Vasyl Yatsyna1,2, Ali H Abikhodr1, Ahmed Ben Faleh1, Stephan Warnke1, Thomas R Rizzo1. 1. Laboratoire de Chimie Physique Moléculaire, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, EPFL SB ISIC LCPM, Station 6, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Department of Physics, University of Gothenburg, 412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Abstract
Coupling vibrational ion spectroscopy with high-resolution ion mobility separation offers a promising approach for detailed analysis of biomolecules in the gas phase. Improvements in the ion mobility technology have made it possible to separate isomers with minor structural differences, and their interrogation with a tunable infrared laser provides vibrational fingerprints for unambiguous database-enabled identification. Nevertheless, wide analytical application of this technique requires high-throughput approaches for acquisition of vibrational spectra of all species present in complex mixtures. In this work, we present a novel multiplexed approach and demonstrate its utility for cryogenic ion spectroscopy of peptides and glycans in mixtures. Since the method is based on Hadamard transform multiplexing, it yields infrared spectra with an increased signal-to-noise ratio compared to a conventional signal averaging approach.
Coupling vibrational ion spectroscopy with high-resolution ion mobility separation offers a promising approach for detailed analysis of biomolecules in the gas phase. Improvements in the ion mobility technology have made it possible to separate isomers with minor structural differences, and their interrogation with a tunable infrared laser provides vibrational fingerprints for unambiguous database-enabled identification. Nevertheless, wide analytical application of this technique requires high-throughput approaches for acquisition of vibrational spectra of all species present in complex mixtures. In this work, we present a novel multiplexed approach and demonstrate its utility for cryogenic ion spectroscopy of peptides and glycans in mixtures. Since the method is based on Hadamard transform multiplexing, it yields infrared spectra with an increased signal-to-noise ratio compared to a conventional signal averaging approach.
Separation and identification
of isomers are long-standing problems
in analytical chemistry. They are particularly crucial in the fields
of glycomics,[1−3] metabolomics,[4,5] and lipidomics,[6,7] where the high isomeric complexity of samples poses a significant
analytical challenge. For example, glycans, also known as oligosaccharides
or carbohydrates, are difficult to analyze due to their complex stereochemistry
and the possibility of branched structures.[8] Likewise, many important metabolite molecules are isobaric or isomeric
and difficult to identify.[5]While
mass spectrometry (MS) offers rapid analysis with extremely
high sensitivity,[9] it cannot easily distinguish
between isomers, and hence it is often combined with orthogonal separation
techniques, such as liquid chromatography (LC),[2,4,10] capillary electrophoresis,[11] or gas chromatography.[12] Even
though these hybrid techniques can separate many isomeric structures,
the addition of an orthogonal separation method often extends the
analysis time, which in the case of LC–MS can take more than
an hour for a single separation procedure. Ion mobility spectrometry
(IMS),[13−15] on the other hand, can separate isomers on a millisecond
timescale and is easily coupled to MS, showing great promise for high-throughput
analysis of complex isomeric mixtures. Recent developments in the
high-resolution IMS technology such as structures for lossless ion
manipulation (SLIM)[16,17] and cyclic IMS[18] make these techniques particularly well suited to isomer
separation. Nevertheless, it remains challenging to assign unambiguously
isomeric species in complex mixtures following high-resolution IMS
separation, either using their collisional cross sections (CCSs)[19−22] or tandem MS.[23−25] Recently, several research groups have applied infrared
(IR) spectroscopy to distinguish isomeric ions, either at room temperature
using IR multiple photon dissociation spectroscopy (IRMPD)[26−30] or under cryogenic conditions using messenger-tagging spectroscopy[31] or helium nanodroplet spectroscopy.[32−34] We have recently demonstrated that a combination of cryogenic IR
spectroscopy with ultrahigh-resolution IMS offers an unambiguous identification
of isomers with the subtlest of structural differences.[35−41] For instance, using this approach, glycan reducing-end anomers can
be separated and distinguished by their cryogenic IR spectra.[35,36,38] The power of this technique stems
from the fact that the vibrational spectrum is an intrinsic property
of a molecule, which can be stored in a database, reproduced across
laboratories, and can serve as a fingerprint for molecular identification.
