4.7 Review

Analytical techniques for biomass-restricted metabolomics: An overview of the state-of-the-art

Journal

MICROCHEMICAL JOURNAL
Volume 171, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2021.106794

Keywords

Biomass-restricted metabolomics; Capillary electrophoresis; Mass spectrometry; Micro; nano liquid chromatography; Technological developments

Funding

  1. China Scholarship Council (CSC) [201906390032]
  2. Vidi grant scheme of the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research (NWO Vidi) [723.016.003]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper discusses the crucial factors for the performance of biomass-restricted metabolomics studies, including sampling and sample preparation methods, separation techniques, and ionization sources. It also provides overviews of MS-based miniaturized metabolomics studies reported over the past five years, with information on sample type, sample preparation volume, injection volume, separation techniques, and MS analyzers.
Biomedical and clinical questions increasingly deal with biomass-restricted samples. To address these questions with a metabolomics approach, the development of new microscale analytical techniques and workflows is needed. Over the past few years, significant efforts have been made to improve the overall sensitivity of MSbased metabolomics workflows to enable the analysis of biological samples that are low in metabolite concentration or biomass. In this paper, factors that are crucial for the performance of biomass-restricted metabolomics studies are discussed, including sampling and sample preparation methods, separation techniques and ionization sources. Overviews of MS-based miniaturized metabolomics studies reported over the past five years are given in tables, with information provided on sample type, sample preparation volume, injection volume, separation techniques and MS analyzers. Finally, some general conclusions and perspectives are given.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available