2 resultados para mass yields
em CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK
Resumo:
In biological mass spectrometry (MS), two ionization techniques are predominantly employed for the analysis of larger biomolecules, such as polypeptides. These are nano-electrospray ionization [1, 2] (nanoESI) and matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization [3, 4] (MALDI). Both techniques are considered to be “soft”, allowing the desorption and ionization of intact molecular analyte species and thus their successful mass-spectrometric analysis. One of the main differences between these two ionization techniques lies in their ability to produce multiply charged ions. MALDI typically generates singly charged peptide ions whereas nanoESI easily provides multiply charged ions, even for peptides as low as 1000 Da in mass. The production of highly charged ions is desirable as this allows the use of mass analyzers, such as ion traps (including orbitraps) and hybrid quadrupole instruments, which typically offer only a limited m/z range (< 2000–4000). It also enables more informative fragmentation spectra using techniques such as collisioninduced dissociation (CID) and electron capture/transfer dissociation (ECD/ETD) in combination with tandem MS (MS/MS). [5, 6] Thus, there is a clear advantage of using ESI in research areas where peptide sequencing, or in general, the structural elucidation of biomolecules by MS/MS is required. Nonetheless, MALDI with its higher tolerance to contaminants and additives, ease-of-operation, potential for highspeed and automated sample preparation and analysis as well as its MS imaging capabilities makes it an ionization technique that can cover bioanalytical areas for which ESI is less suitable. [7, 8] If these strengths could be combined with the analytical power of multiply charged ions, new instrumental configurations and large-scale proteomic analyses based on MALDI MS(/MS) would become feasible.
Resumo:
To test for magnetic flux buildup in the heliosphere from coronal mass ejections (CMEs), we simulate heliospheric flux as a constant background open flux with a time-varying interplanetary CME (ICME) contribution. As flux carried by ejecta can only contribute to the heliospheric flux budget while it remains closed, the ICME flux opening rate is an important factor. Two separate forms for the ICME flux opening rate are considered: (1) constant and (2) exponentially decaying with time. Coronagraph observations are used to determine the CME occurrence rates, while in situ observations are used to estimate the magnetic flux content of a typical ICME. Both static equilibrium and dynamic simulations, using the constant and exponential ICME flux opening models, require flux opening timescales of ∼50 days in order to match the observed doubling in the magnetic field intensity at 1 AU over the solar cycle. Such timescales are equivalent to a change in the ICME closed flux of only ∼7–12% between 1 and 5 AU, consistent with CSE signatures; no flux buildup results. The dynamic simulation yields a solar cycle flux variation with high variability that matches the overall variability of the observed magnetic field intensity remarkably well, including the double peak forming the Gnevyshev gap.