In this study, the concept of ion sponge has been explored for developing 3D arrays of large numbers of ion traps but with simple configurations. An ion sponge device with 484 trapping units in a volume of 10 × 10 × 3.2 cm has been constructed by simply stacking 9 meshes together. A single rf was used for trapping ions and mass-selective ion processing. The ion sponge provides a large trapping capacity and is highly transparent for transfer of ions, neutrals, and photons for gas phase ion processing. Multiple layers of quadrupole ion traps, with 121 trapping units in each layer, can operate as a single device for MS or MS/MS analysis, or as a series of mass-selective trapping devices with interlayer ion transfers facilitated by AC and DC voltages. Automatic sorting of ions to different trapping layers based on their mass-to-charge (m/z) ratios was achieved with traps of different sizes. Tandem-in-space MS/MS has also been demonstrated with precursor ions and fragment ions trapped in separate locations.
In this study, the concept of ion sponge has been explored for developing 3D arrays of large numbers of ion traps but with simple configurations. An ion sponge device with 484 trapping units in a volume of 10 × 10 × 3.2 cm has been constructed by simply stacking 9 meshes together. A single rf was used for trapping ions and mass-selective ion processing. The ion sponge provides a large trapping capacity and is highly transparent for transfer of ions, neutrals, and photons for gas phase ion processing. Multiple layers of quadrupole ion traps, with 121 trapping units in each layer, can operate as a single device for MS or MS/MS analysis, or as a series of mass-selective trapping devices with interlayer ion transfers facilitated by AC and DC voltages. Automatic sorting of ions to different trapping layers based on their mass-to-charge (m/z) ratios was achieved with traps of different sizes. Tandem-in-space MS/MS has also been demonstrated with precursor ions and fragment ions trapped in separate locations.
Quadrupole
ion trap has compact
size and simple configuration. It is suitable for tandem mass spectrometry
analysis with a single analyzer.[1] The relatively
high operation pressure is also good for efficient CID (collision
induced association) and implementation for miniature mass spectrometers
with low pumping capacity.[2,3] In addition to the mass
analysis, quadrupole ion traps have also been widely used for ion
processing in hybrid instruments and can be coupled with quadrupole
filters,[4] a Fourier transform ion cyclotron
resonance (FTICR) cell,[5] Orbitrap,[6] and time-of-flight (TOF) mass analyzers.[7] Arrays of ion traps have also been explored previously,
mainly for two purposes: (I) to compensate for the trapping capacity
reduced with miniature ion traps[8−11] or (II) to perform multichannel mass analysis in
parallel for high throughput analysis.[12−14] By shrinking the size
of the ion traps, maximum rf amplitude required for covering a same
mass-to-charge (m/z) range is reduced
and therefore low-power and small-size electronics can be used. The
miniaturized ion traps, however, could suffer from severe space charge
effect. Two-dimension arrays of miniature cylindrical ion traps have
been built to enlarge the total space for trapping, with the number
of traps ranging from a few[13] to several
hundreds[10] or one million.[11] Use of micro fabrication methods[10,11] was necessary for constructing the arrays with a large number of
ion traps of micrometer sizes. Arrays of linear ion traps have also
been made,[9,15] but the production of arrays with large
numbers of trapping units is very difficult due to the complexity
in the configuration of a linear ion trap. Using the virtual electrode
approaches, linear arrays of rectilinear ion traps[8] and arrays of halo ion traps[16] have been developed with relatively low structural complexity.In this study, we have explored a method of constructing ion trap
arrays of large capacities but with extremely simple configurations,
which therefore are also very easy to fabricate. Meshes with narrow
wires were used to construct a 3D array with hundreds of ion traps
in multiple layers. This device is named as “ion sponge”.
The array is highly transparent, suitable for injection of gas phase
particles into different layers of the device as well as for the ion
transfers among the layers. The ions can be stored, mass selectively
isolated, sorted, and transferred for various tandem mass spectrometry
processes.
