Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2026 Mar 10.
Published in final edited form as: J Phys Chem Lett. 2025 Aug 20;16(34):8785–8791. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.5c01440

Wavelength Dependence of Intact Protein Extraction Using Femtosecond Laser Ablation

Alexander AC Wainwright 1,, Khaled Madhoun 2,, Pei Su 3, Samuel E Janisse 4, Jessica E Besaw 5, Harmanjot S Grewal 6, Oliver P Ernst 7, Jared O Kafader 8, Neil L Kelleher 9, RJ Dwayne Miller 10
PMCID: PMC12969999  NIHMSID: NIHMS2148187  PMID: 40833879

Abstract

The extraction and analysis of intact proteins from complex biological samples via femtosecond laser ablation are influenced by wavelength-dependent multiphoton and avalanche ionization processes. To investigate these effects, an intact protein mixture with molecular weights ranging from 9 kDa to 68 kDa as well as individual proteins were sampled using laser wavelengths spanning from the ultraviolet to the near-infrared. Our results suggest that visible and infrared wavelengths enable intact protein extraction, even for proteins with strong absorption in the visible spectrum. Ultraviolet wavelengths also yield intact extraction when long enough to avoid resonant absorption by the aromatic amino acids. Our findings support the hypothesis that minimizing multiphoton ionization helps preserve intact protein signals during femtosecond laser ablation. By isolating the role of laser wavelength, this study provides insight on high intensity laser–biomolecule interactions relevant to analytical techniques such as high-resolution mass spectrometry imaging.

Graphical Abstract

graphic file with name nihms-2148187-f0001.jpg


Laser desorption mass spectrometry (LDMS) is a common method of isotope, elemental and molecular analysis in fields like material science,1 geology,2 and bioanalytics.3 Beyond small molecules, LDMS is capable of sampling and ionizing larger biomolecules, including proteins from biological samples, through desorption by impulsive vibrational excitation (DIVE).46 The DIVE process uses pulsed mid-infrared lasers (PIRLs) that target the O–H vibrational modes of water to drive efficient material removal.713 Mass spectrometry imaging (MSI) using PIRLs has provided valuable insights on the functions of metabolites and proteins in complex biological tissues.1416 However, PIRLs require sufficient sample hydration to drive the ablation process and are fundamentally limited by diffraction to a minimum laser spot size of ~ 3 μm.

Ultrafast lasers offer a promising alternative mechanism, relying on nonlinear energy deposition via multiphoton, tunneling, and avalanche ionization (AI) rather than resonant vibrational excitation.3,17,18 This enables femtosecond (fs) laser ablation to operate under a broader range of conditions than PIRLs, including in dry environments. Previous studies have suggested that fs lasers may allow for sub micrometer spatial resolution MSI.19 However, the specific contributions of protein chromophores, protein size, electron collisional processes, and multiphoton ionization (MPI) to intact protein ejection have not been systematically investigated.

Previous studies have shown intact protein extraction from aqueous solutions and biological tissues using infrared (IR) fs laser ablation coupled with ambient electrospray ionization.2022 Other related works using visible fs lasers from ice samples have shown substantial intact signatures for organic molecules, peptides, and small proteins with masses of up to 6 kDa.23,24 To our knowledge, intact extraction of larger proteins with visible or ultraviolet (UV) ultrafast lasers has not been previously reported. Recent works by the Murray25,26 and Zhu27 groups have shown successful intact extraction of proteins using nanosecond lasers in the deep UV. These works show the promise of using shorter wavelengths for intact extraction of large biomolecules. However, at the intensities used in ultrafast laser ablation, which are four to five orders of magnitude larger than these nanosecond studies,2527 the influence of wavelength on intact protein ejection remains largely unexplored.

As outlined by Linz et al.,18 laser wavelength determines the extent of MPI and collisional ionization (CI) during fs laser ablation, influencing both ionization efficiency and the potential for damage to the sample’s constituents. For pure water, which is often used to model the ablation dynamics of biological samples like tissue,17,18,28,29 MPI plays a more significant role at shorter wavelengths in the UV and visible, while CI dominates for longer wavelengths in the IR.18 When considering biomaterials, proteins and metabolites have a much larger absorptivity across the UV, visible, and near IR spectrum than water (see Figure 1 and Figure S1).30,31 Consequently, unless a specific absorption peak of water is targeted, MPI will generally occur more readily in proteins and metabolites,32 increasing the likelihood of MPI-induced fragmentation processes in biological samples when compared to exciting vibrational modes of water.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Optical absorption coefficient of free electrons from the Drude model before the electron avalanche (electron density of 1010 cm−3), at the start of the avalanche process (1016–1019 cm−3), and in a stable electron avalanche 1020 cm−3 estimated using the same assumptions as ref 18, compared to MastR (at 500 μM), HEWL (700 μM), Mb (1000 μM), and water from ref 19.