While adding a spectroscopic dimension to IMS–MS does increase
the sample analysis time, we have recently developed a scheme in which
IR fingerprints of multiple, mobility-separated species can be obtained
in less than a minute.[42] Nevertheless,
fast spectroscopic analysis of all species in a complex mixture still
presents a challenge.To address this issue further, we present
here a novel multiplexed
spectroscopic technique based on Hadamard transform that can be used
to acquire simultaneously the IR spectra of all species present in
a mixture in a single laser scan. This approach could be easily implemented
on any IMS–MS instrument equipped with ion trapping and laser
irradiation. Moreover, it is particularly well-suited for spectroscopic
studies of complex mixtures with a broad range of ion mobilities.
We demonstrate the method by recording the cryogenic IR spectra of
all species separated by SLIM–IMS for several peptide and glycan
mixtures and show that the spectral signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) increases
in agreement with the theoretical multiplex advantage.
Experimental
Methods
Apparatus
Figure shows a schematic representation of the home-built
instrument that we used in this work, which has been described previously.[36,43] It combines ultrahigh-resolution SLIM–IMS with cryogenic
ion spectroscopy and time-of-flight (TOF) MS. In brief, ions produced
by nanoelectrospray are introduced into the instrument through a heated
stainless-steel capillary (170 °C) and accumulated in a dual-stage
ion funnel assembly (MassTech), which we use as a trap. Short, intense
ion packets (150 μs duration) are then released into a compact
SLIM ion mobility device (15 × 15 cm) filled with helium at 3
mbar, where molecules are separated according to their shape (i.e.,
their rotationally averaged CCS). The SLIM–IMS device[43] was designed following the work of Smith and
co-workers[16,17] and offers a single-cycle 1.5
m serpentine path for mobility separation. Extended path lengths are
obtained by allowing the ions to undergo multiple cycles.[36,44] Following SLIM–IMS separation, mobility-selected ions are
guided through differential pumping stages, an electrostatic bender,
and a quadrupole before entering a cryogenic planar trap maintained
at a temperature of 40 K. A short intense gas pulse (He/N2 mixture, 9:1 ratio) is introduced shortly before arrival of the
ions to trap them, cool them, and tag them with nitrogen in preparation
for messenger-tagging spectroscopy. Subsequently, the cold tagged
ions are irradiated with a tunable continuous-wave mid-IR laser (IPG
Photonics) and mass analyzed using a reflectron-type TOF mass spectrometer.
When the laser frequency is resonant with a vibrational transition
of the tagged molecule, it absorbs an IR photon, which leads to intramolecular
vibrational energy redistribution and dissociation of the nitrogen
tag(s). Plotting the ratio between the tagged and total ion signals
of the same species as a function of the laser wavenumber produces
highly resolved IR spectra that can serve as fingerprints for molecular
identification. Typical IR laser irradiation times are <100 ms,
and the laser power is maintained at 0.2 W across the entire tuning
range. The laser bandwidth is 0.3–1 cm–1,
and the wavenumber step was set to 1.3 cm–1 in the
present work.
Figure 1
Overview of the experimental setup employed in this work.
The figure
is adapted with permission from ref (36). Copyright 2022 American Chemical Society.
Overview of the experimental setup employed in this work.
The figure
is adapted with permission from ref (36). Copyright 2022 American Chemical Society.Arrival time distributions (ATDs) of ions following
SLIM–IMS
separation are obtained using a channeltron detector after m/z selection by the quadrupole mass filter. Alternatively,
the two-dimensional IMS–MS profiles covering all m/z values of complex samples can be obtained by scanning a narrow transmission
window (e.g., 300 μs) in the arrival time dimension and acquiring
mass spectra corresponding to this window using TOF–MS.
