off-line by scraping and
eluting TLC zones followed by injection into the HPLC instrument (279) or by TLC of
collected column fractions (280), the most reported and most advantageous approach is
when the two methods are coupled on-line using TLC as the second stage. This sequence
allows utilization of the unique advantages of TLC, including further separation by a
diverse mechanism, static detection with multiple methods, and storage on the layer of all
zones in the column effluent fractions for evaluation without time constraints. A spray jet
aerosol sample applicator (13, 281, 282) has been most commonly used to deposit
column effluent onto the layer origin. As an example of an application, iprodione
residues in vegetables have been determined by RP-HPLC followed by TLC-AMD (283).
Many compound types have been studied, including 1,2,4-triazole (293) and furan (294)
derivatives.
REFERENCES
1. B.Fried and J.Sherma. Thin Layer Chromatography: Techniques and Applications. 4th ed. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 1999.
2. B.Renger. J.AOAC Int. 84:1217, 2001.
3. K.I.Sakodynskii. J.Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 5:210, 1992.
4. J.Sherma. Liquid chromatography. In: H.A.Laitenen and G.W.Ewing, eds. A History of
Analytical Chemistry. Washington, DC: ACS Div. Anal. Chem. 1977, p. 306.
5. L.S.Ettre and H.Kalasz. LCGC 19:712, 2001.
6. J.Sherma. Thin layer chromatography. In: H.J.Issaq, ed. A Century of Separation Science. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 2002, pp. 49–68.
7. F.Kreuzig. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 11:322, 1998.
8. V.Berezkin. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 8:401, 1995.
9. N.Pelick, H.R.Bolliger, and H.K.Mangold. A history of thin layer chromatography. In: J.C.
Giddings and R.A.Keller, eds. Advances in Chromatography, Vol. 3. New York: Wiley-
Interscience, 1966, p. 85.
10. E.Stahl. Dunnschicht-Chromatographie—Ein Laboratorium-Handbuch. Berlin: Springer-
Verlag, 1962.
11. J.Sherma. Anal. Chem. 74:2653, 2002.
12. J.Sherma. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 74:435, 1991.
13. C.F.Poole. J. Chromatogr. A 856:399, 1999.
14. J.P.Abjean. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 6:147, 1993.
15. J.P.Abjean. J.AOAC Int. 80:737, 1997.
16. I.Choma, D.Grenda, I.Malinowska, and Z.Suprynowicz. J. Chromatogr. B 734:7, 1999.
17. H.Kutsch and U.Schoen. Fresenius’ J. Anal. Chem. 367:279, 2000.
18. R.E.Kaiser, W.Guenther, H.Gunz, and G.Wulff, eds. Thin Layer Chromatography. Duesseldorf,
Germany: InCom, 1996.
19. E.Hahn-Deinstrop. Applied Thin Layer Chromatography. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH,
2000.
20. B.Fried and J.Sherma. Thin Layer Chromatography: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Boca
Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1996.
21. K.Robards, P.R.Haddad, and P.E.Jackson. Principles and Practice of Modern Chromatographic
Methods. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1994, pp. 179–226.
22. J.C.Touchstone. Thin layer Chromatography. In: H.Guenzler and A.Williams, eds. Handbook
of Analytical Techniques. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH, 2001, pp. 327–344.
23. J.Sherma. Thin layer Chromatography. In: R.A.Meyers, ed. Encyclopedia of Analytical
Chemistry. Chichester, UK: Wiley, 2001, pp. 11485–11498.
24. C.F.Poole and S.K.Poole. J. Chromatogr. A 703:573, 1995.
25. J.Bariska, K.Valko, K.Takas-Novak, and H.Kalasz. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 12:46,
1999.
