The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Masshunter workstation

Manufactured by Agilent Technologies
Sourced in United States

The Agilent MassHunter Workstation is a software platform designed to support mass spectrometry data acquisition, analysis, and reporting. It provides a unified interface for controlling and managing Agilent mass spectrometry instruments.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

97 protocols using masshunter workstation

1

Pharmacokinetic Analysis via LC-MS/MS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The analysis of pharmacokinetics was conducted using an LC-MS/MS system consisting of an Agilent 1260–6460 liquid chromatography instrument (Agilent, Agilent Technologies Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA) equipped with a quaternary pump, a vacuum degasser, a thermo-stated column oven, and an autosampler (set at 4 °C), which were coupled to a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer. Separation was performed on an Agilent C18 column (3.0 × 50 mm, 2.7 μm) at 25 °C. The mobile phase consisted of (A) acetonitrile and (B) water containing 0.1% formic acid with a gradient elution program (20–30% A at 0–1 min; 30–50% A at 1–2 min; 50–60% A at 2–3 min; 60–70% A at 3–6 min). The flow rate was kept constant at 0.4 mL/min and the injection volume was 2 μL. The ion source was ESI- Agilent Jet S; the gas flow rate was set at 5 L/min; nebulizer 45 psi; sheath gas temperature 300 °C; sheath gas flow 11 L/min; capillary 3500 V; and nozzle voltage 500 V.
The MassHunterTM Workstation (Agilent, Waldbronn, Germany) was used for data collection and acquisition.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

HPLC-MS/MS Quantification Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Chromatographic analysis was performed on an Agilent 1200 series HPLC (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Chromatographic separation was achieved on an Poroshell 120 StableBond C18 column (2.1*100mm, 2.7µm) from Agilent Technologies at ambient temperature with a mobile phase of A: 10mM ammonium acetate and B: acetonitrile. The elution gradient was: 20%B (0min), 30%B (0.1min), 40%B (0.5min), 50%B (5-11min), 90%B (11.5-12.5min), 20%B (13.5-25min) . The flow rate was 0.25mL/min. The injection volume was 1µL, and the autosampler tray was at ambient temperature.
MS/MS detection was carried out by a 6410B Triple Quadrupole from Agilent Technologies equipped with ElectroSpray Ionization source (ESI) in negative mode. The MS conditions were as follows: drying gas temperature 350°C, drying gas flow 8L/min, nebulizer pressure 40psi, and capillary voltage 4000V.
Fragment ions spectra were recorded in dynamic Multiple Reaction Monitoring (dMRM). Data collection and processing were performed with Masshunter TM Work-station from Agilent Technologies.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Quantifying Uremic Toxins via LC-MS/MS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To quantify levels of uremic toxins and related metabolites, targeted profiling was performed on Agilent 1290 Infinity LC and Agilent 6490 Triple Quadrupole MS systems equipped with an Agilent Jet Stream ESI source (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA). MassHunter Workstation (Ver B.06.00, Agilent Technologies) software was used for data acquisition and analysis. Chromatographic separation was performed using a ZIC®-HILIC column (2.1 mm × 100 mm, 3.5 μm; SeQuant). The flow rate and injection volume were set at 0.4 ml/min and 1 μl, respectively. Mobile phase A consisted of 10 mM ammonium acetate and 0.1% formic acid in water:acetonitrile (5:95 v/v), and phase B consisted of 10 mM ammonium acetate and 0.1% formic acid in water:acetonitrile (50:50 v/v). The linear gradient used for elution and to equilibrate the initial gradient for subsequent runs was 1% B from 0–2 min, 1–55% B from 2–6 min, 55–99% B from 6–7 min, 99% B from 7–9 min, 99–1% B from 9–9.1 min, and 99% B from 9.1–13 min. Quantification was performed in the MRM mode and the optimal conditions for each metabolite were determined by flow injection of individual standards (100 ng/mL in 75% acetonitrile) into the ESI source in the negative ion mode. p-Cresyl sulfate-2H7 was used as an internal standard. Compound retention times and MRM transitions are summarized in Supplementary Table S5.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Quantitative LC-MS/MS Analysis Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
LC-MS/MS equipment consisted of an Agilent Technologies 1200 Series liquid chromatography system equipped with a degasser (G1322A), an SL binary pump (G1312B), a high-performance autosampler (G1357D, HiP-ALSSL+), and a thermostated column compartment (G1316B SL) which was coupled with a 6460 triple-quadrupole mass spectrometer (Agilent Technologies, USA) and was operated with an Agilent G1948B ionization source in switching the electrospray ionization (ESI) mode during chromatography from positive to negative. An Agilent Mass Hunter workstation was used for the control of the equipment, data acquisition, and analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Mass Spectrometry-Based Compound Identification