Design of 3D Array of Ion Traps and Performance Optimization
A proof-of-concept design of the ion sponge is illustrated in Figure 1a. A number of stainless steel meshes, made by wire
EDM (electrical discharge machining, Allied Precision Machine Inc.,
Lafayette, IN), were stacked together with an interplate distance
of z0 to construct the trap array. Each
mesh of a thickness t had a large number of square
holes of an identical size of 2r0 ×
2r0 and a wire width of t. The centers of the holes were aligned for every other meshes but
with a shift between each adjacent two (Figure 1b). A single rf was applied on all the meshes of even numbers, which
made each of the square holes acting as the ring in a traditional
3D quadrupole ion trap. The crosses of the wires on meshes of odd
numbers acted as the end-cap electrodes of the ion traps, on which
the AC or DC signals were applied to manipulate the ions trapped in
each layer. One of the many trapping units is shown in Figure 1b, with two metal crosses from the two odd-numbered
meshes as the end-cap electrodes and a square metal frame from an
even-numbered mesh as the ring electrode. Each end-cap electrode mesh
was shared by two adjacent layers of ion traps. Therefore, each additional
trap layer could be added with two additional meshes. An array made
with 9 meshes is shown in Figure 1c, with 4
layers of a total of 484 ion traps in a volume of 10 × 10 ×
3.2 cm. The dimensions of the trapping units, including the trap width
2r0, the interend-cap distance 2z0, and the electrode width t, are defined as shown in Figure 1d,e.
Figure 1
(a) 3D mechanical
drawing of an ion sponge with three trapping
layers. Ions detected with three electron multipliers. (b) Schematic
configuration of a single trapping unit, with a square ring electrode
and two cross end-cap electrodes, and simulated electric field. (c)
Photo of an ion sponge with four trapping layers. (d) Schematic configuration
of 1 trap layer and geometries (e) without and (f) with a shift of
the cross end-cap electrodes off the center of the square hole. (g)
Schematic instrument setup for testing, with a DAPI interface for
directly introducing ions from ion sources in an ambient environment.
(a) 3D mechanical
drawing of an ion sponge with three trapping
layers. Ions detected with three electron multipliers. (b) Schematic
configuration of a single trapping unit, with a square ring electrode
and two cross end-cap electrodes, and simulated electric field. (c)
Photo of an ion sponge with four trapping layers. (d) Schematic configuration
of 1 trap layer and geometries (e) without and (f) with a shift of
the cross end-cap electrodes off the center of the square hole. (g)
Schematic instrument setup for testing, with a DAPI interface for
directly introducing ions from ion sources in an ambient environment.As expected, each of the trapping
units in the ion sponge would
have a highly distorted quadrupolar field in comparison with the Paul
trap. The field solved using COMSOL (V. 4.3, COMSOL, Inc., Burlington,
MA) for one trapping unit with an rf voltage on the ring electrode
is shown in Figure 1b. The shape of the electric
field is still similar to a traditional 3D quadrupole ion trap, and
the trapping of ions is expected to occur with a dynamic rf field
of proper amplitude applied. The following equation should still be
applicable for the traps in an ion sponge:where q is the Mathieu parameter, A2 is the quadrupole coefficient, V and Ω are
the rf amplitude and frequency, respectively, and m and e are the molecular weight and charge,
respectively, of the ion. As for cylindrical[17] and rectilinear[18] ion traps with simplified
and imperfect geometries, the quadrupole coefficient A2 is expected to be relatively small for the traps in
an ion sponge due to the stronger high-order fields.[19]The purpose for the development of an ion sponge
device is to explore
alternative means for trapping and manipulating a large number of
ions for multistage ion processing in gas phase. Achieving high resolution
for MS analysis is not the primary goal in this study. However, understanding
the geometric effect on the mass selective processes, such as ion
isolation and the ion transfer, would be of great interest for future
implementation of this type of device. Ion sponges of different dimensions
were designed with assistance of numerical simulations of ion trajectories
using a method previously reported[20] (see Supporting Information for details). Geometry
optimization was made with considerations of trapping efficiency,
intertrap ion transfer efficiency, and mass selectivity or mass resolution,
while keeping the simplicity of the device configuration. The geometries
evaluated are listed in Table 1. For some of
them, the crosses of both end-cap electrodes were shifted by a distance
of a in both x and y directions from the center axis of the square ring electrode, which
was expected to allow better transfer of the ions between layers of
ion traps. As shown in Figure S1a,b, Supporting
Information, with the simulated spectra for Geometry I and
VI, a decrease in the wire width resulted in an improvement in the
mass resolution, e.g., from Δm/z of about 3 at half-maximum of the peak for Geometry I to about 1.8
for Geometry VI. This is most likely due to a smoother virtual electric
surface formed with the narrower electrodes. In Geometry II (Table 1 and Figure S1c, Supporting
Information), the cross electrode was moved off the center
by 0.13 mm and a higher efficiency for ion transferring out of the
ion trap by rf scan could be obtained. A resolution similar to Geometry
VI was obtained. The ratios of high-order field components (octopole A4 and dodecapole A6) over quadrupole field A2 inside a single
trapping cell are A4/A2 = −0.199 and A6/A2 = 0.303, respectively (see Supporting Information for calculation of A2, A4, and A6).