26. C.F.Poole and N.C.Dias. J.Chromatogr. A 892:123, 2000.
27. J.Cazes, ed. Encylcopedia of Chromatography. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001.
28. International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. Pure Appl. Chem. 65:819, 1993.
29. D.C.Fenimore and C.M.Davis. Anal. Chem. 53:252A, 1981.
30. C.F.Poole and S.K.Poole. Anal. Chem. 61:1257A, 1989.
31. G.Guiochon and A.Siuoffi. J. Chromatogr. Sci. 16:470, 1978.
32. G.Guiochon and A.Siouffi. J. Chromatogr. Sci. 16:152, 1978.
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 54
74. J.C.Touchstone and M.F.Dobbins. Steroids. In: J.C.Touchstone and J.Sherma, eds.
Densitometry in Thin Layer Chromatography—Practice and Applications. New York: Wiley,
1979, p. 633.
75. J.-P.Abjean and V.Lahogue. J. AOAC Int. 80:1171, 1997.
76. D.W.Edwards. Derivative formation for TLC. In: J.C.Touchstone and D.Rogers, eds. Thin
Layer Chromatography—Quantitative Environmental and Clinical Applications. New York:
Wiley, 1980, p. 51.
77. R.Wintersteiger. GIT-Suppl. 3:5–8, 10–11, 1988.
78. H.Jork, W.Funk, W.Fischer, and H.Wimmer. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 1:280, 1988.
79. A.Koch. Deut. Apotheker Z. 137:4155, 1997.
80. A.R.Shalaby. Food Chem. 65:117, 1999.
81. S.Wawrzycki, E.Pyra, and B.Wawrzycki. J.Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:21, 2001.
82. S.D.McCrossen, A.Conyers, and J.D.Hayler. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:88, 2001.
83. A.Mohammad, M.Ajmal, and S.Anwar. Indian J. Chem. Technol. 7:87, 2000.
84. A.Witek, H.Hopkala, and G.Matysik. Chromatographia 50:41, 1999.
85. R.A.Preis and E.A.Vargas. Food Addit. Contam. 17:463, 2000.
86. Y Nagata, T.Iida, and M.Sakai. J. Mol. Catal. B-Enzymatic 12:105, 2001.
87. J.Subert and K.Slais. Pharmazie 56:355, 2001.
88. E.Hahn-Dienstrop. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 5:57, 1992.
89. L.Lepri and A.Cincinelli. TLC sorbents. In: J. Cazes, ed. Encyclopedia of Chromatography.
New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 854–858.
90. R.J.Maxwell and A.R.Lightfield. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 12:109, 1999.
91. E.Hahn-Dienstrop. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 6:313, 1993.
92. B.H.Chen, S.H.Yang, and L.H.Han. J. Chromatogr. 543:147, 1991.
93. G.Zgorka. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:1397, 2001.
94. A.Mohammad, J.P. S.Chahar, E.Iraqi, and V.Agrawal. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:12,
2000.
95. B.Paw and G.Misztal. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:195, 2000.
96. P.K.Zarzycki, J.Nowakowska, A.Chmielewska, and H.Lamparczyk. J. Planar Chromatogr.-
Mod. TLC 9:260, 1996.
97. M.L.Bieganowska and A.Petruczynik. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 12:135, 1999.
98. H.Szumilo and J.Flieger. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 9:462, 1996.
99. B.Klama and T.Kowalska. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 12:207, 1999.
100. A.Mohammad, K.T.Nasim, and P.A.Mohammed Najar. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC
9:445, 1996.
101. W.Wardas and A.Pyka. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:8, 2001.
102. A.Mohammad and J.P.S.Chahar. J. AOAC Int. 82:172, 1999.
103. R.A.Steiner, B.Fried, and J.Sherma. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 21:427, 1998.
104. J.J.Schariter, B.Fried, and J.Sherma. Acta Chromatogr. 11:102, 2001.
105. J.Fisher and J.Sherma. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:388, 2000.
106. J.Gasparic. Adv. Chromatogr. (N.Y.) 31:153, 1992.
107. B.Nikolova-Damyanova and Sv. Momchilova. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:1447,
2001.
