↓ Skip to main content

Ultrasonication-assisted spray ionization mass spectrometry for the analysis of biomolecules in solution

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Ultrasonication-assisted spray ionization mass spectrometry for the analysis of biomolecules in solution
Published in
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, November 2011
DOI 10.1016/j.jasms.2010.04.021
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tsung-Yi Chen, Jia-Yi Lin, Jen-Yi Chen, Yu-Chie Chen

Abstract

In this paper, we describe a novel technique--ultrasonication-assisted spray ionization (UASI)--for the generation of singly charged and multiply charged gas-phase ions of biomolecules (e.g., amino acids, peptides, and proteins) from solution; this method employs a low-frequency ultrasonicator (ca. 40 kHz) in place of the high electric field required for electrospray ionization. When a capillary inlet is immersed into a sample solution within a vial subjected to ultrasonication, the solution is continually directed to the capillary outlet as a result of ultrasonication-assisted capillary action; an ultrasonic spray of the sample solution is emitted at the outlet of the tapered capillary, leading to the ready generation of gas-phase ions. Using an ion trap mass spectrometer, we found that singly charged amino acid and multiply charged peptides/proteins ions were generated through this single-step operation, which is both straightforward and extremely simple to perform. The setup is uncomplicated: only a low-frequency ultrasonicator and a tapered capillary are required to perform UASI. The mass spectra of the multiply charged peptides and proteins obtained from sample solutions subjected to UASI resemble those observed in ESI mass spectra.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Taiwan 1 3%
Unknown 31 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 24%
Researcher 8 24%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 16 48%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 12%
Engineering 3 9%
Computer Science 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 March 2023.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#1,227
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,829
of 245,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#65
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 245,491 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.