field-flow fractionation of macromolecules and structures ... event/2015/related techniques...af2000...
TRANSCRIPT
The Field-Flow Fractionation Platform
Field-Flow Fractionation of Macromolecules and Structures That Cannot be Characterized
by Conventional GPC/SEC Techniquesy
Trevor Havard, Evelin Moldenhaur, Soheyl Tadjiki (Postnova)
Sebastien Perrier *, Sylvain Catrouillet* (Warwick and Monash)
Ad d Ch t i ti f P t i Bi l d N ti l
www.postnova.com .
Advanced Characterization of Proteins, Biopolymers and Nanoparticles
FFF Separation Range
Comparison Chromatography vs. Field-Flow Fractionation
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 2
FFF Principle
Separation Mechanism
• Separation in a narrow ribbon-like channel• Laminar flow inside the channel• External field perpendicular to the solvent flow
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 3
• External field perpendicular to the solvent flow
FFF Principle
Separation Mechanism
• Centrifugal Field• Flow Field• Thermal Field• Gravitational Field
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 4
Gravitational Field
Asymmetric Flow FFF - Principle
Step 1• Sample is injected directly into the
flow stream• A second pump provides focus flow• Cross flow is achieved by a precise
syringe pump• Constant flow to the detectors, no valves
Step 2• Sample is focused to narrow band• Improved resolution and sample
washing• Enrichment of very low concentrations
Step 3 • Focus flow stops and main pump elutes
the sample• Variable cross flow • Detector flow stays constant
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 5
Asymmetric Flow FFFSmart Stream Splitting
• Major portion of flow in the channel is containing no sample• Minor portions of the flow is carrying the sample above the membrane• Minor portions of the flow is carrying the sample above the membrane• Splitting of those two stream via 2 outlets at the channel end• Only the sample containing sub-stream is guided to the detector• Sample dilution is reduced at channel outlet
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 6
• Increase of sensitivity by factor 5 or more depending on conditions
Smart Stream SplittingHDL Lipoprotein Preparation for Mass Spectroscopy
Enrichment of HDL by a factor of 2 using Smart Stream Splitting
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 7
FFF versus SEC
Reversed elution order in FFF compared to SEC
Additional information fromFFF!
M Co-elution of large
SEC
Log
gmaterial due tointeraction withstationary phase
SEC
FFF
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 8
Elution Volume
How Low Can a Postnova AF4 go!!
16000
18000 12,384 g/mole
12000
14000
16000
(A
U)
Aprotinin Cytochrome C Bromophenol Blue669.7 g/mole
8000
10000
bsor
banc
e (
6511 4 / l
4000
6000
UV
ab 6511.4 g/mole
0 2 4 6 8 100
2000
www.postnova.com . 10/22/2015 9
Retention time (min)
Flexibility of the Cross-Flow Gradient“Tailor-made” separation in AF4 realized by cross-flow-adjustment
• Extension of Cross-Flow causes better separation
• Selective enhancement of separation
• In SEC not possible!In SEC not possible!→ Column change is time
consuming and expensive→ Calibration of column
determines separationdetermines separation
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 10
Mixture of narrow PS: 300, 1200 & 8000 kg/mol
Flexibility of the Cross-Flow Gradient
1
2
ow [m
L/m
in]
• Gradient of any
Polydisperse PE
0 ,8 10 7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 1 3 140
Cro
ss-F
loE lu tion Volum e [m L]
yshape can be used
• Adjustment of
0 ,5
0 ,6
0 ,7
0 ,8
10 5
10 6
10
V] ol]
jseparation according to special requirements of
0 ,2
0 ,3
0 ,4
10 3
10 4
IR-S
igna
l [m
Mol
ar M
ass
[g/m
oqthe sample
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 1 3 14-0 ,1
0 ,0
0 ,1
10 1
10 2
M
www.postnova.com . 11
Elution Volum e [m L]
22.10.2015
System Information
► Injector
► Separator
PN5300 Auto Injector
AF2000 MF Flow FFF System (AF4)► Separator
► Channel
AF2000 MF Flow FFF System (AF4)
AF2000 Analytical Channel (AF4) 350 µm Thickness; NovaRC 10kDa Membrane
PN3241 UV – Absorbance, 254 nm
► Detection,
PN3150 RI – Refractive IndexPN3621 MALS – Static Light Scattering, 532 nm
n.a.
► Fraction.
► Eluent
Sample UW001: 0.1 M NaCl + 0.2 g/L NaN3Eluent filtered by 0.1 µm filterSample UW002: THF
Sample UW001: 0 5 mL/min and 0 5 mL/min Smart Stream Splitting► Eluent
► Flow Rate
Sample UW001: 0.5 mL/min and 0.5 mL/min Smart Stream SplittingSample UW002: 0.5 mL/min
Postnova AF2000 Multi Flow FFF
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com .
