4.7 Article

Comprehensive Petroporphyrin Identification in Crude Oils Using Highly Selective Electron Transfer Reactions in MALDI-FTICR-MS

期刊

ENERGY & FUELS
卷 33, 期 5, 页码 3899-3907

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b04325

关键词

-

资金

  1. COLCIENCIAS [617-2013, FP44842-077-2016]
  2. French national FT-ICR network [FR 3624 CNRS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Petroprophyrins are biomarkers used to extract information about petroleum genesis among other characteristics. Identification of particular types, such as Ni, Cu, Mn, vanadyl (VO), and oxygenated or sulfur-containing porphyrins, typically involves exhaustive isolation and purification processes followed by high-resolution mass spectrometry analysis using atmospheric pressure photoionization [APPI-(+)] or electrospray [ESI-(+)] sources. Simultaneous identification of all porphyrins present in a particular crude oil or organic-matter-rich sediment still remains an analytical challenge. Here, we report a straightforward petroporphyrin isolation and identification methodology based on a single-step liquid-liquid (L-L) extraction (crude oil: acetonitrile) and high-performance thin-layer chromatography fractionation (HPTLC, aminopropylbonded silica) followed by selective ionization via electron transfer in matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI-FTICR). Mass spectrometric analysis of the extracts resulted in detection of 350 individual compounds in the acetonitrile extract and 518 in the HPTLC extract, corresponding to the porphyrin families N4VO, N4VO2, N4VO3, N4VOS, and N4Ni as verified by isotopic structure analysis. To the best of our knowledge, this observation constitutes the largest simultaneous identification of Ni, VO, and oxygenated and sulfur-containing porphyrins in a single crude oil sample. In addition, the use of MALDI significantly reduces the amount of sample required for analysis (pico to femtomole levels) in comparison with continuous infusion methods such as APPI and ESI.

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

4.7
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