Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40989836›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of mass spectrometry2025

Selecting the Correct Autosampler Vial and Insert to Improve Reproducibility and Accuracy in Mass Spectrometry Analyses.

Ashlee T Falls, Erin S Baker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of mass spectrometry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ashlee T FallsDepartment of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514, USA.
Erin S BakerDepartment of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5246-2213

Funding

Single cell, multi-parametric high throughput platform to classify endocrine disruptor potential of mixturesP42ES027704 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Efstratios Pistikopoulos · 2017 to 2026
$21.2M
Understanding the role of lipids in structure and function of membrane proteinsRM1GM145416 · NIGMS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Erin S Baker, Arthur D Laganowsky · 2022 to 2026
$7.4M
Increasing the Coverage, Sensitivity and Specificity of Rapid Lipidomic MeasurementsR01GM141277 · NIGMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BAKER, ERIN S · 2022 to 2025
$1.2M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES027704NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM141277NIGMS NIH HHS RM1 GM145416
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acquiring accurate and reproducible data is crucial for analytical chemists, however, sample storage and manipulation play a large role in achieving high-quality results. Autosampler vials and small-volume inserts are used for sample preparation and storage prior to mass spectrometry analyses, however, the utility, design, and material of these vary greatly. Here, we assessed differences in data reproducibility, sample loss, and physical differences among vials and inserts made of glass and polypropylene for combinations (vial/insert): glass/glass (GG), glass/polypropylene (GP), polypropylene/glass (PG), and polypropylene/polypropylene (PP). Six per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were evaluated in 40:60 methanol:water with 3 mM ammonium acetate for 32 days to determine peak area reproducibility over time since PFAS do not degrade, therefore changes would most likely be due to adhesion and evaporation. On Day 1, the measured average peaks areas for the 6 PFAS were not statistically significant between any combinations, however, PP was the least reproducible (relative standard deviation >10%). All samples were then recapped and stored for one month at -20°C and reanalyzed to compare the peak areas between Day 1 to Day 32. All combinations showed >10% differences in peak area for at least 4 PFAS and both evaporation and adhesion were observed. While the greatest effects due to adhesion occurred in the glass inserts, the glass vials showed the least volume loss to evaporation. Thus, when adhesion and evaporation are considered together, the GP combination is recommended for PFAS analyses as the glass vial reduces evaporation rates, and the polypropylene insert minimizes adhesion.

Indexed as

Autosampler VialLong-Term StorageMass SpectrometryPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substancesPFAS

Identifiers

PMID40989836
PMCPMC12453059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.