Table 1
Six Geometries Used in the Study of
the Ion Spongea
trap geometry
r0 (mm)
z0 (mm)
t (mm)
a (mm)
I
2.62
2.75
0.76
0
II
3.88
3.75
0.25
0.13
III
2.88
2.75
0.25
0.13
IV
3.88
3.20
0.25
0.13
V
3.88
6.40
0.25
0.13
VI
3.88
3.75
0.25
0
See Figure S1, Supporting Information, for definition of dimensions.
See Figure S1, Supporting Information, for definition of dimensions.During the characterization
of the ion sponge performance (to be
further discussed later), it was found that the trapping efficiency
for the last trap layer next to the electron multiplier was very low,
which was due to the field penetration by the high DC voltage applied
on the electron multiplier. The last two meshes of each ion sponge
were thereby grounded for shielding. For the low-voltage signals applied
on cross electrodes for ion excitation or isolation in selected trap
layers (to be further described later), no significant effect due
to field penetration was observed. The ion sponges of different geometries
constructed for experimental characterization all had 121 trapping
units on each layer.
Experimental Section
The ion sponges
were characterized using a home-built testing system[21] (Figures 1g and S3a, Supporting Information) that had a single-stage
vacuum chamber. A discontinuous atmospheric pressure interface (DAPI)[22] was used for transferring ions from an atmosphere
pressure ionization source. The ion sponge was placed in the vacuum
chamber behind the DAPI inlet capillary (Figure S2b, Supporting Information). Three electron multipliers were mounted
on a print circuit board to detect the ions ejected from different
locations of the trap array (Figure S2c, Supporting
Information). Ion intensities detected by these detectors were
representative for ions ejected from the center, horizontal edge,
and vertical edge of the ion sponge. The spectra shown in this manuscript
were recorded using the electron multiplier 2 (Figure S2c, Supporting Information) located at the center,
unless otherwise specified. Details of the control system have been
previously described.[21] The frequency of
the rf applied on the ring electrodes was 820 kHz with a typical amplitude
of about 112 V0-p for trapping the ions during the
DAPI open period, unless otherwise specified.Different ionization
sources were used in the experiments to generate
ions, including nanoelectrospray ionization (nanoESI), using glass
capillaries each with a pulled tip, and atmosphere pressure chemical
ionization (APCI) using a corona discharge. For experiments using
multiple beam of ions or gas molecules, multiple DAPIs were used with
bent capillaries[23] for a convenient implementation.
Cocaine, N,N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET), p-bromo-benzoic acid, and diethyl-methoxy-borane were purchased
from Sigma Chemical Co. (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO). MRFA (Met-Arg-Phe-Ala)
was purchased from Research Plus Inc. (Manasquan, NJ). Imatinib was
purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology Inc. (Santa Cruz, CA). Samples
used with nanoESI (cocaine, MRFA, p-bromo-benzoic
acid, imatinib) were prepared in a methanol/water solution (1:1 v/v).
Mass-Selective
Ion Ejection
Mass-selective ejection of the ions out of the
ion sponge was experimentally
characterized for Geometry I and II (Table 1) for a comparison. The ion sponge of each geometry had 3 layers
of ion traps constructed with 9 meshes (last two grounded for shielding).
Mass selective instability scan was performed by increasing the rf
amplitude while recording the ion signals using the central detector.