► Flow Rate
22.10.2015 - C O N F I D E N T I A L - 12
Summary (AT THE BEGINNING)
The best fit of the shape (SAS ie ) doesn’t agree ith theThe best fit of the shape (SAS view) doesn’t agree with the fit of the intensity
Results of SLS agree with the SANS results in intensity
The hypothesis: Most of the system is composed of unimersThe hypothesis: Most of the system is composed of unimerswith a small amount of very long cylinders that explain both the results of SLS and SANS was confirmed by AF4 resultsresults
www.postnova.com . 13
β-Sheet Forming Cyclic Peptide Nanotubes
D‐ L‐
www.postnova.com . 14Ghadiri, M. R.; Granja, et al., Nature, 1993, 366 (6453), 324.Horne, W. S., et al., Bioorg. & Med. Chem. 2005, 13 (17), 5145.
SANS
Study of SL155
PEGA60 DP = 60
www.postnova.com . 15
60
Nanotube Design Elements
Internal Diameter
External Functionality
.
www.postnova.com . 16Chapman, R., et al., Chem. Soc. Rev. 2012, 41, 6023.Couet, J.; Biesalski, M., Small 2008, 4 (7), 1008.
Sample UW001: SL155Raw Data Fractogram of AF4 - MALS and UV
SystemSystem• PN5300 Auto Injector• AF2000 FFF System• PN1650 Smart Stream Splitter
PN3621 MALS D t t• PN3621 MALS Detector• PN3241 UV Detector• PN3150 RI Detector
Conditions• Injection Volume: 20 µL• Concentration: 10 mg/mL• LS 90°(red trace)S 90 ( ed t ace)• RI Detector (blue trace)• The 1st peak shows a double structure and was detected between 8 and
25 min by light scattering detection.• A 2nd peak was detected between 25 and 60 min by light scattering
d t ti
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 - C O N F I D E N T I A L - 17
detection.
Sample UW001: SL155O l M l M d LS Si lOverlay: Molar Mass and LS Signal• The Molar Mass was calculated from MALS and RI data• given value for dn/dc = 0.12 mL/g
In the 1st Fraction the Sample contains Material with a Molar Mass of appr 5 4 x 104 g/mol (w• In the 1st Fraction the Sample contains Material with a Molar Mass of appr. 5.4 x 104 g/mol (w-Average), in the 2nd Fraction of 2.6 x 105 g/mol and in the 3rd Fraction of 2.3 x 106 g/mol.
Conditions• Molar Mass (red dots)• LS Signal (blue trace)• LS Signal (blue trace)• Fitting by Random Coil Model
Mw [g/mol]
1 Fractionn-Average 4.2 x 1041 2 3
1. Fraction8.5 – 16.5 min
w-Average 5.4 x 104
z-Average 7.2 x 104
2. Fraction n-Average 2.5 x 105
A 2 6 10516.5 – 20.8 min
w-Average 2.6 x 105
z-Average 2.7 x 105
3. Fraction27 5 47 5
n-Average 7.1 x 105
w-Average 2.3 x 106
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 - C O N F I D E N T I A L - 18
27.5 – 47.5 min
w Average 2.3 x 10
z-Average 1.9 x 107
Sample UW001: SL155
RadiusMolar Mass
Molar Mass Distribution Particle Size Distribution Radius
al
0.0550.0500.0450.0400 035
C
1.0
o a ass
al
1.0 C
1.0
Diff
eren
tia 0.0350.0300.0250.0200.0150.010
Cum
ulativeDiff
eren
tia
Cum
ulative
Radius [nm]140120100806040200
0.0050.000 0.0
Molar Mass [g/mol]1e+3 1e+4 1e+5 1e+6 1e+7 1e+8 1e+9
0.0 0.0
Differential Molar Mass/Particle Size Distribution (blue trace) Cumulative Molar Mass/Particle Size Distribution (red trace)Differential Molar Mass/Particle Size Distribution (blue trace), Cumulative Molar Mass/Particle Size Distribution (red trace)
The sample shows a multimodal distribution. For the 1st fraction (8.5 – 16.5 min) the distribution is in therange of 1.5 x 104 – 1.7 x 105 g/mol, for the 2nd fraction (16.5 – 20.8 min) in the range of 1.7 x 105 – 3.4 x 105
g/mol and for the 3rd fraction (27.5 – 47.5 min) in the range of 3.4 x 105 – 1.2 x 108 g/mol.
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 - C O N F I D E N T I A L - 19
g/mol and for the 3 fraction (27.5 47.5 min) in the range of 3.4 x 10 1.2 x 10 g/mol.
