| Title |
The Effect of Collimating Lens Focusing on Laser Beam Shape in Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-MS)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13361-017-1867-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew B. O’Rourke, Benjamin B. A. Raymond, Steven P. Djordjevic, Matthew P. Padula |
| Abstract |
Tissue imaging using matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry (MALDI-MS) is a well-established technique that, in recent years, has seen wider adoption and novel application. Applications such imaging mass spectrometry (IMS) and biotyping are beginning to gain greater exposure and use; however, with limitations in optimization methods, producing the best result often relies on the ability to customize the physical characteristics of the instrumentation, a task that is challenging for most mass spectrometry laboratories. With this in mind, we have described the effect of making simple adjustments to the laser optics at the final collimating lens area, to adjust the laser beam size and shape in order to allow greater customization of the instrument for improving techniques such as IMS. We have therefore been able to demonstrate that improvements can be made without requiring the help of an electrical engineer or external funding in a way that only costs a small amount of time. Graphical Abstract ᅟ. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 11% |
| Researcher | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 3 | 33% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 January 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#2,946
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#326,005
of 449,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#35
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 449,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.