Charge states for a 4 kDa peptide, worked through posts 121–147
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1 · go to the accepted answer.
Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.
Coming back to post #121, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Sample matrix effects: if a sample is dissolved in a complex matrix, other compounds in the matrix can suppress the peptide signal. Clean samples give higher sensitivity than dirty samples.
Quantitation by MS: most quantitation is done by LC-UV detection at 214 nm, not by MS, because extinction coefficients are better known. MS can quantify if an internal standard is used but that requires preparation.
post #125 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Calibration matters: a high-resolution instrument out of calibration can report mass with ppm error large enough to be uninformative. Check when the instrument was last calibrated before trusting the reported accuracy.
What mass accuracy establishes: the measured mass is consistent with a specific composition. What it does not establish: purity, sequence order, stereochemistry, or the absence of an isobaric species. Every one of those requires something else.
Mass accuracy is expressed in parts per million. It is the difference between observed and theoretical mass divided by theoretical mass, multiplied by a million. A high-resolution instrument in good calibration achieves low single-digit ppm on a peptide of this size.
On post #125 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Desalting before analysis: some samples need desalting to remove salts that suppress the peptide signal. Report whether desalting was used, because it can affect the apparent ionization efficiency and the reported purity.
post #129 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Tandem mass spectrometry: MS/MS fragments the molecular ion and uses fragment masses to confirm identity and detect modifications. A simple identity confirmation by LC-MS does not address post-translational modifications or impurities with the same or very close mass.
Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.
Coming back to post #130, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Resolution: "high resolution" commonly means <5 ppm across the mass range. Unit-resolution instruments achieve ±1 Da at best and cannot distinguish two species differing by less than 1 Da in total mass.
Purity and identity are different questions: LC-MS establishes that the species at a retention time has the expected mass. It does not establish how much of the sample is that species (that is what LC-UV purity answers).
This follows post #132 rather than contradicting it.
Quantitation by MS: most quantitation is done by LC-UV detection at 214 nm, not by MS, because extinction coefficients are better known. MS can quantify if an internal standard is used but that requires preparation.
I read post #134 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.
Purity and identity are different questions: LC-MS establishes that the species at a retention time has the expected mass. It does not establish how much of the sample is that species (that is what LC-UV purity answers).
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Electrospray ionisation produces multiply charged ions. For a 4 kDa peptide you expect mostly 2+, 3+, and 4+ charge states. Reading an electrospray spectrum means recognizing the envelope, not looking for one peak.
Picking up post #136: that is the part I would want checked first.
Mass accuracy is expressed in parts per million. It is the difference between observed and theoretical mass divided by theoretical mass, multiplied by a million. A high-resolution instrument in good calibration achieves low single-digit ppm on a peptide of this size.
What mass accuracy establishes: the measured mass is consistent with a specific composition. What it does not establish: purity, sequence order, stereochemistry, or the absence of an isobaric species. Every one of those requires something else.
Sample matrix effects: if a sample is dissolved in a complex matrix, other compounds in the matrix can suppress the peptide signal. Clean samples give higher sensitivity than dirty samples.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Charge states observed: for semaglutide (4113.6 Da) the doubly charged ion appears at m/z ≈ 2057, triply charged at ≈ 1371, quadruply at ≈ 1029. Those are the positions to look for; the heights depend on the ionization efficiency.
Worth separating two things that post #139 runs together.
Two things before anyone answers the substance.
First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.
post #143 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Common adducts: sodium adds ≈22, potassium adds ≈38 compared to hydrogen. A [M+Na]+ peak is common and its mass is predictable from the base mass.
Calibration matters: a high-resolution instrument out of calibration can report mass with ppm error large enough to be uninformative. Check when the instrument was last calibrated before trusting the reported accuracy.
Picking up post #143: that is the part I would want checked first.
Resolution: "high resolution" commonly means <5 ppm across the mass range. Unit-resolution instruments achieve ±1 Da at best and cannot distinguish two species differing by less than 1 Da in total mass.
On post #143 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Tandem mass spectrometry: MS/MS fragments the molecular ion and uses fragment masses to confirm identity and detect modifications. A simple identity confirmation by LC-MS does not address post-translational modifications or impurities with the same or very close mass.
This topic was referenced in
- Distinguishing a deletion sequence by mass alone — the long versionAnalytics › Mass spectrometry · 44 replies
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Reading an MS report that only gives you a single number — the long version
Reading an MS report that only gives you a single number — the long version — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I would like to understand what this number means before I…
|
2 | 47k | 18mo | |
|
Why mass spectrometry cannot tell you about an epimer
Why mass spectrometry cannot tell you about an epimer I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three…
|
+75 | 82 | 4k | 17mo |
|
Isotope patterns and why the monoisotopic peak is not the tallest
Isotope patterns and why the monoisotopic peak is not the tallest — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Working through the identity arithmetic and I would like it checked.…
|
+12 | 16 | 7.5k | 17mo |
|
MALDI versus ESI for a quick identity check
On the subject in the title: MALDI versus ESI for a quick identity check Working notes rather than a conclusion. Working through the identity arithmetic and I would like it checked. tirzepatide has a…
|
2 | 2k | 11mo | |
|
Mass error in ppm: the arithmetic and the caveat — a second dataset
On the subject in the title: Mass error in ppm: the arithmetic and the caveat — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion. Working through the identity arithmetic and I would like it checked.…
|
+20 | 24 | 1.7k | 1d |
Related topics — sharing the tags high-resolution MS, counter-ion content, charge states
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Isotope patterns and why the monoisotopic peak is not the tallest — does this still hold?
Isotope patterns and why the monoisotopic peak is not the tallest — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Working through the identity…
|
2 | 4.6k | 7h | |
|
Adsorption to container surfaces and to plastics
On the subject in the title: Adsorption to container surfaces and to plastics Working notes rather than a conclusion. A documentation question rather than an analytical one. I have a certificate in front of…
|
+13 | 17 | 4.3k | 5mo |
|
Why mass spectrometry cannot tell you about an epimer
Why mass spectrometry cannot tell you about an epimer I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three…
|
+75 | 82 | 4k | 17mo |
|
Oxidation and deamidation mass shifts, tabulated
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Oxidation and deamidation mass shifts, tabulated Everything below is what sits behind that. Working through the identity arithmetic and I would like it checked.…
|
+67 | 76 | 21k | 16mo |
|
About the Mass spectrometry category
LC-MS and high-resolution MS, charge states, mass accuracy in ppm, and what identity confirmation does and does not establish. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it,…
|
+5 | 9 | 19k | 6h |