4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry for the characterization of ionic liquids and the analysis of amino acids, peptides and proteins in ionic liquids

期刊

JOURNAL OF MASS SPECTROMETRY
卷 39, 期 12, 页码 1494-1505

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jms.746

关键词

biocatalysis; deuterium exchange; gas-phase chemistry; ion formation; quantification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ionic liquids are interesting solvents for a number of applications in chemistry and biotechnology. We characterized five different ionic liquids by laser desorption/ionization (LDI) and by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) mass spectrometry (MS) and studied the analysis of amino acids, peptides and proteins dissolved in these solvents. Signals of both anions and cations of the ionic liquids could be observed both in LDI- and in MALDI-MS. In the latter case, adduct formation between anions and cations of the analytes was observed. Amino acids, peptides and proteins could be analyzed in ionic liquids after addition of matrix substances. Sodium and potassium adducts were not observed in any analysis involving ionic liquids. Low molecular mass compounds and peptides could be analyzed best in the presence of water-immiscible ionic liquids, whereas proteins gave the best results in water-miscible ionic liquids. Optimal analysis conditions such as molar matrix-to-analyte and ionic liquid-to-matrix ratios were determined. Homogeneity of samples in the presence of ionic liquids was reduced compared with classical MALDI preparations. Relative quantitation of amino acids was possible using isotope-labeled internal standards. MALDI-MS thus can be used for the analysis of chemical reactions and the screening of enzyme-catalyzed reactions in ionic liquids and for the analysis of the biocatalysts dissolved in these solvents. Theoretical aspects of ion formation in the presence of ionic liquids both in LDI and MALDI analysis are discussed. Copyright (C) 2004 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

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