RATIONALE: The determination of the center-of-mass energy at which 50% of a precursor ion decomposes (Ecom(50)) during collision-induced dissociation (CID) is dependent on the chemical structure of the ion as well as the physical and electrical characteristics of the collision cell. The current study was designed to identify variables influencing Ecom(50) values measured on four different mass spectrometers. METHODS: Fifteen test compounds were protonated using + ve electrospray ionization and the resulting ions were fragmented across a range of collision energies by CID. Survival yield versus collision energy curves were then used to calculate Ecom(50) values for each of these [M+H](+) ions on four different mass spectrometers. In addition, the relative recovery of the [M+H](+) ions of eight compounds ranging in molecular weight from 46 to 854 Da were determined at collision cell radiofrequency (RF) voltages ranging from 0 to 600 V. RESULTS: Ecom(50) values determined on the four instruments were highly correlated (r(2) values ranged from 0.953 to 0.992). Although these overall correlations were high, we found different maximum ion recoveries depending on collision cell RF voltage. High-mass ions had greater recovery at higher collision cell RF voltages, whereas low-mass ions had greater recovery at lower collision cell RF voltages as well as a broader range of ion recoveries. CONCLUSIONS: Ecom(50) values measured on four different instruments correlated surprisingly well given the differences in electrical and physical characteristics of the collision cells. However, our results suggest caution when comparing Ecom(50) values or CID spectra between instruments without correcting for the effects of RF voltage on ion transfer efficiency.
RATIONALE: The determination of the center-of-mass energy at which 50% of a precursor ion decomposes (Ecom(50)) during collision-induced dissociation (CID) is dependent on the chemical structure of the ion as well as the physical and electrical characteristics of the collision cell. The current study was designed to identify variables influencing Ecom(50) values measured on four different mass spectrometers. METHODS: Fifteen test compounds were protonated using + ve electrospray ionization and the resulting ions were fragmented across a range of collision energies by CID. Survival yield versus collision energy curves were then used to calculate Ecom(50) values for each of these [M+H](+) ions on four different mass spectrometers. In addition, the relative recovery of the [M+H](+) ions of eight compounds ranging in molecular weight from 46 to 854 Da were determined at collision cell radiofrequency (RF) voltages ranging from 0 to 600 V. RESULTS: Ecom(50) values determined on the four instruments were highly correlated (r(2) values ranged from 0.953 to 0.992). Although these overall correlations were high, we found different maximum ion recoveries depending on collision cell RF voltage. High-mass ions had greater recovery at higher collision cell RF voltages, whereas low-mass ions had greater recovery at lower collision cell RF voltages as well as a broader range of ion recoveries. CONCLUSIONS: Ecom(50) values measured on four different instruments correlated surprisingly well given the differences in electrical and physical characteristics of the collision cells. However, our results suggest caution when comparing Ecom(50) values or CID spectra between instruments without correcting for the effects of RF voltage on ion transfer efficiency.
Authors: Konstantin V Barylyuk; Konstantin Chingin; Roman M Balabin; Renato Zenobi Journal: J Am Soc Mass Spectrom Date: 2009-10-06 Impact factor: 3.109
Authors: L Mark Hall; Lowell H Hall; Tzipporah M Kertesz; Dennis W Hill; Thomas R Sharp; Edward Z Oblak; Ying W Dong; David S Wishart; Ming-Hui Chen; David F Grant Journal: J Chem Inf Model Date: 2012-04-27 Impact factor: 4.956
Authors: Christina Y Hampton; Catherine J Silvestri; Thomas P Forbes; Mark J Varady; J Mark Meacham; Andrei G Fedorov; F Levent Degertekin; Facundo M Fernández Journal: J Am Soc Mass Spectrom Date: 2008-06-28 Impact factor: 3.109
Authors: Lochana C Menikarachchi; Dennis W Hill; Mai A Hamdalla; Ion I Mandoiu; David F Grant Journal: J Chem Inf Model Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 4.956
Authors: L Mark Hall; Dennis W Hill; Lochana C Menikarachchi; Ming-Hui Chen; Lowell H Hall; David F Grant Journal: Bioanalysis Date: 2015 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Lochana C Menikarachchi; Shannon Cawley; Dennis W Hill; L Mark Hall; Lowell Hall; Steven Lai; Janine Wilder; David F Grant Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Lochana C Menikarachchi; Mai A Hamdalla; Dennis W Hill; David F Grant Journal: Comput Struct Biotechnol J Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 7.271