The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Analytics · Mass spectrometry

Reading an MS report that only gives you a single number

BD
b.demirTL2 Moderator24 Jan 2025#1

On the subject in the title: Reading an MS report that only gives you a single number Working notes rather than a conclusion.

I would like to understand what this number means before I repeat it anywhere.

A VendorInvestigate report on a tirzepatide lot gives 97.1% purity. The supplier certificate for the same lot states 97.6%. Both documents name a reversed-phase method; neither states the same gradient.

My question is not "who is right". It is: given that those two figures were produced by different methods, what is the largest difference I should expect from method alone, and at what point does a gap stop being explainable that way?

7 likes 18mo
SB
s.bergstromTL2 Moderator27 Jan 2025#2

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.

11 likes 18mo
CD
cannula_driftTL3Regular30 Jan 2025#3

post #2 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

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.

24 likes 18mo
AM
a.mwangiTL2 Moderator1 Feb 2025#4

On the opening post — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

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.

0 likes 18mo
BR
buffer_reviewTL3Regular4 Feb 2025 · edited#5

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.

1 like 18mo
SV
sa.vogelTL2 Moderator6 Feb 2025#6
buffer_review, post #5: 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. Go to post

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.

7 likes in reply to #5 18mo
L
LJankowiakTL3Regular8 Feb 2025#7

post #6 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

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).

17 likes 18mo
AC
a.cardosoTL2 Moderator10 Feb 2025#8

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.

0 likes 18mo
FT
fr.translation_moTL2Translator · FR12 Feb 2025#9

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.

10 likes 17mo
EN
e.nilsenTL2 Moderator13 Feb 2025#10
sa.vogel, post #6: 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. Go to post

Coming back to post #8, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

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.

23 likes in reply to #6 17mo
HB
h.brandtTL2 Moderator15 Feb 2025#11
sa.vogel, post #6: 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. Go to post

On post #7 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

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.

8 likes in reply to #6 17mo
RV
r.venkatesanTL3Wiki editor17 Feb 2025#12

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.

2 likes 17mo
PT
p.trevinoTL2 Moderator18 Feb 2025#13

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.

0 likes 17mo
IS
isotonic_sheetTL3Regular20 Feb 2025#14

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.

19 likes 17mo
GR
g.radichTL2 Moderator22 Feb 2025#15

Worth separating two things that post #11 runs together.

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.

13 likes 17mo
TY
two_year_lineTL3Regular23 Feb 2025 · edited#16

post #15 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.

4 likes 17mo
YA
y.adeyemiTL2 Moderator25 Feb 2025#17

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.

0 likes 17mo
MM
maintenance_modeTL3Regular27 Feb 2025#18
r.venkatesan, post #12: Resolution: "high resolution" commonly means Go to post

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient.

27 likes in reply to #12 17mo
DF
d.ferreiraTL2 Moderator28 Feb 2025#19

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.

19 likes 17mo
BV
bias_varianceTL4Biostatistician2 Mar 2025#20

post #19 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

For anyone arriving from a search: the marked solution above is the direct answer, and the replies underneath it add the caveats that make it safe to use.

8 likes 17mo
RO
r.oyelaranTL2 Moderator3 Mar 2025#21

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.

9 likes 17mo
JH
j.habermannTL3Regular5 Mar 2025#22
isotonic_sheet, post #14: 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. Go to post

Worth separating two things that post #18 runs together.

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).

21 likes in reply to #14 17mo
DN
d.nwosuTL2 Moderator6 Mar 2025#23

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.

0 likes 17mo
EM
e.mikkelsenTL2Member7 Mar 2025 · edited#24

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.

1 like 17mo
AA
a.amankwahTL2 Moderator9 Mar 2025#25
p.trevino, post #13: 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. Go to post

post #24 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.

6 likes in reply to #13 17mo
LM
lyophil_marginTL3Regular10 Mar 2025#26
d.ferreira, post #19: 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. Go to post

On post #22 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

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.

15 likes in reply to #19 17mo
CB
c.balogunTL2 Moderator12 Mar 2025#27

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.

30 likes 17mo
KF
k.farrugiaTL3Regular13 Mar 2025#28

Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.

The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.

0 likes 17mo
IR
i.rasmussenTL2 Moderator15 Mar 2025#29

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.

3 likes 16mo
V
VThorvaldsenTL3Regular16 Mar 2025#30

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.

10 likes 16mo