| Title |
Carbon Nanoparticles and Graphene Nanosheets as MALDI Matrices in Glycomics: a New Approach to Improve Glycan Profiling in Biological Samples
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13361-018-1985-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alireza Banazadeh, Wenjing Peng, Lucas Veillon, Yehia Mechref |
| Abstract |
Glycomics continues to be a highly dynamic and interesting research area due to the need to comprehensively understand the biological attributes of glycosylation in many important biological functions such as the immune response, cell development, cell differentiation/adhesion, and host-pathogen interactions. Although matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI) mass spectrometry (MS) has proven to be suitable for glycomic profiling studies, there is a need for improved sensitivity in the detection of native glycans, which ionize inefficiently. In this study, we investigated the efficiencies of graphene nanosheets (GNs) and carbon nanoparticles (CNPs) as MALDI matrices and co-matrices in glycan profiling. Our results indicated an enhancement of signal intensity by several orders of magnitude upon using GNs and CNPs in MALDI analysis of N-glycans derived from a variety of biological samples. Interestingly, increasing the amounts of CNPs and GNs improved not only the signal intensities but also prompted in-source decay (ISD) fragmentations, which produced extensive glycosidic and cross-ring cleavages. Our results indicated that the extent of ISD fragmentation could be modulated by CNP and GN concentrations, to obtain MS2 and pseudo-MS3 spectra. The results for glycan profiling in high salt solutions confirmed high salt-tolerance capacities for both CNPs and GNs. Finally, the results showed that by using CNPs and GNs as co-matrices, DHB crystal formation was more homogeneous which improved shot-to-shot reproducibility and sensitivity. 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 5 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 12% |
| Engineering | 2 | 12% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
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 23 August 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#2,946
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,587
of 341,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#46
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 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 341,728 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.