Spectra were recorded for MRFA and DEETionized by nanoESI and APCI,
respectively. The ions were introduced through DAPI and trapped in
the ion trap array. With a delay of 500 ms after the DAPI closing,
the ions were mass selectively analyzed by scanning the rf amplitude
at a rate of about 4000 Da/s. A resonance ejection condition was established
by applying the opposite phases of an AC signal (376 kHz) alternatingly
on the odd-numbered meshes. The amplitude of AC was also ramped from
1.0 to 1.2 V along with the rf scan. For the protonated ions, m/z 525 from MRFA and m/z 192 from DEET, and the proton-bound dimer of
DEET m/z 383, the mass resolution
was found to be better with Geometry II (Figure 2). For instance, Δm/z of
1.9 was obtained at the half-maximum of the peak, in comparison with
2.4 for Geometry I. The resolution for Geometry II is similar to the
simulated Δm/z of ∼1.8
(Figure S1c, Supporting Information), and
the resolution improvement with the narrower electrodes is in agreement
with the observation from the simulations.
Figure 2
Mass spectra of MRFA
(a and c) and DEET (b and d) obtained from
ion sponges of Geometry I (a and b) and II (c and d), resonance ejection
at 376 kHz.
Mass spectra of MRFA
(a and c) and DEET (b and d) obtained from
ion sponges of Geometry I (a and b) and II (c and d), resonance ejection
at 376 kHz.The mass resolution of
an ion trap array is affected by the resolving
power of each individual ion trap as well as the consistency in dimensions
of all the trap units. As demonstrated previously, the mass shifts
among traps due to imperfect fabrication could contribute to the broadening
of the peaks observed with the entire array.[24] This effect was tested by comparing the resolutions of the spectra
obtained with the entire array or an individual channel (with only
a small area exposed to ion detector). However, no significant difference
was observed, presumably because the dimension of every trapping unit
was large in comparison with the fabrication imperfections; also the
resolution of individual unit was already compromised due to the distorted
field associated with the simple configuration.
Distribution of the Trapped
Ions
The sensitivity for the mass analysis using the ion
sponge is dependent
on the efficiency of trapping the ions introduced and the open period
of the DAPI, which is typically shorter than 20 ms to avoid elevation
of pressure above 500 mTorr in the manifold. Every individual ion
trap inside the array is a 3D quadrupole ion trap. While the efficiency
for trapping externally injected ions is typically very low for individual
3D ion traps,[25,26] the 3D array of 3D traps is expected
to have an improved overall efficiency for catching the ions introduced
by DAPI. The distributions of the ions trapped in an ion sponge were
characterized in the following two experiments.An ion sponge
of Geometry I with 2 trap layers (7 meshes) was used
in a study with simultaneous ion injections at different locations
(Figure S3a, Supporting Information). The
cocaine ions and DEET ions, generated by nanoESI and APCI, respectively,
were introduced toward the ion sponge at the same time using two DAPIs.
The signal intensities for the protonated cocaine m/z 304 and DEET dimer m/z 383 were recorded by the three detectors during the mass
selective instability scans as shown in Figure S3b, Supporting Information, which reflects the distributions of
these ions in the XY plane of the ion sponge. It
was obvious that these two types of ions were trapped in the space
with relatively broad distributions, centered at the points of injection
but overlapping with each other.The broadening
of the ion distribution was further characterized
by varying the distance between the center DAPI capillary and the
ion sponge (Figure S4a, Supporting Information). Since there was a gas expansion after the DAPI inlet,[27] more broadened distributions would have been
expected for longer distances; however, it was actually observed with
the shortest distance of 2.5 mm (Figure S4b, Supporting
Information). The vacuum pressure varies during the DAPI open
time and can increase to several hundred millitorrs. The local pressure
at the first mesh in this case, for example, with a background vacuum
pressure of 100 mTorr, was calculated to be about 10 Torr based on
the data extracted from the simulations previously reported,[27] corresponding to a mean free path of about 5.3
μm. A strong disturbance of the gas jet can be caused with the
cross electrodes on the first mesh of the ion sponge, which facilitated
