4.6 Article

Fully automated two-dimensional high-performance liquid chromatography with electrospray ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry for the determination of oligosaccharides in glycopeptides after enzymic fluorescence labeling

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1160, 期 1-2, 页码 120-127

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.04.012

关键词

oligosaccharide; fluorescence labeling; transglycosylation reaction; endo-M; two-dimensional high-performance liquid chromatography (2D-HPLC); electrospray ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (ESI-TOF-MS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two-dimensional high-performance liquid chromatography using an electrospray ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (2D-HPLC-ESI-TOF-MS) system was established for the on-line determination of asparagine-linked oligosaccharides in glycopeptides. The analysis of the oligosaccharides started with the enzymic transglycosylation reaction utilizing Endo-beta-N-acetylglucosaminidase (Endo-M). The oligosaccharides were transferred to a fluorescent acceptor (NDA-Asn-GlcNAc) with Endo-M to produce the fluorescent oligosaccharides. The resulting fluorescent oligosaccharides were specifically isolated from the non-fluorescent oligosaccharides with fluorescence detection after separation by the 1st dimension Amide-80 column. The fraction of fluorescent oligosaccharides was effectively trapped in the anion exchange column. The trapped oligosaccharides were then separated by the 2nd dimension ODS column and sensitively determined by ESI-TOF-MS. Disialo-Asn (a model oligosaccharide) and several oligosaccharides liberated from ovalbumin could be efficiently separated by the 2D-HPLC and identified from the ESI-TOF-MS. Based on these results, the proposed 2D-HPLC-ESI-TOF-MS system may be useful for on-line oligosaccharide analyses. Although the analytical run time is still long, a high-throughput determination will be performed by optimization of the 2D-HPLC conditions. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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