During the fs laser ablation, AI is substantially a CI process driven by photoabsorption of liberated electrons. Following the Drude model, the one-photon absorption cross-section for free electrons is given by:18

σ1pt=tcole2(ω2tcol2+1)cn0ε0mc

where tcol is the Drude collision time, e is the charge of an electron, ω is the angular frequency of the incident laser, n0 is the index of refraction of the medium, mc is the mass of the liberated electron, c is the speed of light and σ1pt is the single photon absorption cross section. As the electron density (n(t)) evolves throughout the ablation process, the roles of MPI and energy absorption by free electrons, generated by MPI and tunneling ionization, can be compared using the absorptivity, defined by the absorption coefficient (α(t)=σ1ptn(t)). Figure 1 shows a wavelength-dependent comparison of the single-photon absorption coefficient of free electrons during the ablation process - at an electron density of 1010 cm−3, at the onset of the avalanche process (1016–1019 cm−3), and during a stable electron avalanche (1020 cm−3) - alongside the absorption coefficients for the proteins: hen egg white lysozyme (HEWL), myoglobin (Mb), and Mastigocladopsis repens rhodopsin (MastR). We propose that the significant absorption coefficient of free electrons at densities between 1016 and 1019 cm−3 allows the AI process to dominate the absorption process, limiting protein fragmentation from MPI. Previously, a similar electron density was found to correspond to the threshold required for AI to drive the absorption process when modeling the ablation of water with 250 fs laser pulses.18

Although photoinduced fragmentation can be mitigated by selecting the appropriate wavelength, the risk of dissociation from CI during the ablation process must be addressed. To preserve protein integrity, the energy of electrons in the low-density plasma, produced during ablation, must remain below the electron collisional dissociation threshold of the analyte molecules. Fortunately, under near ablation threshold conditions (between 1012 and 1013 W/cm2, depending on wavelength), the average energy of electrons is below the collisional dissociation threshold of most proteins (~10 eV33,34).18,28 Therefore, electron collisional dissociation is unlikely to significantly contribute to fragmentation and reduction in intact protein signal.

The contributions of protein chromophores were explored with three model proteins which span a range of structural complexity and photoactivity. These proteins were not chosen to mimic tissue environments, but rather to enable the controlled study of energy transfer and ablation product formation across proteins with distinct absorption profiles. Establishing these principles under well-defined conditions is a prerequisite to extending laser ablation methods to more complex biological systems.

HEWL serves as a valuable reference point as it only absorbs near 280 nm, has a well-characterized structure and a long history of use in conventional mass spectrometry (MS).35,36 Mb contains a heme chromophore and exhibits a well-characterized optical response and ionization behavior with a strong absorption peak at 400 nm and a weak absorption peak near 500 nm37,38 (see Figure S1). As a membrane protein, MastR is of particular interest due to its structural similarity to light activated proteins like bacteriorhodopsin.39 MastR belongs to the microbial rhodopsin family and acts as a light-activated chloride pump containing a retinal chromophore with an absorption peak at 535 nm (near 515 nm).

To examine the influence of molecular weight on protein extraction, a protein mixture was used, with approximate masses of 9 kDa, 12 kDa, 21 kDa, 29 kDa, 50 kDa, and 68 kDa (details in Experimental Methods Section of the Supporting Information).

Two different Orbitrap MS data acquisition methods were used to guarantee the efficient detection and processing of protein signals across a broad mass range for each wavelength used: ensemble Fourier-transform-based (for HEWL and Mb), and individual ion based4042 (for MastR and the protein mixture). See the experimental methods section of the supplement for more details. Only data sets generated using the same analysis techniques are compared.

