4.8 Article

Chemical Vapor Deposition of Aminopropyl Si lanes in Microfluidic Channels for Highly Efficient Microchip Capillary Electrophoresis-Electrospray Ionization-Mass Spectrometry

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 86, 期 7, 页码 3493-3500

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac404106u

关键词

-

资金

  1. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Center for Biomedical Microdevices and Waters Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) method for the surface modification of glass microfluidic devices designed to perform electrophoretic separations of cationic species. The microfluidic channel surfaces were modified using aminopropyl silane reagents. Coating homogeneity was inferred by precise measurement of the separation efficiency and electroosmotic mobility for multiple microfluidic devices. Devices coated with (3-aminopropyl)di-isopropylethoxysilane (APDIPES) yielded near diffusion-limited separations and exhibited little change in electroosmotic mobility between pH 2.8 and pH 7.5. We further evaluated the temporal stability of both APDIPES and (3-aminopropyl)triethoxysilane (APTES) coatings when stored for a total of 1 week under vacuum at 4 degrees C or filled with pH 2.8 background electrolyte at room temperature, Measurements of electroosmotic flow (EOF) and separation efficiency during this time confirmed that both coatings were stable under both conditions. Microfluidic devices with a 23 cm long, serpentine electrophoretic separation channel and integrated nanoelectrospray ionization emitter were CVD coated with APDIPES and used for capillary electrophoresis (CE)-electrospray ionization (ESI)-mass spectrometry (MS) of peptides and proteins. Peptide separations were fast and highly efficient, yielding theoretical plate counts over 600,000 and a peak capacity of 64 in less than 90 s. Intact protein separations using these devices yielded Gaussian peak profiles with separation efficiencies between 100,000 and 400,000 theoretical plates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据