The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

12 protocols using q exactive hf orbitrap ms

1

Standardized nTDMS Data Collection

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data were collected on either a custom Thermo Fisher Q Exactive Orbitrap HF MS with Extended Mass Range (QE-EMR) [8 (link)] or a commercially available Thermo Fisher Q Exactive Orbitrap MS with Ultra High Mass Range (UHMR). Critical details of nTDMS data collection were previously outlined in our manuscript on the development of standardized best-practices for collection of nTDMS data. This standard operating procedure included extensive discussion on recommended reagents, materials, suggested values for key instrument tuning and data acquisition parameters, and step by step instructions on the collection of MS1, MS2, and MS3 data [14 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Coupling CESI-8000 Plus to Orbitrap MS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The CESI-8000 Plus instrument was hyphenated with a custom Thermo Fisher Q Exactive Orbitrap HF MS with extended mass range14 (link) (QE-EMR) and a commercial Thermo Fisher Q Exactive Orbitrap MS with ultrahigh mass range (UHMR). Important parameters of the applied tune files for MS1, MS2, and pseudo-MS3 experiments for both instruments are provided in Table S2. A Nanospray Flex ion source was changed using an OptiMS Thermo MS adapter from SCIEX for hyphenation of the CESI and orbitrap (OT) instruments. The sprayer tip was positioned 2.5 mm in front of the OT orifice, and an ESI voltage between +1.6 and +1.9 kV was applied during separation. The inlet capillary of the MS instruments was heated to 330 °C (QE-EMR) and 300 °C (UHMR), respectively.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

CESI-Orbitrap MS Hyphenation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The CESI-8000 Plus instrument was hyphenated with a custom Thermo Fisher Q Exactive Orbitrap HF MS with Extended Mass Range 14 (QE-EMR) and a commercial Thermo Fisher Q Exactive Orbitrap MS with Ultra High Mass Range (UHMR). Important parameters of the applied tune files for MS 1 , MS 2 , and pseudo-MS 3 experiments for both instruments are in Table S2. A Nanospray Flex™ Ion Source was changed using an OptiMS Thermo MS Adapter from SCIEX for hyphenation of the CESI and orbitrap (OT) instruments. The sprayer tip was positioned 2.5 mm in front of the OT orifice and an ESI voltage between +1.6 and +1.9 kV was applied during separation. The inlet capillary of the MS instruments was heated to 330 ºC (QE-EMR) and 300 ºC (UHMR), respectively.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Proteomic Profiling of Pooled Peptides

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The pooled peptide samples of 11-plex, 16-plex and 27-plex were fractionated into 40 concatenated fractions by an offline basic pH RPLC (Supporting Information). Each fraction was analyzed with acidic pH reverse-phase LC-MS/MS with a self-packed column (75 μm × 15 cm with 1.9 μm C18 resin from Dr. Maisch GmbH, heated at 65°C to reduce back pressure) coupled with a Q Exactive HF Orbitrap MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Peptides were eluted in a 60 min gradient (buffer A: 0.2% formic acid, 5% DMSO; buffer B: buffer A plus 65% AcN) in a 90 min run. MS settings included MS1 scans (60,000 resolution, 410-1600 m/z scan range, 1 x 106 AGC, and 50 ms maximal ion time) and 20 data-dependent MS2 scans (60,000 resolution, starting from 120 m/z, 1 x 105 AGC, 120 ms maximal ion time, 1.0 m/z isolation window with 0.2 m/z offset, HCD, specified normalized collision energy (NCE), and 15 s dynamic exclusion). The protein identification and quantification were performed by the JUMP search engine (Supporting Information). During the quantification, the identified PSMs with missing values in any TMT channels were removed. The remaining PSMs were used for peptide and protein quantification. This filtering step resulted in the loss of < 2% of the identified proteins.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Proteomic Profiling by LC-MS/MS