Figure 2 shows the mass spectra of extracted HEWL using fs laser ablation pulses at wavelengths between 1030 and 257 nm. These spectra are compared to a control sample drop cast on a glass slide, which was introduced into the mass spectrometer using nanospray desorption electrospray ionization (nano-DESI).43 Intact HEWL peaks are visible when ablated with wavelengths of 1030, 515, and 343 nm. However, the intact HEWL signal intensity is inversely correlated with the increased photon energy of shorter wavelengths. At 1030 nm, MPI initiates free-electron generation, which in turn seeds an electron avalanche that is responsible for the majority of the energy absorption (see Figure 1 to compare absorption after seed electron generation).18,28 Based on rate equation modeling for pure water, for a 1030 nm, 250 fs pulse at 1013 W/cm2, there would be approximately 100 times more ionization events from the avalanche process than from strong field ionization (see ref 18 for details). For a visible and UV pulse of the same duration and intensity, approximately 10 times more ionization occurs from AI than MPI at 515 nm and about 3 times at 343 nm, indicating an increased significance of MPI.18 These results suggest that as the wavelength decreases, the protein absorbs more energy via MPI leading to increased fragmentation. When ablated with 257 nm, there are no intact protein peaks present, suggesting fragmentation of the protein. However, specific fragmentation peaks could not be assigned to a high degree of certainty. HEWL has no chromophore absorbing in the visible range and only absorbs strongly at 280 nm due to the aromatic amino acids. This suggests that during laser ablation at 257 nm the photon energy is deposited into the protein via MPI, likely leading to extensive protein fragmentation and preventing identification from the mass spectra.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Mass spectra of HEWL following fs laser ablation and subsequent analysis by nano-DESI using a catch-and-release method. Charge states corresponding to the intact protein are labeled in each spectrum. Compared to the unablated drop-cast nano-DESI control, the ablation spectra exhibit increased charge state broadening and a decreased signal-to-noise ratio at shorter laser wavelengths. This trend reflects a wavelength-dependent reduction in intact protein signal. Corresponding signal intensities are presented in Supplementary Figure S2.

Analysis of Mb (Figure 3) shows a similar loss of intact protein signal as wavelength decreases (see supplementary Figure S3). In Mb, the heme group absorbs around 500 nm, making 515 nm a near-resonant wavelength. The intact protein, including the heme group, remains detectable down to 343 nm. However, the change in peak intensity of 515 to 1030 nm is much more significant in Mb with an 87% decrease in signal, than HEWL (37% decrease). This difference may reflect an increased role of MPI in the ablation process at 515 nm for Mb compared to HEWL, resulting in increased protein fragmentation and a lower intact protein signal. At 257 nm, the spectrum lacks any intact protein peak, isotopic peaks, or charge state series, suggesting fragmentation.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Mass spectra of Mb post ultrafast laser ablation sampling using a catch and release method with nano-DESI. The charge states of the intact protein are indicated in each spectrum. The signal intensities are shown in Figure S3.

MastR (data shown in supplement Figure S4 and with mirror plot comparisons in Figure S5), behaves similarly to Mb despite a significantly different linear absorption spectrum. Specifically, MastR’s deconvoluted mass spectra at 1030 nm and with a PIRL are nearly identical, confirming that fs laser ablation at 1030 nm supports intact protein extraction. Likewise, the loss of intact protein signatures at 257 nm is consistent with the other proteins studied. However, unlike Mb, MastR has approximately 7.5 times lower linear absorption at 343 nm than 515 nm. At the high intensities used, this would suggest that resonant enhanced multiphoton absorption would be more significant at 515 nm than 343 nm (following ref 44), yet as wavelength decreases we still observe a decrease in MastR’s intact protein signal. This contradiction indicates a more complicated process than pure MPI. We hypothesize that at 515 nm, AI will contribute an order of magnitude more ions than MPI,18 resulting in the observed intact protein signal. In contrast, when water is ablated at 343 nm, MPI accounts for approximately one-third of the ionization from AI, indicating a significantly greater contribution of MPI to the ablation process.18 Due to the higher absorptivity of MastR relative to water at 343 nm, the role of MPI will be greater in the protein mixture, with a reduced contribution from AI compared to that observed at 515 nm. We suggest that the decrease in AI compared to 515 nm allows for direct absorption of energy by the protein, leading to more fragmentation and a decrease of the observed intact protein signal. To validate this proposed mechanism, high intensity transient absorption spectroscopy experiments and rate equation modeling that account for the contributions of chromophores to the MPI process are required. Additionally, future studies should compare the on-resonance and near resonance cases by using a fs laser tuned exactly to an absorption peak of a protein between 400 and 600 nm to drive ablation directly into a mass spectrometer for direct top-down proteomic analysis.

