Comparison of inert supports in laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry of peptides: pencil lead, porous silica gel, DIOS-chip and NALDI™ target

Authors

  • Nawar Shenar,

    1. Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), UMR 5247 CNRS–Universités Montpellier 1 et 2, Bâtiment Chimie (17), Université Montpellier 2, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Sonia Cantel,

    1. Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), UMR 5247 CNRS–Universités Montpellier 1 et 2, Bâtiment Chimie (17), Université Montpellier 2, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jean Martinez,

    1. Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), UMR 5247 CNRS–Universités Montpellier 1 et 2, Bâtiment Chimie (17), Université Montpellier 2, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Christine Enjalbal

    Corresponding author
    1. Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), UMR 5247 CNRS–Universités Montpellier 1 et 2, Bâtiment Chimie (17), Université Montpellier 2, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
    • Institut des Biomolécules Max Mousseron (IBMM), UMR 5247 CNRS–Universités Montpellier 1 et 2, Bâtiment Chimie (17), Université Montpellier 2, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

In the search for alternative inert surfaces replacing silicon chips in Desorption/Ionization On porous Silicon (DIOS)-like mass spectrometry analyses, nanostructured silicon-based NALDI™ chips were evaluated in Laser Desorption/Ionization (LDI) of peptides. Comparisons were made using commercially available DIOS chips (MassPREP™-DIOS-target™), amorphous carbon powder from lead pencil and porous silica gel used for chromatographic purposes as reference supports. A set of synthetic model peptides presenting variable amino acid sequences of various lengths was analyzed under all conditions. The LDI responses of the four ‘matrix-free’ techniques were compared, especially in terms of peptide detection sensitivity and overall experiment robustness. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Ancillary