| Title |
To What Extent is FAIMS Beneficial in the Analysis of Proteins?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13361-015-1326-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Helen J. Cooper |
| Abstract |
High field asymmetric waveform ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS), also known as differential ion mobility spectrometry, is emerging as a tool for biomolecular analysis. In this article, the benefits and limitations of FAIMS for protein analysis are discussed. The principles and mechanisms of FAIMS separation of ions are described, and the differences between FAIMS and conventional ion mobility spectrometry are detailed. Protein analysis is considered from both the top-down (intact proteins) and the bottom-up (proteolytic peptides) perspective. The roles of FAIMS in the analysis of complex mixtures of multiple intact proteins and in the analysis of multiple conformers of a single protein are assessed. Similarly, the application of FAIMS in proteomics and targeted analysis of peptides are considered. Graphical Abstract ᅟ. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 36 | 34% |
| Researcher | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 22 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 40 | 37% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 5% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 27 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 March 2016.
All research outputs
#8,187,031
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#1,147
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,681
of 405,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#10
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,835 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 405,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 58% of its contemporaries.