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Mass data were analyzed by the Agilent MassHunter Workstation software (Version B.06.01), based on the accurate measurements of m/z values with online databases (MassBank, etc.), to screen probable compounds. The empirical molecular formula was deduced by comparing the theoretical mass of molecular ions at the mass accuracy of less than five ppm.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Metabolite Profiling by LCMS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The mass signals were obtained by the MassHunter WorkStation data acquisition software (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA), and the raw mass spectrum data were processed by Mass Profinder and Mass Profiler Professional software (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA). The accurate m/z, retention time, and peak area were gained from the multivariate data matrix. Principal component analysis (PCA) and orthogonal projection to latent structures-discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) were used to identify the major latent variables and the potential metabolites by SIMCA-P + 13.0 software. Qualitative Analysis of MassHunter Acquisition Data software (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA) was used to identify the metabolites. Moreover, the hydrogenation and sodium peaks were used to screen metabolites in the positive mode (ESI +), and the condition of the extracted ion chromatogram (EIC) was set at ± 20 ppm. The relative abundance was evaluated based on the peak areas of ions and normalized by the peak area of internal standard, and the sum of peak areas of total detected ion counts was integrated as 100% in in vivo and in vitro analyses. Experimental values were presented as mean ± SD by Prism v. 6 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). The raw data were normalized and scaled in Simca-P software using the Par mode.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

HPLC-MS/MS Pesticide Quantification

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Chromatographic separation was performed using an isocratic system by using 1260 HPLC system equipped with an analytical column Agilent Poroshell 120SB-C18 (4.6 mm  150 mm, 2.7 lm). The HPLC-MS/MS system was controlled by a MassHunter workstation (Agilent Technologies, CA, USA). The LC parameters were as follows: mobile phase A: water containing 0.1% formic acid (v/v) and 0.01 mol L À1 ammonium formate; mobile phase B: methanol containing 0.1% formic acid (v/v); isocratic elution with mobile phase A/mobile phase B (30/70, v/v); injection volume, 3 lL; flow rate, 0.4 mL min À1 .
An Agilent 6410 triple quadrupole mass spectrometer in the positive electrospray ionization (ESI+) mode was used for the analysis of the 5 pesticides. The MS source conditions were as follows: gas flow, 10 L min À1 ; gas temperature, 300 °C; nebulizer pressure, 40 psi; capillary voltage, 4000 V. All other MS-MS parameters were separately optimized for each target compound and are listed in Supplementary Table 1.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Untargeted Metabolomics Data Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data acquisition and manual integration was carried out employing MassHunter Workstation (version B.07.00) from Agilent. Raw data (.D) was converted into mzXML format using ProteoWizard (http://proteowizard.sourceforge.net/). Peak detection, integration, deconvolution, alignment and pseudospectra identification, and inclusion lists generation were carried out using XCMS and CAMERA in R 3.6.1. Data analysis was carried out in MATLAB 2018b (Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA, USA) using in-house written scripts. Data and functions for annotation and data preprocessing scripts used in this work are available from the authors. Peak tables and MS2 data are also accessible via the Mendeley Data repository (https://data.mendeley.com/) under DOI:10.17632/fnzbxmkv83.1.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Dexmedetomidine Quantification Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The coordinating center for the current Italian TREX is IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini. Eight centres are participating this TREX in Italy. Plasma was separated by centrifugation (2500 g for 10 min at 4°C) and stored at −80°C at the site until assay. The assay was performed by an accredited central laboratory, located at IRCCS Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù in Rome (Italy). Liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry analysis were performed by a UHPLC Agilent 1290 Infinity II 6470 (Agilent Technologies) equipped with an ESI‐JET‐STREAM source operating in the positive ion (ESI+) mode for Dexmedetomidine. The software used for controlling this equipment and analyzing data was MassHunter Workstation (Agilent Technologies).
Bias (%) and precision (% coefficient of variation, CV) for High, Medium, and Low ranges were: Bias −1.02%, 4.14% and 6.08%; CV was 2.05%, 1.93%, 4.19%. Lower limit of detection was 0.15 μg.L−1.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Metabolite Profiling of Herbal Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Each experiment was carried out in triplicate with three replicas in each case. Experimental data were expressed as means ± standard deviation (SD). The LC-MS data acquisition was conducted on MassHunter Workstation (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Identification of compounds in SH and SHC were based on the data of literature information and metabolite databases (Chemspider, MassBank, and Agilent herbal library-v20-04-17). The dataset was introduced into SIMCA software (version 13.0, Umetrics, Umea, Sweden) for principal component analysis (PCA) and orthogonal partial least-squares principal discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) after normalization occurred. Mean ± SD was performed using SPSS software (version 22.0; IBM, Armonk, NY, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!