The mass spectra for HEWL, Mb, and MastR provide empirical support for longer wavelengths favoring intact protein extraction. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that, when electron avalanche processes dominate energy absorption, direct MPI of proteins is suppressed, reducing fragmentation. By looking at a protein mixture, we analyzed the dependency of protein size for intact extraction (see Figure 4). Our results show that the fs pulses have a lower relative intensity peak for the intact protein around 68 kDa when compared to nano-DESI and PIRL sampling. We suggest that the proportional increase in the inelastic electron collisional absorption cross section with protein mass leads to a reduction in intact signal for larger proteins due to more CI events within the electron cloud. To validate this hypothesis, detailed studies of plasma energy during laser ablation would be required. Overall, our observations are consistent with the hypothesis that by selecting wavelengths which avoid absorption in the aromatic amino acids, it is possible to minimize the likelihood of fragmentation for proteins. However, for larger proteins the intact peak intensity drops, suggesting protein fragmentation.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Protein ladder with masses from 9 kDa to 68 kDa sampled using UV, visible and IR fs lasers, PIRL and nano-DESI sampling of a drop cast sample.

In this work, we explore the influence of laser wavelength on intact protein extraction during laser desorption. We minimized matrix effects by using aqueous protein samples to isolate the fundamental desorption processes in pure and mixed analyte solutions. These insights provide a starting point for applying visible and UV ultrafast lasers to more complex biological systems, where protein concentrations can range from below 100 pg/μL to over 10 μg/μL.45,46 Given the concentration independence of the extraction mechanism, as demonstrated by the application of fs laser sampling in several publications,2024,47 our results support the broad applicability of fs extraction techniques in proteomics.

One promising application of our findings is subcellular MSI using fs lasers.19 However, achieving sufficient proteoform depth from micron and submicron voxels requires improvements in ion transfer efficiency and MS sensitivity to detect the limited number of proteins present. In our experiment, protein standards were prepared in undersaturated aqueous solutions, likely favoring the ejection of individual molecules. From tissue, proteins may be ejected as individual molecules, clusters, or larger particulates, each with distinct ionization and photochemical behaviors. Although prior work suggests that particulate size can vary with optical penetration depth,30 this effect is minimal across the wavelengths examined and is further constrained by plasma shielding, which limits optical penetration at longer wavelengths.18,30,48,49 Because our system favors the ejection of individual molecules and exhibits minimal variability in optical penetration depth across wavelengths, we expect particulate size to play a minor role in our findings. This factor, however, may be more significant in tissue imaging, where matrix effects can promote the formation and ejection of larger particulates.

Despite the inherent challenges to high-resolution protein sampling, our study represents an initial step toward understanding the physical and photochemical processes that enable intact protein extraction using ultrafast laser ablation. We show evidence that fs lasers with IR, visible and UV wavelengths long enough to avoid resonant absorption in the aromatic amino acids, near 280 nm, effectively extract intact proteins. This result is notable as shorter wavelengths allow for smaller ablation spot sizes than PIRL techniques (see Table S1 in the Supporting Information for the specific laser parameters used in our study). Although prior work using nanosecond lasers in the deep UV demonstrated intact protein extraction,2527 the intensities used for ultrafast ablation are four to five orders of magnitude higher, leading to nonlinear processes dominating.44,50 As such, we cannot extend our findings to comment on the behavior of deep UV lasers. However, significant differences in absorption behavior are expected between ultrafast and longer pulsed lasers. Ultrafast laser ablation can be confined to depths on the order of 100 nm.51,52 In contrast, ablation with longer pulses and lower peak intensities produce crater profiles defined by the absorption depth and highly nonlinear plasma screening, making reproducible profiles more difficult to achieve than with fs lasers.29,51

Our observations support the hypothesis that avoiding resonance with aromatic amino acids allows for intact extraction. Our results indicate a wavelength range from ~ 300 nm to 1 μm that offers a favorable trade-off between reduced fragmentation and the ability to ablate material at submicron resolution.3 Notably, proteins with chromophores showed strong intact signals when irradiated at wavelengths near their visible absorption peaks, suggesting that AI and electron shielding play a role in protecting molecular integrity. Further studies using lasers tuned to specific protein absorption maxima could help elucidate these protective mechanisms. By understanding the wavelength-dependent response of different proteins under fs laser ablation, this study provides foundational insight into how photon energy and nonlinear ionization dynamics influence intact biomolecule extraction. As ultrafast laser technology becomes more widely available,53,54 our findings offer important insight toward applying visible and UV wavelengths for proteomic studies in complex tissue environments and subcellular MS workflows.

Supplementary Material

SI1
SI2

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpclett.5c01440.

Detailed outline of the protein preparation and laser parameters used; fully annotated mass spectra for each of the proteins examined and annotated supporting data (PDF)

Transparent Peer Review report available (PDF)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank Manoel L. da Silva-Neto, Renzhong (Ray) Hua, and Aosheng Gu for their support in creating the apparatus used in this experiment (K.M., A.A.C.W.).

