ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2009
Current-controlled nanospray ionization mass spectrometry.
Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrospray Regime Controls Sensitivity and Quantitative Performance in Micro- and Nano-Flow CE-ESI-MS.Analytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Facile Improvement of Negative Ion Mode Electrospray Ionization Using Capillary Vibrating Sharp-Edge Spray Ionization.Analytical chemistry · 2020Article
- Numerical Simulation of Ion Transport in a Nano-Electrospray Ion Source at Atmospheric Pressure.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2018Article
- Numerical analysis of ion-funnel transmission efficiency in an API-MS system with a continuum/microscopic approach.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2015Article
- Standard flow liquid chromatography for shotgun proteomics in bioenergy research.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The hypothesis that direct determination of electrospray current would provide a viable method for maintaining spray stability to enable optimal nanospray analysis was tested by building a feedback apparatus capable of reading the current and readjusting the emitter voltage in real time. The apparatus consists of a current-sensing circuit that reads the voltage drop across a resistor located between the high-voltage power supply and the nanospray emitter. A low voltage proportional to the observed current is generated and sent to a data acquisition card. The information is used by a proportional-derivative-integral (PID) algorithm to calculate the magnitude of a low-voltage signal that is used to control the power supply output. Any variation of current across the sensing resistor is thus counteracted by an opposite-direction variation of the high voltage applied to the nanospray emitter. In this way, the apparatus adjusts the emitter voltage to achieve a preset value of current, which it strives to maintain over time in spite of any possible variation of the parameters influencing the spray regime. Preliminary results have shown that the feedback apparatus is capable of establishing and maintaining stable spray for samples that are usually considered challenging in traditional voltage-controlled analysis, such as those consisting of nucleic acid solutions with high salt loads. For these types of samples, the total ion count recorded in current-controlled mode was significantly more stable than that observed in voltage-controlled mode. At the same time, overall signal intensities and signal-to-noise ratios were also significantly improved. Setting the target nanospray current to a predefined value and letting the apparatus reach the target without operator intervention enabled the acquisition of viable data from solutions containing up to 2.5 M ammonium acetate, which are ordinarily difficult by traditional manual tuning. A deeper understanding of the current-voltage relationships for samples of very different compositions is expected to enable one not only to predict the target current that should be used for a certain analysis, but also to devise algorithms to change such target as a function of predictable variations of sample properties and analytical conditions. This will allow for optimal performance to be maintained during on-line gradient chromatography in which the nature of the sprayed solution may vary very widely during the course of the analysis.
Identifiers
19359196What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.