The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

6 protocols using uplc ms ms

1

Serum Methionine Cycle Metabolite Quantification

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In this study, we detected three core serum methionine metabolites in the methionine cycle including SAM, SAH, and Hcy by HPLC–MS/MS methods (20 (link)–22 (link)) (Supplementary Table S1). Serum SAM/SAH was calculated as the methylation index.
Before testing, 10 μL of 50 mM DL-Dithiothreitol, and a 10 μL mixture of deuterium-labeled internal standards (2H3-SAM, 500 nM; 2H4-SAH, 500 nM; 2H4-Hcy, 5 μM) were added to the serum samples (50 μL) in turn. The mixtures were vortexed for 5 s and incubated at 37°C for 15 min in the dark. Then 30 μL perchloric acid (1 M) was added to samples for protein precipitation. Subsequently, the samples were centrifuged at 15,000 × g for 10 min at 4°C. Finally, the supernatants were filtered by a 0.22 μm membrane. The methionine metabolites were separated through an Acquity BEH C18 column (2.1 × 50 mm; i.d. 1.7 μm) (Waters Corp., Milford, MA, USA), detected by Agilent 1290 Infinity II UHPLC system coupled with Agilent 6410 Triple Quadrupole LC/MS system, and quantified in multiple reaction monitoring modes. The peaks and concentrations of the targets were measured by UPLC -MS/MS (Agilent) in the positive-ion (ESI+) mode (Supplementary Figure S1). The linearity regression coefficients of SAM, SAH, and Hcy were more than 0.99, with all the inter- and intra-assay coefficients of variation <10% (Supplementary Tables S2, S3).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Bile Acids Analysis in Fecal and Serum Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Bile acids (BAs) present in feces (freeze-dried) and serum samples were evaluated according to the previously described method with slight modifications (25 (link)). Briefly, 50.0 mg fecal or liver samples were accurately weighed on ice, placed in a 2 mL Eppendorf tube, and soaked in 500 μL of 80% pre-cooled methanol/water mixture. The samples were then ground for 3 min, homogenized with a tissuelyzer (QIAGEN, TissueLyser II, Hilden, Germany) at 20 Hz for 2 min centrifugation at 10,000 × g for 15 min at 4°C, and the resulting supernatant was transferred to a UPLC-MS/MS (Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) injection vial for analysis, as previously described (25 (link)). Total BAs were then calculated by adding all detected and measured BAs.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Quantitative Analysis of Anthocyanins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For ‘HB’, ‘RB-4’and ‘HY-1’, 10 g of flesh tissue per sample was ground and then extracted in a solution consisting of anhydrous ethanol, hydrochloric acid and water (volume ratio-2:1:1) twice by ultrasonic techniques. The anthocyanin components were qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed using UPLC-MS/MS (ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry) (Agilent, Palo Alto, CA, USA). Cyanidin (CAS: 528-58-5; chromatographic purity >98%; Chromadex), delphinidin (CAS: 528-53-0; chromatographic purity >96%), cyanidin-3-O-galactoside (CAS: 27661-36-5; chromatographic purity >98%; Chromadex) and delphinidin-3-O-galactoside (CAS: 28500-00-7; chromatographic purity >95%; Chromadex) were used as authentic standard samples for constructing a standard curve and for single point quantitation. Total anthocyanin content was measured using Plant Anthocyanin Content Detection Kit (Solarbio, Beijing, China) following manufacture’s recommendations. Each sample was analyzed in triplicate.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Quantification of Sulfoxaflor in Pollen and Nectar