Multiplexed
Spectroscopy Approach
Multiplexed spectroscopy
based on Hadamard transform measures the IR response of multiple known
combinations of IMS peaks in a single laser scan and allows one to
obtain the spectrum of individual IMS peaks with an increased SNR,
a property known as the multiplex or Fellgett advantage.[45−48] In what follows, we describe the basics of the multiplexing approach
applicable to cryogenic ion spectroscopy combined with IMS.Initially, the IMS–MS profile of the sample is measured, and
the window of interest covering all IMS peaks of interest is selected
and split into N bins. Multiplexing is then performed
using a Simplex matrix S(N × N), which is a cyclic binary matrix derived from Hadamard
matrices. The first row of S corresponds to a binary
pseudorandom sequence of ones and zeros,[48] whereas the next rows correspond to a cyclic shift of the previous
row one place to the left (see Figure a). We typically use N equal to 15,
19, 23, or 31 bins of width chosen such that two IMS peaks having
the same m/z do not overlap in one
bin. During multiplexed spectroscopy scans, the ions in the IMS bins
that correspond to zeros in each row of the S matrix
are deflected, whereas ions that correspond to ones are sent to the
cryogenic trap, where they are cooled, tagged, irradiated with the
IR laser, and mass analyzed using TOF–MS. We then decode this
multiplexed IMS–MS data to obtain the mass spectra of individual
IMS peaks at each laser wavelength λ, which in turn can be used
to obtain their messenger-tagging IR spectra as described above. The
deflection of ions that correspond to zeros in the S matrix
is performed by increasing the voltage on one of the elements of the
ion steering lens (see Figure ) and is controlled by the digital output module of a PCIe-6351
card (National Instruments) using a LabView program. Ion deflection
in our setup allows producing rectangular-shaped pulses with rise
and fall times of approximately 3 μs. Therefore, if required,
the minimal bin length for multiplexing can be as short as ∼20
microseconds.
Figure 2
(a) Example of a relatively complex IMS–MS profile
with
multiple species separated using SLIM–IMS (human milk oligosaccharide
mixture, total drift length 10 m). The IMS–MS profile can be
split into N bins and represents the quantity of
interest X upon multiplexing with the Simplex matrix S (N × N). (b) Multiplexing
and demultiplexing procedure, showing the example of multiplexed data Y = S × X, where S is a (15 × 15) Simplex matrix and X is the IMS–MS
profile from panel (a).
(a) Example of a relatively complex IMS–MS profile
with
multiple species separated using SLIM–IMS (human milk oligosaccharide
mixture, total drift length 10 m). The IMS–MS profile can be
split into N bins and represents the quantity of
interest X upon multiplexing with the Simplex matrix S (N × N). (b) Multiplexing
and demultiplexing procedure, showing the example of multiplexed data Y = S × X, where S is a (15 × 15) Simplex matrix and X is the IMS–MS
profile from panel (a).Mathematically, multiplexing
implies that at each laser wavelength
λ, we measure the encoded matrix Y(λ) = S × X(λ), where S is
an (N × N) Simplex matrix, X(λ) is an (N × k) matrix that contains the individual mass spectra of N bins in the selected ATD window (Figure a), and k is the length
of the MS data vector. One may see that the measured Y(λ) matrices contain various known combinations of mass spectra
of different IMS bins (Figure b). Upon data analysis, we multiply the Y(λ)
matrices with the inverse of the S matrix to obtain the
individual MS traces in each IMS bin [i.e., we compute X(λ) = S–1 × Y(λ) at each λ]. This demultiplexing step is fast and
can be performed while scanning the laser wavelength.In this
approach, the theoretical Fellgett advantage (i.e., the
increase in the SNR using multiplexed spectroscopy compared to normal
spectroscopy of single species) can be estimated as[47]where x is the signal intensity of the m/z channel
of interest in the ith IMS bin and x̅ is defined as which for high N is approximately
equal to an average signal across all the IMS bins in the m/z channel of interest. Equation is valid for shot-noise limited conditions,
which are intrinsic to TOF–MS measurements, and it implies
that an increase in the SNR will be observed for all IMS bins with
an intensity twice higher than the average intensity across all bins
for the m/z value of interest. This is typically
the case for sparce ATDs with just a few IMS peaks in each m/z channel, which we often obtain using ultrahigh-resolution
SLIM–IMS separations of complex mixtures with a broad range
of mobilities. Equation also shows that the SNR of weak IMS peaks under the presence of
strong peaks with the same m/z value will show a
decrease in SNR upon multiplexing. Such weak IMS peaks can be identified
at the initial stage of ATD inspection, and if necessary, they can
be spectroscopically analyzed individually.It is worth noting
that Hadamard transform multiplexing was previously
applied in ion mobility instruments in order to increase their duty
cycle when coupled with continuous ion sources such as ESI.[49−53] In this case, multiplexing was achieved by sending multiple identical
ion packets for separation by the IMS device in a single experimental
cycle, which allowed increasing the SNR and resolution in the ion
mobility dimension. We employ a drastically different approach, since
our goal is to obtain IR spectra of ion packets that have different
ion mobility.
