4.8 Article

Charge Detection Mass Spectrometry with Almost Perfect Charge Accuracy

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 87, 期 20, 页码 10330-10337

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b02324

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [0832651]
  2. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  3. Division Of Chemistry [0832651] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Charge detection mass spectrometry (CDMS) is a single-particle technique where the masses of individual ions are determined from simultaneous measurement of each ion's mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) and charge. CDMS has many desirable features: it has no upper mass limit, no mass discrimination, and it can analyze complex mixtures. However, the charge is measured directly, and the poor accuracy of the charge measurement has severely limited the mass resolution achievable with CDMS. Since the charge is quantized, it needs to be measured with sufficient accuracy to assign each ion to its correct charge state. This goal has now been largely achieved. By reducing the pressure to extend the trapping time and by implementing a novel analysis method that improves the signal-to-noise ratio and.compensates for imperfections in the charge measurement, the uncertainty has been reduced to less than 0.20 e rmsd (root-mean-square deviation). With this unprecedented precision peaks due to different charge states are resolved in the charge spectrum. Further improvement can be achieved by quantizing the charge (rounding the measured charge to the nearest integer) and culling ions with measured charges midway between the integral values. After ions with charges more than one standard deviation from the mean are culled, the fraction of ions assigned to the wrong charge state is estimated to be 6.4 x 10(-5) (i.e., less than 1 in 15 000). Since almost all remaining ions are assigned to their correct charge state, the uncertainty in the mass is now almost entirely limited by the uncertainty in the m/z measurement.

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