Stefanie Wernisch1, Farsad Afshinnia1, Thekkelnaycke Rajendiran2,3, Subramaniam Pennathur4,5,6. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Michigan, 5309 Brehm Center, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, 1301 Catherine Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. 3. Michigan Regional Comprehensive Metabolomics Resource Core, University of Michigan, 6300 Brehm Tower, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Michigan, 5309 Brehm Center, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. spennath@umich.edu. 5. Michigan Regional Comprehensive Metabolomics Resource Core, University of Michigan, 6300 Brehm Tower, 1000 Wall Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. spennath@umich.edu. 6. Department of Molecular and Integrative Physiology, University of Michigan, 1137 E. Catherine Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. spennath@umich.edu.
Abstract
Metabolomics applications of differential mobility spectrometry (DMS)-mass spectrometry (MS) have largely concentrated on targeted assays and the removal of isobaric or chemical interferences from the signals of a small number of analytes. In the work reported here, we systematically investigated the application range of a DMS-MS method for metabolomics using more than 800 authentic metabolite standards as the test set. The coverage achieved with the DMS-MS platform was comparable to that achieved with chromatographic methods. High orthogonality was observed between hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography and the 2-propanol-mediated DMS separation, and previously observed similarities were confirmed for the DMS platform and reversed-phase liquid chromatography. We describe the chemical selectivity observed for selected subsets of the metabolite test set, such as lipids, amino acids, nucleotides, and organic acids. Furthermore, we rationalize the behavior and separation of isomeric aromatic acids, bile acids, and other metabolites. Graphical abstract Differential mobility spectrometry-mass spectrometry (DMS-MS) facilitates rapid separation of metabolites of similar mass-to-charge ratio by distributing them across the compensation voltage range on the basis of their different molecular structures.
n class="Chemical">Metabolomics applications of differential mobility spectrometry (DMS)-mass spectrometry (MS) have largely concentrated on targeted assays and the removal of isobaric or chemical interferences from the signals of a small number of analytes. In the work reported here, we systematically investigated the application range of a DMS-MS method for metabolomics using more than 800 authentic metabolite standards as the test set. The coverage achieved with the DMS-MS platform was comparable to that achieved with chromatographic methods. High orthogonality was observed between hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography and the 2-propanol-mediated DMS separation, and previously observed similarities were confirmed for the DMS platform and reversed-phase liquid chromatography. We describe the chemical selectivity observed for selected subsets of the metabolite test set, such as lipids, amino acids, nucleotides, and organic acids. Furthermore, we rationalize the behavior and separation of isomeric aromatic acids, bile acids, and other metabolites. Graphical abstract Differential mobility spectrometry-mass spectrometry (DMS-MS) facilitates rapid separation of metabolites of similar mass-to-charge ratio by distributing them across the compensation voltage range on the basis of their different molecular structures.
Entities:
Keywords:
Differential mobility spectrometry; Lipidomics; Mass spectrometry; Metabolomics; Selectivity
Authors: Chang Liu; J C Yves Le Blanc; Jefry Shields; John S Janiszewski; Christian Ieritano; Gene F Ye; Gillian F Hawes; W Scott Hopkins; J Larry Campbell Journal: Analyst Date: 2015-10-21 Impact factor: 4.616
Authors: Paul R S Baker; Aaron M Armando; J Larry Campbell; Oswald Quehenberger; Edward A Dennis Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2014-09-15 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Chang Liu; J C Yves Le Blanc; Bradley B Schneider; Jefry Shields; James J Federico; Hui Zhang; Justin G Stroh; Gregory W Kauffman; Daniel W Kung; Christian Ieritano; Evan Shepherdson; Mitch Verbuyst; Luke Melo; Moaraj Hasan; Dalia Naser; John S Janiszewski; W Scott Hopkins; J Larry Campbell Journal: ACS Cent Sci Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 14.553
Authors: Christopher D Chouinard; Gabe Nagy; Ian K Webb; Sandilya V B Garimella; Erin S Baker; Yehia M Ibrahim; Richard D Smith Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2018-08-24 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Catherine S Lane; Kirsty McManus; Philip Widdowson; Sarah A Flowers; Gerard Powell; Ian Anderson; J Larry Campbell Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Susan Marie Viet; Jill C Falman; Lori S Merrill; Elaine M Faustman; David A Savitz; Nancy Mervish; Dana B Barr; Lisa A Peterson; Robert Wright; David Balshaw; Barbara O'Brien Journal: Int J Hyg Environ Health Date: 2021-05-23 Impact factor: 7.401