Materials
Disaccharide GalNAc-α(1–3)-Gal
was purchased from Dextra (UK), whereas Gal-β(1–3)-GalNAc
and human milk oligosaccharide samples were purchased from Carbosynth
(UK). Bovine serum albumin (BSA) protein digest was purchased from
Thermo Fisher Scientific. All samples were used without further purification.
For electrospray, the disaccharide samples were dissolved in water/methanol
(v/v 50/50) to a final concentration of 5–50 μM, and
the BSA protein digest was dissolved in water to yield a 0.5 μM
concentration.
Results and Discussion
We first
demonstrate a multiplexed spectroscopy approach by analyzing
a mixture of two isomeric disaccharides, GalNAc-α(1–3)-Gal
and Gal-β(1–3)-GalNAc, which we separate after twelve
SLIM–IMS roundtrips (total drift length of 18 m). The ATD corresponding
to [M + Na]+ ions (m/z 406) is shown in
black in Figure a,
where four major peaks can be observed. More specifically, each disaccharide
exhibits two ion mobility peaks, which likely originate from reducing-end
anomers, as was shown in our previous work.[35−37] For multiplexing,
the ATD was split into 31 bins of 1.4 ms each, as shown in red in Figure a, and the IMS–MS
data was encoded with an S(31 × 31) matrix at each
laser wavelength step. The peaks of interest that represent the two
disaccharides can be found within bins 3, 4, 7, and 8 (Figure a). The spectra corresponding
to these bins are shown in Figures b–e and were obtained by demultiplexing the
encoded IMS–MS data for each laser wavelength and plotting
the ratio between the messenger-tagged and total ion signal of the
disaccharide species.
Figure 3
(a) ATD of a mixture of two disaccharides, GalNAc-α(1–3)-Gal
and Gal-β(1–3)-GalNAc, in the [M + Na]+ state,
acquired after 12 SLIM-IMS separation cycles (18 m drift length) using
the quadrupole mass filter and the channeltron detector, compared
to the IMS profile recorded in 31 bins, 1.4 ms/bin using TOF–MS.
The peak marked with the asterisk is due to an impurity that was not
filtered by the quadrupole. (b–e) Cryogenic IR spectra of individual
peaks separated by SLIM–IMS obtained using our multiplexed
approach (red) compared with the spectra obtained under normal non-multiplexed
measurements (gray). Multiplexed IR spectroscopy was performed using
S(31 × 31) in the arrival time window of 107–150 ms, which
was split into 31 bins of 1.4 ms duration. Non-multiplexed data were
acquired directly after the multiplexed laser scan under the same
experimental conditions and using the same width and the number of
bins.
