Ask The Editor: CE Sensitivity
What methods can be used to overcome the low concentration sensitivity of capillary electrophoresis for separation and detection of trace-level analytes in complex matrices?
An LCGC reader recently submitted the following question:
What methods can be used to overcome the low concentration sensitivity of capillary electrophoresis for separation and detection of trace-level analytes in complex matrices?
LCGC's Steve Brown provides us with the following answer:
Low concentration sensitivity is a major obstacle in capillary electrophoresis (CE) analyses, especially with UV detection, and it is caused by the required low injection volumes and short detection pathlength. A few examples of preconcentration approaches include on-line concentration for the CE analysis of biological fluids (1); on- and in-capillary preconcentration methods based on solid-phase extraction (2); in-line preconcentration using a cellulose acetate-coated porous joint in the capillary (3); on-line preconcentration of protein using a cellulose acetate-coated porous membrane at one end of a CE column (4); membrane preconcentration for CE?mass spectrometry (MS) sequencing of peptides (5); solid-phase microextraction (SPME) and on-line sample stacking for the analysis of pesticides in foods (6); and on-line preconcentration using monolithic methacrylate polymers for the CE analysis of S-propranolol (7). Britz-McKibbin and colleagues (8) compared various preconcentration methods for steroid CE analysis and noted that four major on-line preconcentration strategies had been used: sample stacking, transient isotachophoresis, sweeping, and dynamic pH junction - the mechanisms vary depending on electrolyte properties such as conductivity, co-ion mobility, additive concentration, and buffer pH. These examples just scratch the surface of the body of literature available on this topic.
Reference
(1) S. Sentellas, L. Puignou, and M.T. Galceran, J. Sep. Sci. 25(15-17), 975-987 (2002).
(2) L. Saavedra and C. Barbas, J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 70(2), 289-297 (2007).
(3) R. Umeda and X.-Z. Wu, Anal. and Bioanal. Chem 382(3), 848-852 (2005).
(4) B. Yang, F. Zhang, H. Tian, and Y. Guan, J. Chrom. A 1117(2), 214-218 (2006).
(5) S. Naylor and A.J. Tomlinson, Talanta 45(4), 603-612 (1998).
(6) J. Hernández-Borges, A. Cifuentes, F.J. GarcÃa-Montelongo, and M.A. RodrÃguez-Delgado, Electrophoresis 26(4/5), 980-989 (2005).
(7) N.E. Baryla and N.P. Toltl, Analyst 128, 1009-1012 (2003).
(8) P. Britz-McKibbin, T. Ichihashi, K. Tsubota, D.D.Y. Chen, and S. Terabe, J. Chrom. A 1013, 65-76 (2003).
Questions?
LCGC technical editor Steve Brown will answer your technical questions. Each month, one question will be selected to appear in this space, so we welcome your submissions. Please send all questions to the attention of "Ask the Editor" at lcgcedit@lcgcmag.com. We look forward to hearing from you.
AI and GenAI Applications to Help Optimize Purification and Yield of Antibodies From Plasma
October 31st 2024Deriving antibodies from plasma products involves several steps, typically starting from the collection of plasma and ending with the purification of the desired antibodies. These are: plasma collection; plasma pooling; fractionation; antibody purification; concentration and formulation; quality control; and packaging and storage. This process results in a purified antibody product that can be used for therapeutic purposes, diagnostic tests, or research. Each step is critical to ensure the safety, efficacy, and quality of the final product. Applications of AI/GenAI in many of these steps can significantly help in the optimization of purification and yield of the desired antibodies. Some specific use-cases are: selecting and optimizing plasma units for optimized plasma pooling; GenAI solution for enterprise search on internal knowledge portal; analysing and optimizing production batch profitability, inventory, yields; monitoring production batch key performance indicators for outlier identification; monitoring production equipment to predict maintenance events; and reducing quality control laboratory testing turnaround time.
