ArticleRapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM2012
Isomeric differentiation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons using silver nitrate reactive desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry.
Article in Rapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry via Synchronizing Ion Generation and Ion Injection.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2019Article
- Direct Evidence for the Origin of Bis-Gold Intermediates: Probing Gold Catalysis with Mass Spectrometry.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2018Article
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
Abstract
rationalePolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are nonpolar and difficult to detect by desorption electrospray ionization. We present a new detection method based on cationization with silver ions, which has the added advantage of being able to differentiate PAHs with the same mass but different structure.
methods9,10-Diphenylanthracene and triptycene, in addition to four different groups of PAH isomers: (1) anthracene and phenanthrene, (2) pyrene and fluoranthene, (3) benz[a]anthracene, benz[b]anthracene (tetracene), and chrysene (4) benzo[a]pyrene and benzo[k]fluoranthene, were deposited on a paper surface and bombarded with methanol droplets containing silver nitrate. The resulting microdroplets entered a quadruple mass spectrometer for mass analysis.
resultsThe mass spectrum shows [PAH](+), [Ag + OH + PAH](+), and [Ag(PAH)(n)](+) (n = 1, 2) (and [PAH + O(2)](+) in the case of benz[b]anthracene) ions. PAHs having a bay structure, such as phenanthrene, showed a different tendency to interact with silver ions from those PAHs having a linear arrangement of the fused benzene rings, such as anthracene. The ratios of the [PAH](+) peak intensity to that of [Ag-PAH](+), [Ag + OH + PAH](+), [Ag(PAH)(2)](+), and [PAH + O(2)](+) were used to differentiate the PAH isomers sharing the same molecular formula with different structures. For isomeric mixtures the [PAH](+) to [Ag + OH + PAH](+) ratio was found to be the most useful parameter. The uncertainty in the mole fraction of an isomeric mixture was ±0.09, ±0.13, ±0.25, and ±0.1 for phenanthrene-anthracene, fluoranthene-pyrene, benz[a]anthracene-chrysene, and benzo[a]pyrene-benzo[k]fluoranthene, respectively.
conclusionsA simple method has been developed for the detection of PAHs in desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry based on Ag(I) cationization. The method showed a capability to differentiate PAHs isomers (having the same molecular mass) in isomeric mixture with an uncertainty in the mole fraction of about ±0.1. At high inlet temperature and voltage, this method showed better sensitivity but less ability to differentiate between isomeric species.
Identifiers
What 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.