(a) ATD of a mixture of two disaccharides, GalNAc-α(1–3)-Gal
and Gal-β(1–3)-GalNAc, in the [M + Na]+ state,
acquired after 12 SLIM-IMS separation cycles (18 m drift length) using
the quadrupole mass filter and the channeltron detector, compared
to the IMS profile recorded in 31 bins, 1.4 ms/bin using TOF–MS.
The peak marked with the asterisk is due to an impurity that was not
filtered by the quadrupole. (b–e) Cryogenic IR spectra of individual
peaks separated by SLIM–IMS obtained using our multiplexed
approach (red) compared with the spectra obtained under normal non-multiplexed
measurements (gray). Multiplexed IR spectroscopy was performed using
S(31 × 31) in the arrival time window of 107–150 ms, which
was split into 31 bins of 1.4 ms duration. Non-multiplexed data were
acquired directly after the multiplexed laser scan under the same
experimental conditions and using the same width and the number of
bins.Spectra in the free OH stretch
region obtained in this way were
compared to the reference spectra acquired using isomerically pure
samples (Figure S1, Supporting Information), allowing us to assign peaks 1–2 to Gal-β(1–3)-GalNAc
and peaks 3–4 to GalNAc-α(1–3)-Gal.For
the purpose of comparing the SNR of multiplexed and normal
scans, the grey traces in Figure b–e show the corresponding laser scans acquired
with the same settings but without multiplexing (i.e., S equals the identity matrix). One can see that the SNR improves upon
multiplexing, allowing us to obtain high quality spectra in a shorter
period of time. In order to estimate the SNR gain quantitively, we
have analyzed the noise levels of multiplexed and non-multiplexed
measurements by determining the standard deviation of data within
the baseline of each spectrum where no depletion peaks occur (3680–3750
cm–1). We find that the observed gain in SNR, GSNR, reaches values between 1.7 and 2.8, depending
on the IMS peak of interest (see Figure b–e), and agrees well with the theoretical
estimation using eq . On average, an SNR increase of 2.14 is observed, and this corresponds
to a reduction in analysis time by a factor of 4.6.Next, we
demonstrate the high-throughput nature of this multiplexed
spectroscopy approach by analyzing a BSA protein digest mixture. Figure a shows the IMS–MS
profile after a single-cycle separation using our compact SLIM–IMS
device (1.5 m drift length). Even though in this case we do not separate
peptide isomers or conformers, rapid separation by SLIM–IMS
reduces the sample complexity for spectroscopic analysis. Indeed under
cryogenic conditions (40 K), every peak visible in Figure a splits into several m/z channels due to the nitrogen tagging process, and SLIM–IMS
separation helps to eliminate the possible crosstalk between the peptide
IR spectra due to the overlapping m/z channels under
the limited mass resolution of our TOF analyzer. Our multiplexed spectroscopy
analysis covered the arrival time window of 5–36 ms (see Figure a) that was split
into 23 bins of 1.35 ms each for multiplexing using S(23 × 23). As a result, we have obtained high-quality cryogenic
IR spectra of 37 peptide species in a single 24 min-long laser scan
that covered the diagnostic frequency range of 3300–3700 cm–1, probing vibrations corresponding to free and hydrogen-bonded
OH/NH stretching. Figure b–e shows several examples of spectra obtained using
multiplexing (red) compared to the non-multiplexed data (grey) obtained
under identical experimental conditions (e.g., same arrival time window,
bin width, and bin number). The comparison clearly indicates a significant
improvement in the SNR thanks to the multiplex advantage. More specifically,
we have obtained an average SNR gain across all species, ⟨GSNR⟩, equal to 1.8 ± 0.2. This value
is slightly lower than the estimated theoretical value of 2.1 ±
0.3 obtained using eq , possibly due to slightly decreased messenger-tagging efficiency
upon multiplexing due to the presence of much larger ion populations
in the cryogenic ion trap compared to non-multiplexed analysis. Nevertheless,
the obtained SNR gain of 1.8 implies that without multiplexing one
has to average data ∼3 times longer in order to reach the same
SNR. The comparison presented in Figure e also demonstrates that improved SNR can
in some cases lead to a better resolved peak pattern, which can provide
a more reliable identification of species based on their database
spectra. These results clearly demonstrate the power of high-throughput
multiplexed spectroscopy when spectra of all species in a complex
mixture need to be acquired with high accuracy in a relatively short
time.