108. K.Kovacs-Hadady and T.Varga. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 8:292, 1995.
109. S.N.Shtykov, E.G.Sumina, E.V.Smushkina, and N.V.Tyurina. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod.
TLC 13:182, 2000.
110. P.-L.Wang, L.Chen, and Y.-F.Fan. J. AOAC Int. 84:684, 2001.
110a. R.Bhushan and J.Martens. Biomed. Chromatogr. 15:155, 2001.
110b. H.E.Hauck, O.Bund, W.Fischer, and M.Schulz. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:234,
2001.
111. C.J.Marsit, B.Fried, and J.Sherma. J. Parasitol. 86:635, 2000.
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 56
112. H.Y.Xu, S.H.Issaq, T.G.McCloud, and H.J.Issaq. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:625,
2001.
113. H.E.Hauck. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 8:346, 1995.
114. E.Soczewinski and M.Wojciak-Kosior. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:28, 2001.
115. T.Kowalska and B.Witkowska-Kita. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 9:92, 1996.
116. V.A.Davankov. Enantiomer 5:209, 2000.
117. J.W.LeFevre, E.J.Gublo, C.Botting, R.Wall, A.Nigro, M.-L.T.Pham, and B.G.Ganci. J. Planar
Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:160, 2000.
118. L.Lepri, M.Del Bubba, A.Cincinelli, and L.Boddi. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:384,
2000.
119. R.Bhushan and G.T.Thiong’o. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:33, 2000.
120. R.Bhushan and G.T.Thiong’o. J. Chromatogr. B 708:330, 1998.
121. H.T.K.Xuan and M.Lederer. J. Chromatogr. 659:191, 1994.
121a. R.Suedee, C.Songkram, A.Petmoreekul, S.Sangkunakup, S.Sankasa, and N.Kongyarit. J.
Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 19:519, 1999.
121b. R.Suedee, T.Srichana, J.Saelim, and T.Thavonpibulbut. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC
14:194, 2001.
122. L.Lepri. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:320, 1997.
123. L.Lepri and A.Cincinelli. Enantiomer separations by TLC. In: J. Cazes, ed. Encylcopedia of
Chromatography. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 306–308.
124. Y.Bereznitski, R.Thompson, E.O’Neill, and N.Gringerg. J. AOAC Int. 84:1242, 2001.
125. S.D.Wagner, J.Pachuski, B.Fried, and J.Sherma. Acta Chromatogr. 12:159, 2002.
126. V.Ghoulipour and S.W.Husain. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:354, 2000.
127. H.M.Baseski and J.Sherma. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:16, 2000.
128. C.Cimpoiu and T.Hodisan. Rev. Anal. Chem. 16:299, 1997.
129. S.J.Costanzo. J. Chromatogr. Sci. 35:156, 1997.
130. W.Prus and T.Kowalska. Optimization of thin layer chromatography. In: J Cazes, ed.
Encylcopedia of Chromatography. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 576–579.
131. C.F.Poole and S.K.Poole. Chromatography Today. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1991, pp. 649–734.
132. A.Pelander, J.Summanen, T.Yrjonen, H.Haario, I.Ojanpera, and H.Vuorela. J. Planar
Chromatogr.Mod. TLC 12:365, 1999.
133. N.C.Dias and C.F.Poole. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:337, 2000.
134. J.K.Rozylo and R.Siembida. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:97, 1997.
135. S.Nyiredy, K.Dallenbach-Tolke, and O.Sticher. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 1:336, 1982.
135a. M.D.Palamareva, R.I.Koleva, and I.D.Kozekov. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:1411,
2001.
136. J.L.Glajch, J.J.Kirkland, and L.R.Snyder. J. Chromatogr. 238:269, 1982.
137. L.R.Snyder. J. Chromatogr. Sci. 16:223, 1978.
138. E.Heilweil. A systematic approach to mobile phase design and optimization for normal- and
reversed-phase chromatography. In: J.C.Touchstone and J.Sherma, eds. Techniques and
Applicatoins of Thin Layer Chromatography. New York: Wiley, 1985, pp. 37–49.
