Analysis of native amino acids by liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization mass spectrometry: comparative study between two sources and interfaces

✍ Scribed by Marine de Person; Patrick Chaimbault; Claire Elfakir

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 2008
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 871 KB
• Volume: 43
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 1076-5174
• DOI: 10.1002/jms.1287

✦ Synopsis

Abstract

The analytical performances of two triple‐quadrupole instruments, which differ in their atmospheric‐pressure sources, were evaluated for native amino acid analysis. The Applied Biosystems/Sciex API 300 instrument was equipped with a turboIon Spray source and a curtain gas interface while the Waters/Micromass Quattro Ultima instrument was characterized by its Z‐spray source.

Liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis of native amino acids requires volatile ion‐pairing mobile phase additives (mainly perfluorinated carboxylic acids). The effects of the structure and concentration of the ion‐pairing reagents as well as the organic modifier percentage on the electrospray response of amino acids were studied in detail. The most favourable chromatographic conditions depend strongly on the mass spectrometer used. Several instrumental parameters were also studied, including spray voltage, transmission lens voltages, temperature of desolvation and auxiliary gas flow rates. The results show substantial qualitative differences depending on the instrument geometry. The quantitative performances of the two triple‐quadrupole mass spectrometers were evaluated in terms of limits of detection and quantification. The effects of the matrix on the analyte ionization were also examined, and the long‐term stability of the electrospray performance was studied over 12 h using a mobile phase containing the perfluorinated ion‐pairing reagents. The study provides information on the robustness of the MS instrument and its detection sensitivity towards native amino acid analysis. It appears that each instrument has its good and bad points since one provides higher sensitivity while another is more robust. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.