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) (RJDM, OPE) National Institutes of Health P41 GM108569 (NLK) National Institutes of Health UH3 CA246635 (NLK) National Institutes of Health P30 DA018310 (NLK) National Institutes of Health P30 CA060553 (awarded to the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center) National Institutes of Health K99 AI183290 (PS)

Footnotes

Complete contact information is available at: https://pubs.acs.org/10.1021/acs.jpclett.5c01440

The authors declare the following competing financial interest(s): J.O.K. and N.L.K. report a conflict of interest with I2MS technology, being commercialized by Thermo Fisher Scientific. N.L.K. is involved in commercialization of software. N.L.K. is a paid consultant for Thermo Fisher Scientific. All other authors declare no competing of interest.

Contributor Information

Alexander A.C. Wainwright, Dept. of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5R 2M8;.

Khaled Madhoun, Dept. of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5R 2M8.

Pei Su, Dept. of Molecular Biosciences, Dept. of Chemistry, Dept. of Chemical and Biological Engineering, and Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, United States;.

Samuel E. Janisse, Dept. of Molecular Biosciences, Dept. of Chemistry, Dept. of Chemical and Biological Engineering, and Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, United States;

Jessica E. Besaw, Dept. of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 1A8;

Harmanjot S. Grewal, Dept. of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5R 2M8

Oliver P. Ernst, Dept. of Biochemistry and Dept. of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 1A8

Jared O. Kafader, Dept. of Chemistry and Proteomics Center of Excellence, Chemistry of Life Processes Institute, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, United States;

Neil L. Kelleher, Dept. of Molecular Biosciences, Dept. of Chemistry, Dept. of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Feinberg School of Medicine, and Proteomics Center of Excellence, Chemistry of Life Processes Institute, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, United States;

R.J. Dwayne Miller, Dept. of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5R 2M8; Dept. of Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 3H4;.

Data Availability Statement

RAW MS files are available from the MassIVE repository under the identifier MSV000097234.