the dispersion of the ion laterally into traps located far from the
center in the XY plane.Besides the lateral
distribution of ions in the XY plane, the ion distribution
along the Z direction
could also be characterized layer by layer. This could be easily done
by eliminating the ions in some of the layers prior to scanning the
ions trapped in other layers. The elimination of the ions trapped
in the two adjacent layers was achieved by applying a broadband SWIFT
on the shared end-cap electrode. Trapping of the ions ejected by SWIFT
from one layer into other layers was not observed in our experiments,
which presumably was due to the relatively high kinetic energies gained
by the ions during the resonance excitation. The disturbance to the
ion trapping in the last layer by the high voltage on the detectors
was observed with this type of characterization. For a three-layer
ion sponge, no mass shift was observed for ions ejected from different
layers of the ion sponge, which means the effect due to a difference
in the time-of-flight for passing through the meshes was minimal.In order to distinguish the original trapping layers for the ions
detected in a single scan, resonance ejection was implemented with
a different ejection point set for each layer. For example, using
an ion sponge of Geometry I with two trapping layers (noted as L1
and L2, Figure S5a, Supporting Information), the boundary ejection can be used for layer L1 while a resonance
ejection can be used for layer L2 (Figure S5b, Supporting Information). For the experimental demonstration,
a monopolar AC signal (AC frequency 290 kHz, 1.5 V) was applied on
the mesh number 5 (Figure S5a, Supporting Information) during the mass selectively instability scan. Ions trapped in L2
were ejected earlier than those of the same m/z values but trapped in L1. The
spectra recorded for DEET without and with the resonance ejection
for L2 are shown in Figure 3a,b, respectively.
Two peaks, for the protonated ion m/z 192 and proton-bound dimer m/z 383, were observed with the boundary ejections for both layers.
However, two additional peaks appeared with the resonance ejection
applied on L2 (Figure 3b), corresponding to
the m/z 192 and m/z 383 ejected at a lower q from
L2. The layers of origins for the peaks were confirmed by the pre-elimination
method described above. This differential ejection method of shifting
peaks for different layers using resonance ejections was applied as
a general means for characterizing the ions trapped in different layers
after each procedure for gas phase ion processing.
Figure 3
Mass spectra of DEET
(a) with boundary ejections for both layers
L1 and L2 and (b) with boundary ejection for L1 and resonance ejection
for L2. (c) Mass spectrum of DEET recorded with boundary ejection
for L1, after ions in L2 eliminated by applying a SWIFT. (d) Mass
spectrum of DEET after ion transfer from L1 to L2 using DC pulses,
boundary ejection for L1, and resonance ejection for L2.
Mass spectra of DEET
(a) with boundary ejections for both layers
L1 and L2 and (b) with boundary ejection for L1 and resonance ejection
for L2. (c) Mass spectrum of DEET recorded with boundary ejection
for L1, after ions in L2 eliminated by applying a SWIFT. (d) Mass
spectrum of DEET after ion transfer from L1 to L2 using DC pulses,
boundary ejection for L1, and resonance ejection for L2.
Inter-Layer Ion Transfer
The ion transfer from L1 to
L2 was performed using the same ion sponge and subsequently characterized
using the resonance ejection method described above. After the DEET
ions were introduced into the two layers of the ion sponge, layer
L2 was emptied by applying a broadband SWIFT (frequency range 10–410
kHz, amplitude 5 V, duration 50 ms) on mesh No. 5 (Figure S5a, Supporting Information). The spectrum recorded
with an rf scan is shown in Figure 3c, showing
the ions ejected from L1 with a boundary ejection. To transfer ions
from L1 to L2, a DC pulse of 1 ms and 110 V was applied on the mesh
No. 1 to push the ions toward the L2. It was found that it was necessary
to apply a DC pulse on mesh No. 5 simultaneously, with an optimized
voltage of 30 V, to catch the ions in L2. A similar procedure was
used in a previous study for ion transfer between two cylindrical
ion traps.[28] Figure 3d shows a MS spectrum recorded with resonance ejection for L2 after
the ion transfer. The peak of m/z 383 reappeared for L2, indicating a successful transfer of some
proton-bound dimers from L1 to L2. The scan function for implementing
the experiment is shown in the Supporting Information (Figure S6).
