{"title":"水生溶解有机物研究中的电喷雾电离抑制--通过液相色谱-质谱法进行调查","authors":"Jeffrey A. Hawkes","doi":"10.1016/j.orggeochem.2024.104852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Ionisation suppression is a persistent issue in electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry, which decreases the signal of co-eluting analytes. In non-targeted analysis, where analyte and organic matrix identity is unknown, this poses a very challenging analytical problem when it comes to quantitatively assessing differences between samples, including in a compositional sense. In this study, I demonstrate the problems that arise due to ionisation suppression using a very simple sample mixing scheme between a fresh, metabolite rich sample (a leaf leachate) and a forest pond water. Samples were analysed after solid phase extraction on Agilent PPL and using high performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray ionisation – Orbitrap mass spectrometry, charged aerosol detector and diode array detector, the latter two allowing quantification of eluting material. I found that more than half of the well-resolved analytes expected to be present (at equal concentration) were completely lost from detection after mixing with pond water DOM. The average recovery of analytical signal (i.e., the signal weighted average), was about 50%, and was highly variable between analytes. Ionisation suppression also affected the signal obtained from the geochemical background DOM, and material recovery decreased slightly when mixing samples and extracting at a higher volume on PPL. Overall, the results showed that ionisation suppression is an extremely important problem for comparison of biogeochemical samples, even when only considering presence and absence of detected features. A multi detector approach and liquid chromatographic separation adds great value in comparison to use of only high resolution mass spectrometry (in direct infusion mode).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":400,"journal":{"name":"Organic Geochemistry","volume":"196 ","pages":"Article 104852"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638024001177/pdfft?md5=ea44ab4b9d9bda29a26c158d352410bc&pid=1-s2.0-S0146638024001177-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Electrospray ionisation suppression in aquatic dissolved organic matter studies – Investigation via liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey A. Hawkes\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.orggeochem.2024.104852\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Ionisation suppression is a persistent issue in electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry, which decreases the signal of co-eluting analytes. In non-targeted analysis, where analyte and organic matrix identity is unknown, this poses a very challenging analytical problem when it comes to quantitatively assessing differences between samples, including in a compositional sense. In this study, I demonstrate the problems that arise due to ionisation suppression using a very simple sample mixing scheme between a fresh, metabolite rich sample (a leaf leachate) and a forest pond water. Samples were analysed after solid phase extraction on Agilent PPL and using high performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray ionisation – Orbitrap mass spectrometry, charged aerosol detector and diode array detector, the latter two allowing quantification of eluting material. I found that more than half of the well-resolved analytes expected to be present (at equal concentration) were completely lost from detection after mixing with pond water DOM. The average recovery of analytical signal (i.e., the signal weighted average), was about 50%, and was highly variable between analytes. Ionisation suppression also affected the signal obtained from the geochemical background DOM, and material recovery decreased slightly when mixing samples and extracting at a higher volume on PPL. Overall, the results showed that ionisation suppression is an extremely important problem for comparison of biogeochemical samples, even when only considering presence and absence of detected features. A multi detector approach and liquid chromatographic separation adds great value in comparison to use of only high resolution mass spectrometry (in direct infusion mode).</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organic Geochemistry\",\"volume\":\"196 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104852\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638024001177/pdfft?md5=ea44ab4b9d9bda29a26c158d352410bc&pid=1-s2.0-S0146638024001177-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organic Geochemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638024001177\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organic Geochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146638024001177","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
电离抑制是电喷雾离子化质谱分析中的一个老大难问题,它会降低共沉淀分析物的信号。在非靶标分析中,由于分析物和有机基质的特性未知,因此在定量评估样品之间的差异(包括成分意义上的差异)时,这构成了一个极具挑战性的分析问题。在本研究中,我使用了一个非常简单的样品混合方案,将富含代谢物的新鲜样品(树叶沥滤液)和森林池塘水混合在一起,演示了由于电离抑制而产生的问题。样品在 Agilent PPL 上进行固相萃取后,使用高效液相色谱法结合电喷雾离子化 - Orbitrap 质谱法、带电气溶胶检测器和二极管阵列检测器进行分析,后两者可对洗脱物质进行定量。我发现,在与池塘水 DOM 混合后,一半以上预期存在的高分辨率分析物(等浓度)完全失去了检测能力。分析信号的平均回收率(即信号加权平均值)约为 50%,不同分析物之间的回收率差异很大。电离抑制也会影响从地球化学背景 DOM 中获得的信号,在 PPL 上混合样品并以较大体积提取时,物质回收率会略有下降。总之,研究结果表明,即使只考虑检测特征的存在与否,电离抑制也是比较生物地球化学样品的一个极其重要的问题。与仅使用高分辨率质谱(直接注入模式)相比,多检测器方法和液相色谱分离法具有更高的价值。
Electrospray ionisation suppression in aquatic dissolved organic matter studies – Investigation via liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry
Ionisation suppression is a persistent issue in electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry, which decreases the signal of co-eluting analytes. In non-targeted analysis, where analyte and organic matrix identity is unknown, this poses a very challenging analytical problem when it comes to quantitatively assessing differences between samples, including in a compositional sense. In this study, I demonstrate the problems that arise due to ionisation suppression using a very simple sample mixing scheme between a fresh, metabolite rich sample (a leaf leachate) and a forest pond water. Samples were analysed after solid phase extraction on Agilent PPL and using high performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray ionisation – Orbitrap mass spectrometry, charged aerosol detector and diode array detector, the latter two allowing quantification of eluting material. I found that more than half of the well-resolved analytes expected to be present (at equal concentration) were completely lost from detection after mixing with pond water DOM. The average recovery of analytical signal (i.e., the signal weighted average), was about 50%, and was highly variable between analytes. Ionisation suppression also affected the signal obtained from the geochemical background DOM, and material recovery decreased slightly when mixing samples and extracting at a higher volume on PPL. Overall, the results showed that ionisation suppression is an extremely important problem for comparison of biogeochemical samples, even when only considering presence and absence of detected features. A multi detector approach and liquid chromatographic separation adds great value in comparison to use of only high resolution mass spectrometry (in direct infusion mode).
期刊介绍:
Organic Geochemistry serves as the only dedicated medium for the publication of peer-reviewed research on all phases of geochemistry in which organic compounds play a major role. The Editors welcome contributions covering a wide spectrum of subjects in the geosciences broadly based on organic chemistry (including molecular and isotopic geochemistry), and involving geology, biogeochemistry, environmental geochemistry, chemical oceanography and hydrology.
The scope of the journal includes research involving petroleum (including natural gas), coal, organic matter in the aqueous environment and recent sediments, organic-rich rocks and soils and the role of organics in the geochemical cycling of the elements.
Sedimentological, paleontological and organic petrographic studies will also be considered for publication, provided that they are geochemically oriented. Papers cover the full range of research activities in organic geochemistry, and include comprehensive review articles, technical communications, discussion/reply correspondence and short technical notes. Peer-reviews organised through three Chief Editors and a staff of Associate Editors, are conducted by well known, respected scientists from academia, government and industry. The journal also publishes reviews of books, announcements of important conferences and meetings and other matters of direct interest to the organic geochemical community.