REFERENCES

  • (1).Wiesendanger R; Grimaudo V; Tulej M; Riedo A; Lukmanov R; Ligterink N; Fausch R; Shea H; Wurz P The LMS-GT Instrument – a New Perspective for Quantification with the LIMS-TOF Measurement Technique. J. Anal. At. Spectrom 2019, 34 (10), 2061–2073. [Google Scholar]
  • (2).Neuland MB; Grimaudo V; Mezger K; Moreno-García P; Riedo A; Tulej M; Wurz P Quantitative Measurement of the Chemical Composition of Geological Standards with a Miniature Laser Ablation/Ionization Mass Spectrometer Designed for in Situ Application in Space Research. Meas. Sci. Technol 2016, 27 (3), No. 035904. [Google Scholar]
  • (3).Cui Y; Veryovkin IV; Majeski MW; Cavazos DR; Hanley L High Lateral Resolution vs Molecular Preservation in Near-IR Fs-Laser Desorption Postionization Mass Spectrometry. Anal. Chem 2015, 87 (1), 367–371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (4).Krismer J; Tamminen M; Fontana S; Zenobi R; Narwani A Single-Cell Mass Spectrometry Reveals the Importance of Genetic Diversity and Plasticity for Phenotypic Variation in Nitrogen-Limited Chlamydomonas. ISME J. 2017, 11 (4), 988–998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (5).Feridouni Khamaneh Y; Kiani P; Miller RJD; Schlüter H; Friedrich RE Complementing the Pulp Proteome via Sampling with a Picosecond Infrared Laser (PIRL). Clin Oral Invest 2021, 25 (12), 6757–6768. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (6).Wainwright AAC; Madhoun K; Su P; Adyin YO; Kafader JO; Kelleher NL; Miller DRJ Application of Nanosecond Mid-Infrared Lasers in Mass Spectrometry Imaging of Intact Proteins. In Optical Interactions with Tissue and Cells XXXVI; SPIE: San Francisco, CA, 2025; Vol. 13317. [Google Scholar]
  • (7).Krutilin A; Maier S; Schuster R; Kruber S; Kwiatkowski M; Robertson WD; Hansen N-O; Miller RJD; Schlüter H Sampling of Tissues with Laser Ablation for Proteomics: Comparison of Picosecond Infrared Laser and Microsecond Infrared Laser. J. Proteome Res 2019, 18 (3), 1451–1457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (8).Friedrich RE; Quade M; Jowett N; Kroetz P; Amling M; Kohlrusch FK; Zustin J; Gosau M; Schlüter H; Miller RJD Ablation Precision and Thermal Effects of a Picosecond Infrared Laser (PIRL) on Roots of Human Teeth: A Pilot Study Ex Vivo. In Vivo 2020, 34 (5), 2325–2336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (9).Petersen H; Tavakoli F; Kruber S; Mnüscher A; Gliese A; Hansen N-O; Uschold S; Eggert D; Robertson WD; Gosau T; Sehner S; Kwiatkowski M; Schlüter H; Schumacher U; Knecht R; Miller RJD Comparative Study of Wound Healing in Rat Skin Following Incision with a Novel Picosecond Infrared Laser (PIRL) and Different Surgical Modalities. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 2016, 48 (4), 385–391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (10).Franjic K; Cowan ML; Kraemer D; Miller RJD Laser Selective Cutting of Biological Tissues by Impulsive Heat Deposition through Ultrafast Vibrational Excitations. Opt. Express, OE 2009, 17 (25), 22937–22959. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (11).Lu Y; Pieterse CL; Robertson WD; Miller RJD Soft Picosecond Infrared Laser Extraction of Highly Charged Proteins and Peptides from Bulk Liquid Water for Mass Spectrometry. Anal. Chem 2018, 90 (7), 4422–4428. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (12).Dwayne Miller RJ Picosecond Infrared Laser (PIRL) Scalpel: Achieving Fundamental Limits to Minimally Invasive Surgery and Biodiagnostics. In Advanced Solid State Lasers; OSA: Berlin, 2015; p AF2A.1. DOI: 10.1364/ASSL.2015.AF2A.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • (13).Wainwright AAC; Madhoun K; Farook F; Salehi S; Maneshi S; Miller RJD Modeling Wavelength Dependence of Laser Tumor Hyperthermic Treatments. In Optical Interactions with Tissue and Cells XXXV; SPIE: San Francisco, CA, 2024; Vol. 12840, pp 46–54. DOI: 10.1117/12.3000396. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • (14).Steffen P; Kwiatkowski M; Robertson WD; Zarrine-Afsar A; Deterra D; Richter V; Schlüter H Protein Species as Diagnostic Markers. Journal of Proteomics 2016, 134, 5–18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (15).Woolman M; Kuzan-Fischer CM; Ferry I; Kiyota T; Luu B; Wu M; Munoz DG; Das S; Aman A; Taylor MD; Rutka JT; Ginsberg HJ; Zarrine-Afsar A Picosecond Infrared Laser Desorption Mass Spectrometry Identifies Medulloblastoma Sub-groups on Intrasurgical Timescales. Cancer Res. 2019, 79 (9), 2426–2434. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (16).Zou J; Talbot F; Tata A; Ermini L; Franjic K; Ventura M; Zheng J; Ginsberg H; Post M; Ifa DR; Jaffray D; Miller RJD; Zarrine-Afsar A Ambient Mass Spectrometry Imaging with Picosecond Infrared Laser Ablation Electrospray Ionization (PIR-LAESI). Anal. Chem 2015, 87 (24), 12071–12079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (17).Vogel A; Noack J; Hüttman G; Paltauf G Mechanisms of Femtosecond Laser Nanosurgery of Cells and Tissues. Appl. Phys. B: Laser Opt 2005, 81 (8), 1015–1047. [Google Scholar]