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Prepared samples were analyzed by an Agilent UPLC-MS/MS (Infinity ultraperformance liquid chromatograph, Agilent, Beijing, China) with an Eclipse plus C18 column (50 mm × 2.1 mm, i.d. 1.8 μm particle size). The mobile phase consisted of 0.01% formic acid in water (solvent A) and acetonitrile (solvent B) applied at a flow rate of 0.2 mL/min under the following gradient conditions: (1) 0.05 min (A-B, 95:5, v/v); (2) 2 min (A-B, 5:95, v/v); (3) 5.5 min (A-B, 95:5, v/v); (4) 8 min (A-B, 95:5, v/v). Injection volume and column temperature were set at 5 μL and 30 °C. The mass spectrometer was operated with ESI source in the positive ionization mode, and sulfoxaflor was detected by multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) with 1 precursor ion and 2 product ions. Optimized MRM parameters of sulfoxaflor were as follows: Qualifying ion pairs were 278.1/174.0 m/z and 278.1/153.9 m/z, and the quantifying ion pair was 278.1/174.0 m/z; collision energy was 12 V and 20 V, declustering potential was 100 V. The LOQ (S/N = 10) and LOD (S/N = 3) were 3.87 μg·kg−1, 1.16 μg·kg−1 in pollen and 2.26 μg·kg−1, 0.68 μg·kg−1 in nectar, respectively. The mean recoveries of sulfoxaflor in pollen and nectar were within 85.67–92.33% and 83.00–96.18%, respectively. Additionally, the RSDs ranged within 2.46–3.06% and 1.17–4.04%, respectively.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Magnolol Sulfation by Human SULTs

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The sulfation reaction system and incubation procedures were the same as those in a previous study [19 (link)]. In brief, the incubation mixture, with a total volume of 200 μL, consisted of 10 μL of enzymes (liver S9 fractions), 5 μL of MgCl2 (1 mM), 5 μL of PAPS (0.05 mM), 178 μL of potassium phosphate buffer (KPI) (44.5 mM, pH 7.4) and 2 μL of magnolol dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) (100 mM) and then diluted by 50% ice-cold acetonitrile to different concentrations. The mixture, prepared in triplicates, was incubated in a shaking water bath at 37 °C for 90 min. The reactions were stopped by the addition of an acetonitrile solution containing IS. Incubations without PAPS were used as control.
The sulfation of magnolol at different concentrations was investigated using seven recombinant human SULTs (SULT1A1*1, 1A1*2, 1A2, 1A3, 1B1, 1E1, and 2A1). All assays were conducted at 37 °C for 90 min with a final protein concentration of 0.01 mg/mL. All samples were centrifuged at 14,000× g for 30 min at 4 °C, and the supernatant was analyzed directly by ultra-performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC–MS/MS) (Agilent technologies, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, CA, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Ultra-sensitive UPLC-MS/MS analysis of sugar phosphates

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Extracts were filtered through 0.2 μm filters (Millipore, Etobicoke, Canada) before UPLC–MS/MS (Agilent, Montreal, Quebec, Canada) analysis equipped with a Hypercarb column (100×2.1 mm, 5 μm) and a Hypercarb pre-column (2.1×10 mm, 5 μm) (Thermo Fisher, Burlington, Canada), as previously described [43] , [44] . Mobile phase consisted in Buffer A: 20 mM ammonium acetate at pH 7.5, and Buffer B: 10% (v/v) methanol in water. Flow rate was set at 0.3 mL min−1 using the following gradient: 0–5 min at 10% A, 5–10 min at linear gradient from 10% to 20% A, 10–20 min at linear gradient from 20% to 100% A, 20–30 min at 100% A, 30–32 min at linear gradient from 100% to 10% A and 32–40 min at 10% A. The Agilent 6460 triple quadruple mass spectrometer (Agilent technologies, Quebec, Canada), equipped with a Jet stream source (Agilent technologies, Quebec, Canada), was used for the analysis of sugar phosphates and low molecular organic acids in negative ion mode. The mass spectrometer parameter were 100 ms scan time; 300°C gas temperature; 7 L min−1 gas flow rate; 35 PSI nebulizer pressure; 400°C sheath gas temperature; 12 L min−1 heath gas flow rate and 3500 V capillary voltage. Data were recorded in MRM mode with the mass spectrometer conditions listed in Table S3. The external standard curve was used for quantification.
+ 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!