↓ Skip to main content

Radical a-Ions in Electron Capture Dissociation: On the Origin of Species

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
Title
Radical a-Ions in Electron Capture Dissociation: On the Origin of Species
Published in
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, April 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13361-012-0374-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roman A. Zubarev, David M. Good, Mikhail M. Savitski

Abstract

Radical a* ions appear in electron capture dissociation mass spectra sporadically, but sometimes with high intensity. Mechanistically, radical a ions are hypothesized to arise due to thermodynamically disadvantaged charge solvation on the backbone nitrogen (instead of carbonyl), which upon neutralization produces a hypervalent group instantly fragmenting into a radical b* and conventional y' ion. The former species is unstable and, after releasing a CO molecule, decays to an a* ion. Here we validate this scenario by direct observation of the complementarity of a* and y' ions by interrogation of an ECD MS/MS database of >10,000 doubly and >5,000 triply charged tryptic peptides. Intriguingly, the most abundant a*/y' pairs are found to come from the cleavage of the same backbone link as the most abundant c' and z* complementary ions. This result gives strong support to the "local" N-Cα bond cleavage mechanism, in which the dissociation occurs at the site of charge solvation. However, a second strong peak is observed in the c'/z* fragment distribution four residues away from the a*/y' cleavage, which supports the indirect N-Cα bond cleavage mechanism. The size distribution of a ions from doubly (but not triply!) charged precursors shows deficit of a3 ions, and possibly a6 ions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 38%
Researcher 2 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 13%
Unknown 2 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 4 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 13%
Unknown 2 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 April 2012.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#2,723
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,282
of 174,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#8
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 174,787 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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.