{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04559505409582689, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02241112828438949, 'mean_word_length': 6.076502732240437, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of the Lipophilicity of Fat-Soluble Vitamins

Ergocalciferol, cholecalciferol, (±)-α-tocopherol, tocopherol acetate, retinol, retinol acetate, retinol palmitate, menadione, and phytonadione have been investigated on RP8F254s and RP18F254s TLC plates with methanol–water in different volume proportions as mobile phases. Linear relationships were obtained between the RM values of the fat-soluble vitamins and the volume fraction of methanol in the mobile phase. Retention values, RM, were extrapolated to zero methanol content and the lipophilicity values RMW(RP8) and RMW(RP18) obtained were compared with measured partition coefficients (log Pexp) and partition coefficients (AlogPs, AClogP, AB/logP, COSMOFFrag, milogP, Kowwin, xlogP) calculated using seven different software products. Cluster analysis was also used for comparison of the theoretical partition coefficients with the chromatographic lipophilicity (RMW(RP8) and RMW(RP18)) of the fat-soluble vitamins. It was found that lipophilicity values RMW(RP8) were most similar to AClogP whereas RMW(RP18) was most similar to the theoretical partition coefficient Kowwin. RMW(RP8) and RMW(RP8) values (i.e. values obtained on RP8F254s and RP18F254s plates) closely describe the lipophilic properties of fat-soluble vitamins.