139. L.R.Snyder, J.W.Dolan, and J.R.Gant, J. Chromatogr. 165:3, 1979.
140. J.Sherma and S.Charvat. Am. Lab. (Fairfield, CT) 15(2): 138, 1983.
141. E.Soczewinski and E.Wojciak-Kosior. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:28, 2001.
142. Sz.Nyiredy, Z.Fater, L.Boltz, and O.Sticher. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 5:308, 1992.
143. K.Dross, C.Sontag, and R.Mannhold. J. Chromatogr. 639:287, 1993.
144. S.Gocan. TLC sandwich chamber. In: J. Cazes, ed. Encyclopedia of Chromatography. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 851–854.
144a. P.Su, D.Wang, and M.Lan. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:203, 2001.
144b. A.M.Worontsov, A.B.Markov, and V.G.Berezkin. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:208,
2001.
145. A.S.Kenyon, T.Layloff, and J.Sherma. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:1479, 2001.
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 57
146. J.Bariska, T.Csermely, S.Fuerst, H.Kalasz, and M.Bathori. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol.
23:531, 2000.
147. J.Anwar and R.Yasmeen. J. Chem. Soc. Pakistan 18:298, 1996.
148. A.Mohammad. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:48, 1997.
149. Sz.Nyiredy. J. AOAC Int. 84:1219, 2001.
150. D.Ruddy and J.Sherma. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 25:321, 2002.
151. S.K.Poole and C.F.Poole. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 5:221, 1992.
152. Sz.Nyiredy and G.Szepesi. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 10:1017, 1992.
153. W.Markowski. J. Chromatogr. 635:283, 1993.
154. G.Lodi, C.Bghi, V.Brandolini, E.Menziani, and B.Tosi. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC
10:31, 1997.
155. G.Mantovani, G.Vaccari, E.Dosi, and G.Lodi. Carbohydr. Polym. 37:263, 1998.
156. L.Sek, C.J.H.Porter, and W.N.Charman. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 25:651, 2001.
157. D.Nurok, R.M.Becker, and K.A.Sassic. Anal. Chem. 54:1955, 1982.
158. R.E.Tecklenberg, Jr., G.H.Fricke, and D.Nurok. J. Chromatogr. 290:75, 1984.
159. Q.S.Wang, B.W.Yan, and L.Zhang. Chromatographia 40:463, 1995.
160. D.Muller and S.Ebel. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:420, 1997.
161. H.Y.Xu, S.H.Issaq, T.G.McCloud, and H.J.Issaq. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:625,
2001.
162. E.Novakova. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:221, 2000.
163. Z.Hajouj, J.Thomas, and A.M.Siouffi. J. Liq. Chromatogr. 18:887, 1995.
164. T.Rezanka. J. Chromatogr. A 727:147, 1996.
165. N.Dimov and K.Filcheva. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 9:197, 1996.
166. M.Glensk and W.Cisowski. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:9, 2000.
167. K.Rowe, D.Bowlin, M.Q.Zou, and J.M.Davis. Anal. Chem. 67:2994, 1995.
168. R.Raisanan, H.Bjork, and P.H.Hynninen. Z.Naturforsch. C 55:195, 2000.
169. S.Gocan. Multidimensional TLC. In: J. Cazes, ed. Encyclopedia of Chromatography. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 533–535.
170. D.Nurok, R.M.Kleyle, C.L.McCain, D.S.Risley, and K.J. Ruterbories. Anal. Chem. 69:1398,
1997.
171. E.Mincsovics, M.Garami, L.Keckes, B.Tapa, G.Katay, and E.Tyihak. J. AOAC Int. 82:587,
1999.
172. J.K.Rozylo. Overpressured layer chromatography. In: J. Cazes, ed. Encyclopedia of
Chromatography. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 579–582.
173. M.Waksmundzka-Hajnos, M.Gadzikowska, and W.Golkiewicz. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod.
TLC 13:205, 2000.
