4.4 Article

A comparison of electron ionization mass spectra obtained at 70 eV, low electron energies, and with cold EI and their NIST library identification probabilities

期刊

JOURNAL OF MASS SPECTROMETRY
卷 55, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jms.4646

关键词

cold EI; electron ionization mass spectra; GC‐ MS; low eV EI; low voltage electron ionization; NIST library identification probabilities

资金

  1. Israel Science Foundation [356/15] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Electron ionization (EI) mass spectra of 46 compounds from several different compound classes were measured. Their molecular ion abundances were compared as obtained with 70-eV EI, with low eV EI (such as 14 eV), and with EI mass spectra of vibrationally cold molecules in supersonic molecular beams (Cold EI). We further compared these mass spectra in their National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) library identification probabilities. We found that Low eV EI is not a soft ionization method, and it has little or no influence on the molecular ion relative abundances for large molecules and those with weak or no molecular ions. Low eV EI for compounds with abundant or dominant molecular ions in their 70 eV mass spectra results in the reduction of low mass fragment ions abundances thereby reducing their NIST library identification probabilities thus rarely justifies its use in real-world applications. Cold EI significantly enhances the relative abundance of the molecular ions particularly for large compounds; yet, it retains the low mass fragment ions; hence, Cold EI mass spectra can be effectively identified by the NIST library. Different standard EI ion sources provide different 70 eV EI mass spectra. Among the Agilent technologies ion sources, the Extractor exhibits relatively abundant molecular ions compared with the Inert ion source, while the High efficiency source (HES) provides mass spectra with depleted molecular ions compared with the Inert ion source or NIST library mass spectra. These conclusions are demonstrated and supported by experimental data in nine figures and two tables.

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