4.7 Article

The signal-to-noise issue in mass spectrometric analysis of polymers

Journal

POLYMER CHEMISTRY
Volume 12, Issue 31, Pages 4451-4461

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d1py00461a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NSERC
  2. Erskine program of the University of Canterbury

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As the average molecular weight of polymers increases, mass spectrometric approaches to polymer analysis become increasingly ineffective due to factors such as signal distribution over a wider range of species, polyisotopic contributions becoming more significant, signal width increasing, and limitations caused by solubility properties and solvent adducts. These factors, along with the drop in polymer concentration during sample preparations for MALDI analysis, ultimately result in a signal-to-noise problem that restricts the ability of mass spectrometry to determine molecular weight distribution for high mass polymers.
Mass spectrometric approaches to polymer analysis become increasingly ineffective as the average molecular weight of the polymer increases. Why? The reasons are several-fold, and apply to both ESI and MALDI: the distribution of signal over an increasing number of different species, even for distributions of narrowest possible dispersity; each unique species has its own intensity broadened over a widening range of m/z values as polyisotopic contributions become more significant; individual signal width becomes larger as m/z increases; and solubility properties and solvent adducts can limit the analytical signal for polymer analysis. For MALDI analysis there is an additional reason: effective sample preparations require a certain weight percentage, causing the concentration of polymer in the matrix to drop. All these factors conspire to cause a signal-to-noise problem that fundamentally limits the ability of mass spectrometry to determine molecular weight distribution for high mass polymers.

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