Figure 4
(a) IMS–MS profile acquired for the BSA protein digest sample
after a single-cycle SLIM–IMS separation (drift length of 1.5
m). (b–e) Examples of peptide cryogenic IR spectra obtained
using our multiplexed approach (red) compared with the spectra obtained
using a normal, non-multiplexed approach (gray) under the same experimental
conditions. Multiplexed IR spectroscopy was performed using S(23 × 23) in the arrival time window of 5–36
ms, which was split into 23 bins of 1.35 ms each. Normal (non-multiplexed)
data were acquired directly after the multiplexed laser scan using
the same arrival time window and number of bins.
(a) IMS–MS profile acquired for the BSA protein digest sample
after a single-cycle SLIM–IMS separation (drift length of 1.5
m). (b–e) Examples of peptide cryogenic IR spectra obtained
using our multiplexed approach (red) compared with the spectra obtained
using a normal, non-multiplexed approach (gray) under the same experimental
conditions. Multiplexed IR spectroscopy was performed using S(23 × 23) in the arrival time window of 5–36
ms, which was split into 23 bins of 1.35 ms each. Normal (non-multiplexed)
data were acquired directly after the multiplexed laser scan using
the same arrival time window and number of bins.
Conclusions
In this work, we demonstrate a Hadamard transform multiplexing
approach that allows measuring the IR spectra of all species present
in a complex mixture in a single laser scan. This method is particularly
promising for the analysis of complex mixtures with high isomeric
complexity and can easily be implemented in various IMS–MS-spectroscopy
setups. For example, in addition to its use in cryogenic IR spectroscopy
employed in this work, the method can be used with IRMPD and UV spectroscopy.
Moreover, one can use this method for multiplexed fragmentation of
mobility selected species as well as for IMS analysis, which can provide alternative identification means
for isomers.[38,43,54]In the future, we plan to combine the presented multiplexed
approach
with significantly higher-resolution SLIM–IMS separations.[42,44] Furthermore, combining Hadamard transform with our cryogenic multi-trap
approach[42] will significantly increase
the throughput of spectroscopic analysis for unambiguous identification
of molecular isomers in highly complex mixtures. This process can
also be significantly accelerated by reducing the laser wavenumber
range employed for isomer identification[42] using an algorithm that analyzes the reference spectra of candidate
structures.
Authors: Oscar Hernandez; Samantha Isenberg; Vincent Steinmetz; Gary L Glish; Philippe Maitre Journal: J Phys Chem A Date: 2015-04-15 Impact factor: 2.781
Authors: Yanglan Tan; Ning Zhao; Jinfeng Liu; Pengfei Li; Corey N Stedwell; Long Yu; Nicolas C Polfer Journal: J Am Soc Mass Spectrom Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 3.109
Authors: Brian H Clowers; Elvin Cabrera; Gordon Anderson; Liulin Deng; Kelly Moser; Gregory Van Aken; John Daniel DeBord Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2021-04-02 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Eike Mucha; Ana Isabel González Flórez; Mateusz Marianski; Daniel A Thomas; Waldemar Hoffmann; Weston B Struwe; Heung S Hahm; Sandy Gewinner; Wieland Schöllkopf; Peter H Seeberger; Gert von Helden; Kevin Pagel Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2017-06-08 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Maike Lettow; Kim Greis; Márkó Grabarics; Jan Horlebein; Rebecca L Miller; Gerard Meijer; Gert von Helden; Kevin Pagel Journal: J Phys Chem A Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 2.781
Authors: Stephan Warnke; Ahmed Ben Faleh; Robert P Pellegrinelli; Natalia Yalovenko; Thomas R Rizzo Journal: Faraday Discuss Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 4.008