174. G.C.Kiss, E.Forgacs, T.Cserhati, and J.A.Vizcaino. J. Chromatogr. A 896:61, 2000.
175. T.Cserhati, E.Forgacs, M.H.Morais, and A.C.Ramos. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:
1435, 2001.
176. I.Fecka and W.Cisowski. Chromatographia 49:256, 1999.
177. E.Soczewinski and J.Flieger. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 9:107, 1996.
178. G.Matysik and E.Soczewinski. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 9:404, 1996.
179. G.Matysik, E.Soczewinski, and M.Wojciak-Kosior. Chromatographia 52:357, 2000.
180. P.K.Zarzycki and H.Lamparczyk. Chem. Anal. Warsaw 46:469, 2001.
181. P.K.Zarzycki. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 14:63, 2001.
182. P.K.Zarzycki, M.Wierzbowska, J.Nowakowska, A.Chmielewska, and H.Lamparczyk. J.
Chromatogr. A 839:149, 1999.
183. P.K.Zarzycki, M.Wierzbowska, and H.Lamparczyk. J. Chromatogr. A 857:255, 1999.
184. J.Sherma. Detection (visualization) of TLC zones. In: J. Cazes, ed. Encyclopedia of
Chromatography. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 248–251.
185. G.Zweig and J.Sherma. Handbook of Chromatography, Vol. II: General Data and Principles.
Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1972, pp. 103–189.
Handbook of thin-layer chromatography 58
186. H.Jork, W.Funk, W.Fischer, and H.Wimmer. Thin Layer Chromatography, Vol. 1a: Physical
and Chemical Detection Methods. Weinheim, Germany: VCH, 1990.
187. H.Jork, W.Funk, W.Fischer, and H.Wimmer. Thin Layer Chromatography, Vol. 1b: Reagents
and Detection Methods. Weinheim, Germany: VCH, 1994.
188. S.J.Shan, H.Tanaka, and Y.Shoyama. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 22:221, 1999.
189. W Putalun, H.Tanaka, and Y.Shoyama. TLC immunostaining of steroidal alkaloid glycosides.
In: J. Cazes, ed. Encyclopedia of Chromatography. New York: Marcel Dekker, 2001, pp. 849–
851.
190. T.Kasama, Y.Hisano, M.Nakajima, S.Handa, and T.Taki. Glycoconjugate J. 13:461, 1996.
191. C.Weins and H.Jork. J. Chromatogr. A 750:403, 1996.
192. R.J.Maxwell and J.Unruh. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 5:35, 1992.
193. S.D.Wagner, S.W.Kaufer, and J.Sherma. J.Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:2525, 2001.
194. I.Ojanpera, R.-L.Ojansivu, J.Nokua, and E.Vuori. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 12:38,
1999.
195. G.Romano, G.Caruso, D.Masumarra, D.Pavone, and G.Cruciani. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod.
TLC 7:233, 1994.
196. G.W.Somsen, W.Morden, and I.D.Wilson. J. Chromatogr. A 703:613, 1995.
197. S.Gocan and G.Cimpan. Rev. Anal. Chem. 16:1, 1997.
198. A.Pelander, I.Ojanpera, J.Sistonen, and P.Sunila. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:1425,
2001.
199. I.D.Wilson, M.Spraul, and E.Humpfer. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:217, 1997.
200. S.J.Kok, I.Bakker, C.Gooijer, U.A.T.Brinkman, and N.H. Velthorst. Anal. Chim. Acta 389:77,
1999.
201. R.Jankowiak, K.P.Roberts, and G.J.Small. Electrophoresis 21:1251, 2000.
202. S.J.Kok, R.Evertsen, N.H.Velthorst, U.A.T.Brinkman, and C.Gooijer. Anal. Chim. Acta
405:1, 2000.
