Influence of methanol as a buffer additive on the mobilities of organic cations in capillary electrophoresis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mobilities of a series of aromatic ammonium ions, ranging in charge from +1 to + 3, were investigated by capillary electrophoresis using buffers consisting of 0-75% v/v methanol. This is an extension of our previous studies involving anion mobility in methanol-water media [1]. Absolute mobilities were determined by extrapolation of the effective mobilities to zero ionic strength according to the Pitts' equation. For all of the buffer compositions studied, the ionic strength effect increased with increasing cation charge, and varied as a function of solvent 1/eta epsilon (1/2) as predicted by the electrophoretic term within the Pitts' equation. In the presence of methanol, the ionic strength effects became more dramatic. The absolute mobilities of the cations were altered by the addition of methanol to the electrophoretic media. For example, at 75% MeOH, a migration order reversal was observed between the + 2 and + 3 ammonium ions. These solvent-induced selectivity changes are attributed to dielectric friction. As predicted by the Hubbard-Onsager dielectric friction model, dielectric friction increased with increasing methanol content and with increasing analyte charge. Further, the changes in cation mobility correlated to the changes in solvent relaxation time (tau), epsilon and eta. Although not predicted by the Hubbard-Onsager theory, the + 3 ammonium ion experienced more dielectric friction than the - 3 sulfonate and - 3 carboxylate investigated previously [1]. This apparent failure of the Hubbard-Onsager model results from its continuum nature, whereby ion-solvent interactions are not taken into account.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".