| Title |
Adduct Formation in ESI/MS by Mobile Phase Additives
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13361-017-1626-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anneli Kruve, Karl Kaupmees |
| Abstract |
Adduct formation is a common ionization method in electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI/MS). However, this process is poorly understood and complicated to control. We demonstrate possibilities to control adduct formation via mobile phase additives in ESI positive mode for 17 oxygen and nitrogen bases. Mobile phase additives were found to be a very effective measure for manipulating the formation efficiencies of adducts. An appropriate choice of additive may increase sensitivity by up to three orders of magnitude. In general, sodium adduct [M + Na](+) and protonated molecule [M + H](+) formation efficiencies were found to be in good correlation; however, the former were significantly more influenced by mobile phase properties. Although the highest formation efficiencies for both species were observed in water/acetonitrile mixtures not containing additives, the repeatability of the formation efficiencies was found to be improved by additives. It is concluded that mobile phase additives are powerful, yet not limiting factors, for altering adduct formation. Graphical Abstract ᅟ. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 250 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 249 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 12% |
| Researcher | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 24 | 10% |
| Unknown | 73 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 68 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 21 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 29 | 12% |
| Unknown | 90 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 March 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#2,447
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,403
of 322,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#24
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,835 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,265 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.