203. H.Englehardt and P.Engel. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:337, 1997.
204. C.Brandt and K.-A.Kovar. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:348, 1997.
205. S.Stahlmann and K.-A.Kovar. J. Chromatogr. A 813:145, 1998.
206. S.Stahlmann, T.Herkert, C.Roseler, I.Rager, and K.-A.Kovar. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 12:461,
2001.
207. S.Stahlmann. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 12:5, 1999.
208. J.Gibkes, I.Vovk, J.Bolte, D.Bicanic, B.Bein, and M.Franko. J. Chromatogr. A 786:163, 1997.
209. K.Uchiyama. Bunseki Kagaku 48:737, 1999.
210. P.Matejka, J.Stavek, K.Volka, and B.Schrader. Appl. Spectrosc. 50:409, 1996.
211. E.Horvath, J.Mink, and J. Kristof. Mikrochim. Acta Suppl. 14:745, 1997.
212. G.W.Somsen, P.G. H.ter Riet, C.Gooijer, N.H.Velthorst, and U.A.Th. Brinkman. J. Planar
Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:10, 1997.
213. E.Horvath, G.Katay, E.Tyihak, J.Kristof, and A.Redey. Chromatographia 51(Pt. 2, Suppl. S):
S297, 2000.
214. L.Kocsis, E.Horvath, J.Kristof, R.L.Frost, A.Redey, and J.Mink. J. Chromatogr. A 845:197,
1999.
215. I.D.Wilson. J. Chromatogr. A 856:429, 1999.
216. P.M.St.Hilaire, L.Cipolla, U.Tedebark, and M.Meldal. Rapid Commun. Mass. Spectrom. 12:
1475, 1998.
217. H.Hildebrandt, U.Jonas, M.Ohashi, I.Klaiber, and H.Rahmann. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B
122: 83, 1999.
218. K.Ludanyi, K.Verkey, J.Szunyog, E.Mincsovics, T.Karancsi, K.Ujszaszy, K.B.Nemes, and I.
Klebovich. J. AOAC Int. 82:231, 1999.
219. K.Ludanyi, A.Gomory, I.Klebovich, K.Monostory, L.Vereckey, K.Ujszaszy, and K.Vekey. J.
Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 10:90, 1997.
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 59
256. E.Papp, A.Farkas, K.H.Otta, and E.Mincsovics. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:328,
2000.
257. M.Petrovic, M.Kastelan-Macan, and S.Babic. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 11:353, 1998.
257a. R.E.Simon, L.K.Walton, Y.Liang, and M.B.Denton. Analyst 126:446, 2001.
258. I.Vovk and B.Simonovska. J. AOAC Int. 84:1258, 2001.
259. M.Petrovic, M.Kastelan-Macan, D.Ivankovic, and S.Matecic. J. AOAC Int. 83:1457, 2000.
260. I.Vovk and M.Prosek. J.Chromatogr. A 768:329, 1997.
261. S.P.Mustoe and D.McCrossen. Chromatographia 53(Pt. 2, Suppl. S):S474-S477, 2001.
262. G.Jozwiak, T.Wawrzynowicz, and M.Waksmundzka-Hajnos. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod.
TLC 13: 447, 2000.
263. M.Waksmundzka-Hajnos, M.Gadzikowska, and W.Golkiewicz. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod.
TLC 13:205, 2000.
263a. S.K.Gupta, J.R.Sargent, and W.P.Weber. Anal. Chem. 73:3781, 2001.
264. E.Gattavecchia, D.Tonelli, A.Breccia, A.Fini, and E.Ferrie. J. Radiochem. Nucl. Chem.-Art.
181: 77, 1994.
265. D.Tonelli, E.Gattavecchia, G.Mazzella, and A.Roda. J. Chromatogr. B 700:59, 1997.
266. I.Hazai, I.Urmos, and I.Klebovich. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 8:92, 1995.
267. I.Klebovich, E.Mincsovics, J.Szunyog, K.Ludanyi, T.Karancsi, K.Ujszaszy, B.D.Kiss, and K.
Vekey. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 11:394, 1998.