Mass Selective Ion Sorting
Another
interesting function
developed with the ion sponges is the mass selective ion sorting,
which enabled an automatic separation of ions in gas phase based on
their m/z values. The implementation
of this concept is based on the creation of a different potential
well depth for each layer in an ion sponge, optimized for ions of
a narrow m/z range. The potential
well depth for ions of a particular m/z value in an ion trap is dependent on the trap size.[1,29] By adjusting the trap geometry of each layer (Figure 4a), the stability diagrams and potential well depths could
become different even though the same rf is applied on ring electrode
meshes of all the layers (Figure 4b). A series
of ion transfer experiments were carried out using a 2-layer ion sponge
(7 meshes), with layer L1 of Geometry III (smaller) and L2 of Geometry
II (larger) (Figure 4a). The DEET ions were
introduced through DAPI into this ion sponge. The trapped ions were
scanned out with boundary ejection for L1 and resonance ejection for
L2. As shown in Figure 4c, when a relatively
low RF trapping voltage (115 V0-p) was applied during
the ion injection, the protonated DEET monomer m/z 192 and dimer m/z 383
could only be trapped in L1 but not in L2. As the amplitude of the
trapping rf increased to 175 V0-p, the DEET monomer
ions m/z 192 were trapped in L2
while the dimer ions m/z 383 were
only trapped in L1. Further increase of the rf voltage to 195 V0-p enabled the trapping of both DEET monomer and dimer
ions in L2, while only dimer ions trapped in L1. This interesting
feature of the ion sponges could be used for mass-selective accumulation
of ions in different locations in an ion sponge, which can be dynamically
adjusted in real time with the trapping rf voltage. The adverse space
charge effect to ions of low abundance could potentially be minimized
using this method.
Figure 4
(a) Schematic configuration of an ion sponge with two
layers of
different sizes and (b) corresponding illustrations of the conceptual
stability diagrams and pseudopotential well depths with the same RF
applied on both layers. (c) Mass spectra obtained for DEET ions using
an ion sponge with Geometry III for L1 and Geometry II for L2 with
trapping rf amplitude of 115 V0-p, 175 V0-p, and 195 V0-p.
(a) Schematic configuration of an ion sponge with two
layers of
different sizes and (b) corresponding illustrations of the conceptual
stability diagrams and pseudopotential well depths with the same RF
applied on both layers. (c) Mass spectra obtained for DEET ions using
an ion sponge with Geometry III for L1 and Geometry II for L2 with
trapping rf amplitude of 115 V0-p, 175 V0-p, and 195 V0-p.
Tandem Mass Spectrometry in Space
Tandem mass spectrometry
(MS/MS) is a powerful tool in chemical analysis and study of gas phase
ion chemistry. It can be used to eliminate the background chemical
noise and to elucidate the chemical structures of the compounds. MS/MS
can be easily performed using an ion sponge by applying the notched
SWIFT for ion isolation followed by an excitation AC for CID. In our
experiments, these signals were applied to the shared end-cap meshes
and CID occurred simultaneously in all the trapping units (see Figures
S7 and S8, Supporting Information). In
this “tandem-in-time” mode, the fragment ions were produced
and trapped in the same trap unit where the precursor ions were trapped
and isolated, just like using a single quadrupole ion trap.[1]Using the multilayer feature of the ion
sponge, a “tandem-in-space” mode was also developed.