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The fractionated samples were processed by acidic reverse-phase LC–MS/MS coupled with a Q Exactive HF Orbitrap MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific), using a self-packed column (75 μm × 150 mm, 1.9 μm C18 resin from Dr Maisch GmbH, at 65 °C). Peptides were eluted with 70 min gradient (buffer A: 0.2% formic acid, 5% dimethyl sulfoxide; buffer B: buffer A plus 65% acetonitrile). The setting of MS involved positive ion mode and data-dependent acquisition (top20: one MS1 scan followed by 20 MS/MS scans). MS1 scans were executed at a 60,000 resolution, 460 to 1600 m/z scan range, a maximum ion time of 50 ms, and 1 × 106 automatic gain control. MS2 scans were acquired at a 60,000 resolution, a fixed initial mass of 120 m/z, a maximum ion time of 120 ms, and 1 × 105 automatic gain control. The fragmentation settings included 1.0 m/z isolation window with 0.2 m/z offset, normalized collision energy of 32, and 15 s of dynamic exclusion.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Proteomic Identification of DSBU Crosslinks

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cross-linked protein samples were separated by SDS-PAGE. Protein bands corresponding to monomeric or dimeric CYP102A1 were submitted for in-gel trypsinolysis and subsequent analysis of the tryptic peptides on a Thermo Scientific Q Exactive HF Orbitrap MS at the University of Michigan Mass Spectrometry-Based Proteomics Resource Facility. Peptide assignments were performed using MeroX (version 2.0) to specifically search for peptides containing the signature doublet that DSBU produces upon fragmentation. MeroX software compares the experimental secondary MS to a library of all theoretically possible DSBU-crosslinked peptides and scores the results based on how well each MS/MS spectrum matches its theoretical counterpart [9 (link),10 (link)]. MS datasets were analyzed with primary and secondary fragment mass deviations of 10 and 50 ppm, respectively, with mass limits of 600–6000 Da. Score cut-offs calculated for a False Discovery Rate (FDR) < 0.01% were applied [11 (link),12 (link)]. The MS/MS spectra were also manually checked, as another layer of quality control, using MeroX and XCalibur (version 3.0).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Offline Basic pH RPLC Fractionation of TMT Peptides

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The pooled TMT labeled peptides were fractionated by an offline basic pH RPLC with a XBridge C18 column (3.5 μm particle size, 4.6 mm × 25 cm, Waters; buffer A: 10 mM ammonium formate, pH 8.0; buffer B: 90% AcN, 10 mM ammonium formate, pH 8.0). The peptides were eluted in a 160 min gradient of 15–50% buffer B, and 160 fractions were collected every min and concatenated to 40 fractions. Each fraction was analyzed on a self-packed column (75 μm × 15 cm with 1.9 μm C18 resin) coupled with a Q Exactive HF Orbitrap MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The peptides were eluted at 0.25 μL/min flow rate with a 60 min gradient of 18–45% buffer B (buffer A: 0.2% formic acid, 5% DMSO; buffer B: buffer A plus 65% AcN). The mass spectrometer was operated in data-dependent mode with a MS1 scan in Orbitrap mass analyzer [450–1600 m/z; 60,000 resolution; 1 × 106 automatic gain control (AGC) target; 50 ms maximum ion time] and 20 data-dependent MS2 scans (60,000 resolution, 1 × 105 AGC target, 110 ms maximum ion time, 32% HCD normalized collision energy (NCE), 1.0 m/z isolation window, 0.2 m/z isolation offset, and 10 s dynamic exclusion).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

