[soldierducky]

Note: All LC is just shorthand for Reverse Phased HPLC.

I am in a debate competition where I am in Team LC.

Obviously I have to argue that LC is better than the GC. So some of the points I have gathered are:

1) Non polar samples work better on HPLC due to the non polar column. GC's column is polar.

2) GC requires Derivatization while HPLC doesn't. This is GCs biggest disadvantage if it were to coupled with an MS.

3) Preparation of GC samples are long and tedious. Compounds in sunflower such as Vitamin E can quickly deteriorate in RTP and light. hence HPLC can better "preserve" the sample quality due to the various rapid methods in preparation.

4) High temperature of GC may degrade some compounds in oil. Esp vitamin E, hence affecting results


Are there any factors that I got wrong or I missed out? Or am I just fighting a losing war?

Would really like to hear your input

[Arkcon]

Hmmm... interesting debate.  You seem to have started with the concept that the column in either case can't be changed, I hope that doesn't come back to ruin your argument, because it certainly can.  If the particular assay requires derivitization then yes, you have sample handling, loss during manipulation, time spent, etc.  I don't see how deriivitization causes problems with mass spec, however.

[marquis]

Most natural oils are not pure, they are mixtures.  A good starting
point would be an in depth investigation into the makeup of
sunflower oil.  If it is like some of it's relatives (soybean oil, linseed
oil, etc.) it is a mixture of different triglycerides , as well as some
low molecular weight additives and components.

Recommend getting a good breakdown of sunflower oils and then
seeing which technique is better for each. 

Good luck.