4.8 Article

Next-Generation Paterno-Buchi Reagents for Lipid Analysis by Mass Spectrometry

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 92, 期 19, 页码 13470-13477

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c02896

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21722506]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Paterno-Buchi (PB) reaction is a photochemical reaction involving [2 + 2] cycloaddition between electronically excited carbonyl and carbon-carbon double bond (C=C). It has been established as a lipid derivatization strategy, leading to confident assignment of C=C locations in lipids when coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS). Although acetone and several aryl-containing ketones or aldehydes have been explored as PB reagents, the chemical properties critical to achieving efficient conversion and minimum side reactions remain unclear. Herein, we investigated a set of acetophenone (AP) derivatives, aiming to provide insights into the development of new PB reagents with enhanced performance for lipid analysis. For AP derivatives, we found that electron-withdrawing groups (e.g., -F and -CF3) on the benzene ring improved the overall conversion, while a bulky group at the ortho-position decreased the conversion. Norrish Type I cleavage was largely diminished; however, the Norrish Type II side reaction was more competitive, producing products isomeric to the PB reaction products. Among all AP derivatives tested, 2',4',6'-trifluoroacetophenone (triFAP) showed the best performance. It offered a relatively high PB yield (20-30%) for different types of C=C, high sensitivity (sub-nM) for C=C identification, and accurate isomer quantitation. Due to the significantly reduced chemical interferences in shotgun analysis, triFAP provided better performance than that from acetone PB-MS/MS. An offline triFAP PB reaction was implemented in a liquid chromatography analysis workflow, which enabled the large-scale identification of phospholipids including C=C location isomers from a complex lipid extract.

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

4.8
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