  • (18).Linz N; Freidank S; Liang X-X; Vogel A Wavelength Dependence of Femtosecond Laser-Induced Breakdown in Water and Implications for Laser Surgery. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 94 (2), No. 024113. [Google Scholar]
  • (19).Murray KK; Seneviratne CA; Ghorai S High Resolution Laser Mass Spectrometry Bioimaging. Methods 2016, 104, 118–126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (20).Brady JJ; Judge EJ; Levis RJ Analysis of Amphiphilic Lipids and Hydrophobic Proteins Using Nonresonant Femtosecond Laser Vaporization with Electrospray Post-Ionization. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom 2011, 22 (4), 762–772. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (21).Judge EJ; Brady JJ; Levis RJ Mass Analysis of Biological Macromolecules at Atmospheric Pressure Using Nonresonant Femtosecond Laser Vaporization and Electrospray Ionization. Anal. Chem 2010, 82 (24), 10203–10207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (22).Parise RJ; Dassanayake DR; Levis RJ Pulse Duration Effects on Solution-Phase Protein Desorption in Laser Electrospray Mass Spectrometry. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom 2023, 34 (4), 701–709. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (23).Krutilin A; Epp S; Alejo G; Busse F; Gitaric D; Schikora H; Schwoerer H; Tellkamp F Peptide Mass Spectra from Micrometer-Thick Ice Films Produced with Femtosecond Pulses. Anal. Chem 2022, 94, 13359–13367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (24).Berry JI; Sun S; Dou Y; Wucher A; Winograd N Laser Desorption and Imaging of Proteins from Ice via UV Femtosecond Laser Pulses. Anal. Chem 2003, 75 (19), 5146–5151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (25).Lawal RO; Donnarumma F; Murray KK Deep-Ultraviolet Laser Ablation Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry. J. Mass Spectrom 2019, 54 (3), 281–287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (26).Lawal RO; Richardson LT; Dong C; Donnarumma F; Solouki T; Murray KK Deep-Ultraviolet Laser Ablation Sampling for Proteomic Analysis of Tissue. Anal. Chim. Acta 2021, 1184, No. 339021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (27).Xiang P; Liyu A; Kwon Y; Hu D; Williams SM; Veličković D; Markillie LM; Chrisler WB; Paša-Tolić L; Zhu Y Spatial Proteomics toward Subcellular Resolution by Coupling Deep Ultraviolet Laser Ablation with Nanodroplet Sample Preparation. ACS Meas. Sci. Au 2023, 3 (6), 459–468. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (28).Liang X-X; Zhang Z; Vogel A Multi-Rate-Equation Modeling of the Energy Spectrum of Laser-Induced Conduction Band Electrons in Water. Opt. Express, OE 2019, 27 (4), 4672–4693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (29).Linz N; Freidank S; Liang X-X; Vogelmann H; Trickl T; Vogel A Wavelength Dependence of Nanosecond Infrared Laser-Induced Breakdown in Water: Evidence for Multiphoton Initiation via an Intermediate State. Phys. Rev. B 2015, 91 (13), No. 134114. [Google Scholar]
  • (30).Vogel A; Venugopalan V Mechanisms of Pulsed Laser Ablation of Biological Tissues. Chem. Rev 2003, 103 (2), 577–644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (31).Smith RC; Baker KS Optical Properties of the Clearest Natural Waters (200–800 Nm). Appl. Opt., AO 1981, 20 (2), 177–184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (32).Franjic K; Miller D Vibrationally Excited Ultrafast Thermodynamic Phase Transitions at the Water/Air Interface. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys 2010, 12 (20), 5225–5239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (33).Papanastasiou D; Kounadis D; Lekkas A; Orfanopoulos I; Mpozatzidis A; Smyrnakis A; Panagiotopoulos E; Kosmopoulou M; Reinhardt-Szyba M; Fort K; Makarov A; Zubarev RA The Omnitrap Platform: A Versatile Segmented Linear Ion Trap for Multidimensional Multiple-Stage Tandem Mass Spectrometry. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom 2022, 33 (10), 1990–2007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (34).Zenaidee MA; Lantz C; Perkins T; Jung W; Loo RRO; Loo JA Internal Fragments Generated by Electron Ionization Dissociation Enhance Protein Top-Down Mass Spectrometry. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom 2020, 31 (9), 1896–1902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (35).Cody RB; Tamura J; Musselman BD Electrospray Ionization/Magnetic Sector Mass Spectrometry: Calibration, Resolution, and Accurate Mass Measurements. Anal. Chem 1992, 64 (14), 1561–1570. [Google Scholar]
