4.3 Article

Extracted fragment ion mobility distributions: A new method for complex mixture analysis

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MASS SPECTROMETRY
卷 309, 期 -, 页码 154-160

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijms.2011.09.011

关键词

Ion mobility spectrometry; Collision-induced dissociation; Extracted ion chromatograms; Basic components from an extract of diesel; Phosphorylated peptide isomers

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [1RC1GM090797-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new method is presented for constructing ion mobility distributions of precursor ions based upon the extraction of drift time distributions that are monitored for selected fragment ions. The approach is demonstrated with a recently designed instrument that combines ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) with ion trap mass spectrometry (MS) and ion fragmentation, as shown in a recent publication [J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 22 (2011) 1477-1485]. Here, we illustrate the method by examining selected charge states of electrosprayed ubiquitin ions, an extract from diesel fuel, and a mixture of phosphorylated peptide isomers. For ubiquitin ions, extraction of all drift times over small mass-to-charge (m/z) ranges corresponding to unique fragments of a given charge state allows the determination of precursor ion mobility distributions. A second example of the utility of the approach includes the distinguishing of precursor ion mobility distributions for isobaric, basic components from commercially available diesel fuel. Extraction of data for a single fragment ion is sufficient to distinguish the precursor ion mobility distribution of cycloalkyl-pyridine derivatives from pyrindan derivatives. Finally, the method is applied for the analysis of phosphopeptide isomers (LFpTGHPESLER and LFTGHPEpSLER) in a mixture. The approach alleviates several analytical challenges that include separation and characterization of species having similar (or identical) m/z values within complex mixtures. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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