Sample UW001: SL155Overlay: Radius of Gyration and LS Signal• The Radius of Gyration was calculated from MALS angular data• The 3rd Fraction shows a Radius of Gyration of 65 nm (z-average)
Conditions• Radius of Gyration (red dots)• LS Signal (blue trace)• Fitting by Random Coil Model2
Rg [nm]
3. Fraction27.5 – 47.5 min
n-Average 29
w-Average 35
A 65min z-Average 65
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 - C O N F I D E N T I A L - 20
Study of SL155 in D2O 10g/L
Using the softare SAS view it’s possible to fit the shapeof the data to have an idea of the shape of the objects in solution
1
10
SANS SL155_D2O Fit Gaussian Chain
1
10
SANS SL155_D2O
0,1I 0,1I
0 01 0 1 1
1E-3
0,01
0 01 0 1 1
1E-3
0,01
0,01 0,1 1
q (Å-1 )0,01 0,1 1
q (Å-1 )
The tail at high q is well fitted with a Gaussian chain form factor
www.postnova.com . 21
The tail at high q is well fitted with a Gaussian chain form factor
Study of SL155 in D2O 10g/L
Using the software SAS view it’s possible to fit the shape of the data to have an idea of the shape of the object in solution
1
10
SANS SL155_D2O Fit Rod
0,1I
0 01 0 1 1
1E-3
0,01
0,01 0,1 1
q (Å-1 )
The rollover is well fitted by a Rod form factor
www.postnova.com . 22
The rollover is well fitted by a Rod form factor
Study of SL155 in D2O 10g/L
Using the software SASit’s possible to fit the shape of the data to have an idea of the shape of the objects in solution
1
10 SANS SL155_D2O Fit Rod Fit Gaussian Chain Sum Rod + GC
0,1I
L = 160Å
0 01 0 1 1
1E-3
0,01
R = 20Å 0,01 0,1 1
q (Å-1 )
A sum of Rod and Gaussian Chain form factors fit nicely all the q rangeL = 160Å => Nagg = 32 (Number of Aggregates)
www.postnova.com . 23
L = 160Å => Nagg = 32 (Number of Aggregates)
AF4 analysis of SL 155 in water
• Main populationMw = 54000g/molMw = 54000g/mol
(unimers)
• Second population
• Minor populationMw = 2.3x106g/mol
Nagg = 38.7p pMw = 2.6x105g/mol
Nagg = 4
AF4 results agree with SLS and SANS results: unimers are the main population
An additional population of Nagg = 4 that was not observed with SLS or SANS isobserved
The minor population (Nagg = 38.7) explain the result in shape of SANS
www.postnova.com . 24
p p ( gg ) p p
C fCentrifugal FFF
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 25
Centrifugal FFF – Principle
Separation PrincipleContent• FFF Principle• Systems• Applications• SummarySummary
• Gravity Separation Field up to 2.500 g• Size Separation Range: Particles 5 nm – 100 µm
Separation based on Si e and Densit
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 26
• Separation based on Size and Density
Polyelectrolyte Encapsulated AroundNanoParticleShown are the raw data signals of the Light Scattering detector at 90° (red line) and the UV detector at 254 nm using Centrifugal Field Flow Fractionation CF3
Using Centrifugal FFF (CF3) we can separate the free Polyelectrolyte from the cross-linked encapsulated
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 27
nanoparticle.
Encapsulated Nanoparticle with Cross-linked Polyelectrolyte Particle Distribution using CF3
In the following figures the particle size distribution is shown:Differential Radius Distribution (blue line) and Cumulative Radius Distribution
Radius0.0280.026 1.0
Differential Radius Distribution (blue line) and Cumulative Radius Distribution (red line) of the second peak of sample.
Rg [nm]
A 30entia
l
0.0240.0220.02
0.0180.0160 014
Cum
n-Average 30
w-Average 41
Diff
ere 0.014
0.0120.01
0.0080.0060.004
mulative
z-Average 55Radius [nm]
140120100806040200
0.0020
-0.0020.0
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 28
Thermal FFF
www.postnova.com .www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 29
Thermal Field-Flow Fractionation
TF3 involves a hot and cold plate to generate a temperature gradient perpendicular to the separation channel. Thermal Diffusion occurs and this us often a property of the polymers morphology.morphology.
• Thermal gradient up to ∆120°C• Separation kDa up to several MDa• Separation kDa up to several MDa• Analysis time, 10 – 120 min (no upper limit)• Separation depends on D and DT
→ Separation according to size and chemical composition
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 30
composition
SEC versus Thermal FFF
Analysis of PS and PMMA by SEC and Thermal FFF PS, PMMA and a mixture of both standards in THF. Taking advantage of the separation by chemical composition in TF3.
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 31
Conclusion
• Field Flow Fractionation Complements SEC/GPC in standard separations
• FFF solves problems when the mass or particle size of the macromolecule exceeds the pore size of the column
• FFF solves the problem when the interaction between theFFF solves the problem when the interaction between the macromolecule and the packing material limits the solvent and pH choice ( GPC Symposium 2014 Presentation)
• FFF solves the problem when the macromolecule is reactive and unstable and the removal of packing and solvent control enables sensible elution characteristics
• FFF can be tailored to the application
• FFF is Great Fun to do in the lab ;) !!
www.postnova.com . 22.10.2015 32