LC-MS/MS Analysis of Pooled Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Twelve-plex pooled samples were reconstituted in 3% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid (v/v) in water before injection. UPLC-MS/MS analysis was conducted using a Thermo Dionex UltiMate™ 3000 nanoLC system coupled to a Thermo Q Exactive™ HF Orbitrap MS. The analytical column was self-made with an integrated emitter tip and dimensions of 75 μm inner diameter × 15 cm length, packed with 1.7 μm, 150 Å, BEH C18 material (Waters, Milford, MA). Mobile phase A was 0.1% formic acid in water, and mobile phase B was 0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile (Optima Solvents, Thermo, Waltham, MA). The flow rate was 0.3 μL/min, and the 70-min gradient was as follows: 0–16 min, 3% solvent B; 16–20 min, 3–25% B; 20–30 min, 25–45% B; 30–50 min, 45–70% B; 50–56 min, 70–95% B; 56–60 min 95% B; 60–60.5 min, 95–3% B; 60.5–70 min, 3% B. Positive ionization mode was used for the MS analysis. Full MS scans were acquired from m/z 180 to 1000 at a resolution of 60 K, automatic gain control (AGC) at 1 × 106, and maximum injection time of 50 ms. The top 20 precursors were selected for higher-energy C-trap dissociation tandem mass spectrometry (HCD MS2) analysis with an isolation window of 1 m/z, normalized collision energy (NCE) of 30, resolving power of 60k, AGC target of 1 × 105, maximum injection time of 30 ms, and a lower mass limit of 110 m/z.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Elevated Pressure MALDI-MS Proteoform Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Samples were vacuum desiccated for 30 min and then washed in fresh solutions of 70% ethanol for 30 s, 100% ethanol for 30 s, Carnoy’s solution (6:3:1 v/v ethanol/chloroform/glacial acetic acid) for 2 min, 100% ethanol for 30 s, water with 0.2% TFA for 15 s, and 100% ethanol for 30 s. Samples were then dried by a stream of nitrogen gas prior to MALDI matrix application. HTX Technologies M5 Sprayer was used to deposit sonicated supernatant of 15 mg/ml 2,5-DHA (2,5-dihydroxyacetophenone) in 90% acetonitrile with 0.2% TFA. The flow rate of the matrix was 150 μl/min with a nozzle temperature of 30.0 °C, with a velocity set to 1300 mm/min with 10 PSI of nitrogen gas. The matrix was then recrystallized with 5% acetic acid solution in water at 38.5 °C and dried for 3.5 min and then immediately analyzed using an elevated pressure MALDI source (Spectroglyph LLC) coupled to a Thermo Scientific Q Exactive HF Orbitrap MS upgraded with ultra-high mass range boards (28 (link)). Spectra were acquired over the m/z range of 3500 to 20,000 in positive polarity mode with a resolving power of 240k at m/z 200 (512 ms transient) and 250 laser shots per pixel. Scans in the.RAW file were summed as a single spectrum for proteoform assignment by accurate mass.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Metabolic Profiling of Cultured Cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cells were cultured in 6-well plates to ~85% confluence and washed with 2 mL ice cold 1X Phosphate-Buffered Saline (PBS). The cells were then harvested in 300 µL freezing 80% acetonitrile (v/v) into 1.5 mL tubes and lysed by Bullet Blender (Next Advance) at 4 °C followed by centrifugation at 21,000 × g for 5 min at 4 °C. The supernatant was dried by speedvac and reconstituted in 7.5 µL of 66% acetonitrile and 2 µL was separated by a ZIC‐HILIC column (150 × 2.1 mm, EMD Millipore) coupled with a Q Exactive HF Orbitrap MS (Thermo Fisher) in negative detection mode. Metabolites were eluted within a 45 min gradient (buffer A: 10 mM ammonium acetate in 90% acetonitrile, pH = 8; buffer B: 10 mM ammonium acetate in 100% H2O, pH = 8). The MS was operated by a full scan method followed by targeted selected ion monitoring and data-dependent MS/MS (tSIM/dd-MS2). MS settings included full scan (120,000 resolution, 350–550 m/z, 3 × 106 AGC and 50 ms maximal ion time), tSIM scan (120,000 resolution, 1 × 105 AGC, 4 m/z isolation window and 50 ms maximal ion time) and data-dependent MS2 scan (30,000 resolution, 2 × 105 AGC, ~50 ms maximal ion time, HCD, Stepped NCE (50, 100, 150), and 10 s dynamic exclusion). Data were quantified using Xcalibur software (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and normalized by cell numbers. Ribonucleotide and deoxyribonucleotides were validated by authentic standards.
+ 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!