4.4 Article

Ultra-fast searching assists in evaluating sub-ppm mass accuracy enhancement in U-HPLC/Orbitrap MS data

期刊

METABOLOMICS
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 15-24

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11306-010-0230-y

关键词

Sub-ppm mass accuracy; Orbitrap; metAlign; Liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC/MS); Data processing; Metabolomics

资金

  1. Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, Strategic Research [1207232903]
  2. Netherlands Toxicogenomics Centre (NTC)
  3. EU-METAPHOR [FOOD-CT-2006-036220]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A strategy, detailed methodology description and software are given with which the mass accuracy of U-HPLC-Orbitrap data (resolving power 50,000 FWHM) can be enhanced by an order of magnitude to sub-ppm levels. After mass accuracy enhancement all 211 reference masses have mass errors within 0.5 ppm; only 14 of these are outside the 0.2 ppm error margin. Further demonstration of mass accuracy enhancement is shown on a pre-concentrated urine sample in which evidence for 89 (342 ions) potential hydroxylated and glucuronated DHEA-metabolites is found. Although most DHEA metabolites have low-intensity mass signals, only 11 out of 342 are outside the +/- 1 ppm error envelop; 272 mass signals have errors below 0.5 ppm (142 below 0.2 ppm). The methodology consists of: (a) a multiple internal lock correction (here ten masses; no identity of internal lock masses is required) to avoid suppression problems of a single internal lock mass as well as to increase lock precision, (b) a multiple external mass correction (here 211 masses) to correct for calibration errors, (c) intensity dependant mass correction, (d) file averaging. The strategy is supported by ultra-fast file searching of baseline corrected, noise-reduced metAlign output. The output and efficiency of ultra-fast searching is essential in obtaining the required information to visualize the distribution of mass errors and isotope ratio deviations as a function of mass and intensity.

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

4.4
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