  • (36).Weiss MS; Palm GJ; Hilgenfeld R Crystallization, Structure Solution and Refinement of Hen Egg-White Lysozyme at pH 8.0 in the Presence of MPD. Acta Cryst. D 2000, 56 (8), 952–958. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (37).Barends TRM; Gorel A; Bhattacharyya S; Schirò G; Bacellar C; Cirelli C; Colletier J-P; Foucar L; Grünbein ML; Hartmann E; Hilpert M; Holton JM; Johnson PJM; Kloos M; Knopp G; Marekha B; Nass K; Nass Kovacs G; Ozerov D; Stricker M; Weik M; Doak RB; Shoeman RL; Milne CJ; Huix-Rotllant M; Cammarata M; Schlichting I Influence of Pump Laser Fluence on Ultrafast Myoglobin Structural Dynamics. Nature 2024, 626 (8000), 905–911. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (38).Lin X; Zhao W; Wang X Characterization of Conformational Changes and Noncovalent Complexes of Myoglobin by Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry, Circular Dichroism and Fluorescence Spectroscopy. J. Mass Spectrom 2010, 45 (6), 618–626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (39).Besaw JE; Ou W-L; Morizumi T; Eger BT; Sanchez Vasquez JD; Chu JHY; Harris A; Brown LS; Miller RJD; Ernst OP The Crystal Structures of a Chloride-Pumping Microbial Rhodopsin and Its Proton-Pumping Mutant Illuminate Proton Transfer Determinants. J. Biol. Chem 2020, 295 (44), 14793–14804. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (40).Su P; McGee JP; Hollas MAR; Fellers RT; Durbin KR; Greer JB; Early BP; Yip PF; Zabrouskov V; Srzentić K; Senko MW; Compton PD; Kelleher NL; Kafader JO Standardized Workflow for Multiplexed Charge Detection Mass Spectrometry on Orbitrap Analyzers. Nat. Protoc 2025, 20, 1485–1508. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (41).Kafader JO; Melani RD; Durbin KR; Ikwuagwu B; Early BP; Fellers RT; Beu SC; Zabrouskov V; Makarov AA; Maze JT; Shinholt DL; Yip PF; Tullman-Ercek D; Senko MW; Compton PD; Kelleher NL Multiplexed Mass Spectrometry of Individual Ions Improves Measurement of Proteoforms and Their Complexes. Nat. Methods 2020, 17 (4), 391–394. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (42).Kafader JO; Melani RD; Senko MW; Makarov AA; Kelleher NL; Compton PD Measurement of Individual Ions Sharply Increases the Resolution of Orbitrap Mass Spectra of Proteins. Anal. Chem 2019, 91 (4), 2776–2783. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (43).Su P; McGee JP; Durbin KR; Hollas MAR; Yang M; Neumann EK; Allen JL; Drown BS; Butun FA; Greer JB; Early BP; Fellers RT; Spraggins JM; Laskin J; Camarillo JM; Kafader JO; Kelleher NL Highly Multiplexed, Label-Free Proteoform Imaging of Tissues by Individual Ion Mass Spectrometry. Sci. Adv 2022, 8 (32), No. eabp9929. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (44).Francis WJC; Grewal H; Wainwright AAC; Yang X; Olivucci M; Miller RJD Resonant Multiphoton Processes and Excitation Limits to Structural Dynamics. Structural Dynamics 2024, 11 (2), No. 024301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (45).Ho B; Baryshnikova A; Brown GW Unification of Protein Abundance Datasets Yields a Quantitative Saccharomyces Cerevisiae Proteome. Cell Systems 2018, 6 (2), 192–205.e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (46).Wiśniewski JR; Hein MY; Cox J; Mann MA “Proteomic Ruler” for Protein Copy Number and Concentration Estimation without Spike-in Standards*. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 2014, 13 (12), 3497–3506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (47).Shi F; Archer JJ; Levis RJ Nonresonant, Femtosecond Laser Vaporization and Electrospray Post-Ionization Mass Spectrometry as a Tool for Biological Tissue Imaging. Methods 2016, 104, 79–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (48).Rethfeld B; Ivanov DS; Garcia ME; Anisimov SI Modelling Ultrafast Laser Ablation. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys 2017, 50 (19), No. 193001. [Google Scholar]
  • (49).Rethfeld B Free-Electron Generation in Laser-Irradiated Dielectrics. Phys. Rev. B 2006, 73 (3), No. 035101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (50).Besaw JE; Miller RJD Addressing High Excitation Conditions in Time-Resolved X-Ray Diffraction Experiments and Issues of Biological Relevance. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol 2023, 81, No. 102624. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (51).Ghadiri Zahrani E; Kopp D; Azarhoushang B Comparison of Material Removal Efficiency in Laser Ablation of Polycrystalline Diamond for Different Pulse Durations. Mater. Lett 2024, 377, No. 137474. [Google Scholar]
  • (52).Tulej M; Ligterink NFW; de Koning C; Grimaudo V; Lukmanov R; Keresztes Schmidt P; Riedo A; Wurz P Current Progress in Femtosecond Laser Ablation/Ionisation Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry. Applied Sciences 2021, 11 (6), 2562. [Google Scholar]
  • (53).Callou TP; Garcia R; Mukai A; Giacomin NT; de Souza RG; Bechara SJ Advances in Femtosecond Laser Technology. Clin Ophthalmol 2016, 10, 697–703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • (54).Sibbett W; Lagatsky AA; Brown CTA The Development and Application of Femtosecond Laser Systems. Opt. Express, OE 2012, 20 (7), 6989–7001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

SI1
SI2

Data Availability Statement

RAW MS files are available from the MassIVE repository under the identifier MSV000097234.

RESOURCES