The tandem-in-space analysis is typically performed using instruments
with beam type CID, such as a triple quadrupole, quadrupole-quadrupole-trap,
or quadrupole-TOF (time-of-flight) instruments. The precursor isolation,
ion fragmentation, and fragment ion analysis are performed in different
analyzers. In comparison with a tandem-in-time procedure in a single
ion trap, one of the advantages of tandem in space is the reduction
of the space charge effect on the fragment ions of interest. The fragment
ions can also be continuously accumulated as in a QTrap instrument
(AB Sciex, Toronto, Canada).[4] While the
multiple layers of ion traps in an ion sponge can be all operated
uniformly in a parallel fashion, they can also be used as multiple
stages of analyzers in a sequential fashion to implement the tandem-in-space
procedure. For an ion sponge with layers of different sizes similar
to that shown in Figure 4a, the L2 with traps
of larger sizes has a stability diagram and a potential well better
suited for trapping the fragment ions in a lower m/z range (Figure 4b). In
L1, the precursor ions can be set at a high q value
for CID with a higher excitation energy. This would not be applicable
with the typically tandem-in-time approach using a single ion trap,[30,31] since the fragment ions could not be stably trapped in the same
device. However, using the ion sponge with layers of different sizes,
the fragment ions could possibly be caught by L2 with a lower low-mass
cutoff at the same rf voltage.For experimental implementation,
an ion sponge of 2 layers was
constructed as shown in Figure 5a, with L1
of Geometry IV and L2 of Geometry V with a larger z0. The protonated imatinib m/z 494 was produced by nanoESI and introduced through the
DAPI. The ions trapped in L2 were eliminated by applying a broadband
SWIFT on the mesh 5 (Figure 5a). The isolation
of the precursor ions in L1 can be done by applying a notched SWIFT
on mesh 1 and/or 3. Instead of applying an AC like in a traditional
ion trap for CID, a DC voltage was applied on mesh 1, which displaces
the trapped ions off the center of the trap and induces the excitement
of the ions with the higher RF field.[32−34] The positive DC voltage
applied on mesh 1 also pushed the fragment ions toward L2 which facilitated
the directional transfer. The actual scan function used for the tandem-in-space
procedure is shown in Figure S9, Supporting Information. The differential ejection method was used to examine the ions from
both L1 and L2. As shown with the spectra in Figure 5b,c, the CID occurred with a DC voltage of 18 V and the fragment
ions were all trapped in L2. The CID efficiency increased at higher
DC voltages (Figure 5d), and a complete dissociation
of protonated imatinib m/z 494 was
achieved at 22 V (Figure 5e).
Figure 5
(a) Schematic illustration
of the tandem-in-space procedure for
an ion sponge with two trap layers of different sizes. (b–e)
Mass spectra recorded for CID of protonated imatinib m/z 494 using an ion sponge with L1 of Geometry IV
and L2 of Geometry V, at activation DC voltage of (b) 0 V, (c) +18
V, (d) +19 V, and (e) +22 V DC, respectively.
(a) Schematic illustration
of the tandem-in-space procedure for
an ion sponge with two trap layers of different sizes. (b–e)
Mass spectra recorded for CID of protonated imatinib m/z 494 using an ion sponge with L1 of Geometry IV
and L2 of Geometry V, at activation DC voltage of (b) 0 V, (c) +18
V, (d) +19 V, and (e) +22 V DC, respectively.
Conclusion
In this study, we have explored a novel
concept for constructing
trap arrays of large numbers of units with simple means for fabrication.
For the first time, we demonstrated the fabrication and the function
of a 3-dimentional array of quadrupole ion traps. The ion sponge provides
large trapping capacity and is capable of catching externally introduced
ions at a maximal efficiency. Flexible operations and versatile procedures,
such as interlayer ion transfer, mass-selective ion sorting, or tandem-in-space
MS/MS, can be implemented with a single driving rf. A tandem MS device
with a large number of stages could be developed by simply adding
two meshes for each stage. The ion sponge potentially is best suited for gas phase ion processing
prior to a final MS analysis in hybrid mass spectrometers.
Authors: John E P Syka; Jarrod A Marto; Dina L Bai; Stevan Horning; Michael W Senko; Jae C Schwartz; Beatrix Ueberheide; Benjamin Garcia; Scott Busby; Tara Muratore; Jeffrey Shabanowitz; Donald F Hunt Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: Miriam Fico; Jeffrey D Maas; Scott A Smith; Anthony B Costa; Zheng Ouyang; William J Chappell; R Graham Cooks Journal: Analyst Date: 2009-04-03 Impact factor: 4.616
Authors: Yuan Tian; Trevor K Decker; Joshua S McClellan; Qinghao Wu; Abraham De la Cruz; Aaron R Hawkins; Daniel E Austin Journal: J Am Soc Mass Spectrom Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 3.109
Authors: Yuan Tian; Trevor K Decker; Joshua S McClellan; Linsey Bennett; Ailin Li; Abraham De la Cruz; Derek Andrews; Stephen A Lammert; Aaron R Hawkins; Daniel E Austin Journal: J Am Soc Mass Spectrom Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 3.109