268. J.Szunyog, E.Mincsovics, I.Hazai, and I.Klebovich. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 11:25,
1998.
269. C.Christelle, P.Vingler, N.Boyera, I.Galey, and B.A.Bernard. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod.
TLC 10:243, 1997.
270. N.Motoji, H.Kuroiwa, and A.Shigematsu. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 18:108, 1995.
271. M.Okuyama, Y Hatori, and A.Shigematsu. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 17:559, 1994.
272. H.Fujino, I.Yamada, S.Shimada, and M.Yoneda. J. Chromatogr. B 757:143, 2001.
273. J.K.Rozylo, M.Janicka, and R.Siembida. J. Liq. Chromatogr. 17:364, 1994.
274. S.Reuke and H.E.Hauck. Fresenius’ J. Anal. Chem. 351:739, 1995.
275. T.Cserhati, E.Forgacs, A.Kosa, G.Csiktusnadi-Kiss, and M.Candais. J. Planar Chromatogr.-
Mod. TLC 11:34, 1998.
276. I.Baranowska and C.Pieszko. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 11:119, 1998.
277. P.Renold, E.Madero, and T.Maetzke. J. Chromatogr. A 908:143, 2001.
278. H.Y.Xu, S.H.Issaq, T.G.McCloud, and H.J.Issaq. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 24:625,
2001.
279. P.O’Connor, S.Fremont, J.Schneider, H.Dowty, M.Jaeger, G.Talaska, and D.Warshawsky. J.
Chromatogr. B 700:49, 1997.
280. M.A.Hawryl and E.Soczewinski. Chromatographia 52:175, 2000.
281. H.J.Stan and F.Schwarzer. J.Chromatogr. A 819:35, 1998.
282. M.A. Hawryl, E. Soczewinski, and T.H. Dzido. Chem. Anal.-Warsaw 44:15, 1999.
283. U.Wippo and H.J.Stan. Deut. Lebensm.-Rundsch. 93:144, 1997.
284. T.Cserhati and E.Forgacs. J. AOAC Int. 81:1105, 1998.
285. Q.S.Wang and L.Zhang. J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relat. Technol. 22:1, 1999.
286. M.H.Abraham, C.F.Poole, and S.K.Poole. J. Chromatogr. A 749:201, 1996.
287. N.U.Perisic-Janjic, S.O.Podunavac-Kuzmanovic, J.S.Balaz, and D.Vlaovic. J. Planar
Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 13:123, 2000.
288. C.Sarbu and S.Todor. J. Planar Chromatogr.-Mod. TLC 11:123, 1998.
Basic TLC techniques, materials, and apparatus 61
3. E.Stahl. Dunnschicht-Chromatographie—Ein
Laboratoriumshandbuch. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1962.
84. M.-B. Huang, H.-K. Li, G.-L. Li, C.-T. Yan, and L.-P.
Wang. J. Chromatogr. A 742:289, 1996.
9. H.Engelhardt. Hochdruck-Fliissigkeitschromatographie.
2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1977.
46. W.Jost and H.E. Hauck. Proc. Fourth Int. Symp. HPTLC
(Planar Chromatography), Selvino/Bergamo, Italy, 1987:241.
23.
56e. A.J.St. Angelo and C.James, Jr. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc.
70:1245, 1993.
132. T.Lu and Y.Cheng. Hua Hsueh Tung Pao 6:19, 1980; CA
93:1980 235784t.
50. L Eales. In: D Dolphin, ed. The Porphyrins, Vol VI. New
York: Academic Press, 1979, pp 663– 804.
52a. C-K Lai, C-W Lam, Y-W Chan. Clin Chem 40:2026–2029,
1994.
J.Martens, and M.
122. G.K. Bauer, A.M. Pfeifer, H.E. Hauck, and K.-A. Kovar.
J. Planar Chromatogr.—Mod. TLC 11: 84, 1998.
129. J.W. Fiola, G.C. Didonato, and K.L. Busch. Rev. Sci.
Instrum. 57:2294, 1986.