Performance comparisons of nano-LC systems, electrospray sources and LC-MS-MS platforms.
Performance comparisons of nano-LC systems, electrospray sources and LC-MS-MS platforms.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/chromsci/bms255
复制
发表时间：
2014-02
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
Qian Liu;Jennifer S. Cobb;Joshua L. Johnson;Qi Wang;J. Agar
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Qian Liu;Jennifer S. Cobb;Joshua L. Johnson;Qi Wang;J. Agar
选择合适的纳米液相色谱系统（LC）、电离源和质谱仪进行LC-串联质谱（MS-MS）研究是一个复杂的问题，因为有许多相互竞争的技术。本研究比较了四种流行的纳米lc系统、四种电离源和三种使用完全不同LC-MS-MS系统的MS设备。同样性能的Proxeon、Waters和Eksigent nanoLC-Ultra系统在LC性能上存在统计学上的显著差异[保留时间常规为0.7-0.9%相对标准偏差（RSD）]，并且都优于Eksigent nanoLC-2D （RSD ~ 2%）。此外，还发现了布鲁克HCT离子阱质谱仪与Eksigent纳米olc - 2d和布鲁克纳米电喷雾源之间的兼容性问题。电喷雾源本身对布鲁克HCT离子阱的色谱再现性产生了意想不到的显著影响。New Objective纳米喷雾源在滞留时间RSD上显著优于Bruker纳米喷雾源（RSD分别为1%和14%）；布鲁克雾化纳米喷雾源的性能优于这两种传统的非雾化源（保留时间的RSD为0.5%）。最后，为了提供整体蛋白质组学敏感性的有用基准，通过分析三个MS设施中牛血清白蛋白的色氨酸消化浓度范围，比较了不同的LC-MS-MS平台。结果表明，使用Bruker HCT-Ultra离子阱、Thermo LTQ-Velos线性离子阱和Thermo LTQ-Orbitrap XL-ETD可以实现相似的灵敏度。
Selecting a suitable nano-liquid chromatography system (LC), ionization source and mass spectrometer for LC-tandem mass spectrometry (MS-MS) studies is complicated by numerous competing technologies. This study compares four popular nano-LC systems, four ionization sources and three MS facilities that use completely different LC-MS-MS systems. Statistically significant differences in LC performance were identified with similarly performing Proxeon, Waters and Eksigent nanoLC-Ultra systems [retention time routinely at 0.7-0.9% relative standard deviation (RSD)], and all outperformed the Eksigent nanoLC-2D (RSD ∼2%). In addition, compatibility issues were identified between the Bruker HCT ion trap mass spectrometer and both the Eksigent nanoLC-2D and the Bruker nanoelectrospray source. The electrospray source itself had an unexpected and striking effect on chromatographic reproducibility on the Bruker HCT ion trap. The New Objective nanospray source significantly outperformed the Bruker nanospray source in retention time RSD (1% RSD versus 14% RSD, respectively); and the Bruker nebulized nanospray source outperformed both of these traditional, non-nebulized sources (0.5% RSD in retention time). Finally, to provide useful benchmarks for overall proteomics sensitivity, different LC-MS-MS platforms were compared by analyzing a range of concentrations of tryptic digests of bovine serum albumin at three MS facilities. The results indicate that similar sensitivity can be realized with a Bruker HCT-Ultra ion trap, a Thermo LTQ-Velos Linear ion trap and a Thermo LTQ-Orbitrap XL-ETD.