Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Apr 23.
Published in final edited form as: Anal Chem. 2012 Mar 13;84(7):3231–3239. doi: 10.1021/ac203116a

Resolving Structural Isomers of Monosaccharide Methyl Glycosides Using Drift Tube and Traveling Wave Ion Mobility Mass Spectrometry

Hongli Li 1, Kevin Giles 2, Brad Bendiak 3, Kimberly Kaplan 1, William F Siems 1, Herbert H Hill Jr 1,*
PMCID: PMC3633476  NIHMSID: NIHMS363876  PMID: 22339760

Abstract

Monosaccharide structural isomers including sixteen methyl-D-glycopyranosides and four methyl-N-acetylhexosamines were subjected to ion mobility measurements by electrospray ion mobility mass spectrometry. Two ion mobility-MS systems were employed: atmospheric pressure drift tube ion mobility time-of-flight mass spectrometry and a Synapt G2 HDMS system which incorporates a low pressure traveling wave ion mobility separator. All the compounds were investigated as [M+Na]+ ions in the positive mode. A majority of the monosaccharide structural isomers exhibited different mobility drift times in either system, depending on differences in their anomeric and stereochemical configurations. In general, drift time patterns (relative drift times of isomers) matched between the two instruments. Higher resolving power was observed using the atmospheric pressure drift tube. Collision cross section values of monosaccharide structural isomers were directly calculated from the atmospheric pressure ion mobility experiments and a collision cross section calibration curve was made for the traveling wave ion mobility instrument. Overall, it was demonstrated that ion mobility-mass spectrometry using either drift tube or traveling wave ion mobility is a valuable technique for resolving subtle variations in stereochemistry among the sodium adducts of monosaccharide methyl glycosides.

Introduction

Carbohydrates or glycans play important roles in a wide variety of biological processes15 and their structural elucidation is an essential prerequisite for understanding their many functions. They are highly variable in structure owing to differences in their monomer stereochemistries, inter-residue linkage positions, and general branching patterns.68 Moreover, their preparation from biological sources is frequently accompanied by complex mixtures, often isomeric mixtures, of molecules. NMR spectroscopy is useful for evaluation of isomeric heterogeneity, and for structural elucidation, but it is highly preferable to isolate single molecular species prior to determining the structures of unknowns using NMR.913 Typically, physical separation of the molecules is time consuming, usually involving more than one LC separation in more than one orthogonal LC mode.1318 Mass spectrometric methods1923 can analyze samples at far greater sensitivity, but have their own limitations. One critical issue is that mass spectrometry is not well suited for the evaluation of isomeric heterogeneity. With different variants of multi-stage mass spectrometry (MSn) this applies not only to precursor ions having the same m/z but also to many product or multi-stage product ions. Mass spectra at any stage of isolation/dissociation might result from dissociation of more than one isomeric precursor or product ions. We sought to answer the question as to whether small carbohydrate ions, in this case methyl glycosides varying in their stereochemistries, could be physically resolved in the gas phase as a requisite for evaluating the isomeric heterogeneity of small product ions derived from larger oligosaccharide precursors. The means employed here was ion mobility spectrometry (IMS), which is capable of physically separating isomeric ions based on their different drift velocities through an electric field in a counter flow of neutral gas.2429

IMS separates ions based on an ion’s collision cross section (Ω) to charge ratio. Ions of the same chemical formula but different sizes and configuration potentially can be resolved by IMS. When IMS is coupled to MS, it can provide valuable stereochemical information about analytes. Drift tube ion mobility mass spectrometry (DTIMMS) has been applied in the field of carbohydrate research and it has been reported that both isobaric carbohydrate standards and isomeric biological glycans could be unambiguously distinguished by IMS.3035 Dwivedi et al.30 initially demonstrated that monosaccharide methyl glycosides could be resolved by atmospheric pressure ion mobility time-of-flight mass spectrometry. However, a complete set of methyl glycoside isomers were not investigated and systematic structural information associated with the mobility of isomers was not provided. Moreover, IMMS has also been demonstrated as a valuable tool to analyze complex glycan samples. Measurements of glycan conformational and isomeric distributions by IMMS can give a more complete picture of the complexity of glycans accompanying disease states.3435 The mass-mobility correlation band occupied by carbohydrates34, 3637 can provide a general metric for assigning unknown signals to particular molecular classes. Recently, traveling wave ion mobility spectrometry (TWIMS) has been developed3840 and applied to a wide range of applications4146 including glycomics.4750 The electric field, pressure and design of the system3840 are different from traditional DTIMS, and so conducting identical studies on both systems would be beneficial to further characterize the TWIMS separation.

Here we compare the performance of an atmospheric pressure drift tube IMS, employing a novel resistive glass tube design and a traveling wave IMS in a Waters Synapt G2 instrument, at low pressure, in differentiating 20 monosaccharide methyl glycoside structural isomers. Many anomeric and epimeric pairs of methyl glycosides were resolved in analyses performed on the millisecond time scale on both systems. A detailed and direct comparison was made for the first time between the two different types of IMS systems based on the study of structural isomers of small, relatively rigid molecules.

Experimental Section

Electrospray Ionization Ambient Pressure Resistive Glass Drift Tube Ion Mobility Time of Flight Mass Spectrometer (ESI-AP-DTIM-TOFMS)

The instrument was described previously in detail51 by Kaplan et al. in 2010. This system will be simply referred to as the DTIMS in the following text. In this study, voltages applied to the ion gate and IMS exit were 9007 V and 773 V respectively, which resulted in a homogeneous drift field of 412 V/cm. The gate pulse width was 200 µs. A counter flow of nitrogen (1.5 L/min) was introduced at the exit end of the drift tube to provide both the drift gas and also to aid efficient desolvation of ions prior to the ion gate. The IMS tube was placed in a stainless steel cylindrical tube of the same length that did not touch the resistive glass, with an air gap of ~ 5 mm in between. The stainless steel tube was surrounded by heating jackets and heated. The buffer gas temperature was measured to be 92 °C.

TofDaqViewer software, developed by TOFWERKS AG, was used to view and collect all the data from the instrument. The data from each sample could either be completely or selectively exported based on the user-specified time range in the form of a 2D text file. IDL virtual machine software (www.exelisvis.com) was then used to generate 2D IMMS correlation spectra based the data exported from TofDaqViewer. The ESI was constructed at WSU. Detailed information on its construction and operation are given in the supporting information. The voltage applied to the ESI needle was 14.5 KV, producing a 3KV difference between the ESI needle and the entrance of the ion mobility spectrometer. ESI solvent used in this study was a 50:50 (v/v) methanol: water mixture.

Synapt G2 HDMS System-Traveling Wave Ion Mobility Spectrometry (TWIMS)

The Synapt G2 HDMS (high definition mass spectrometry) (Waters Corp., Manchester, UK) is a hybrid quadrupole/IMS/orthogonal TOFMS instrument and has been previously described.3840, 52, 53 The moving/non-uniform electric field in Synapt G2 is called the traveling wave or T-wave. In the IM cell of the Synapt G2, the ability of the ions to pass through the neutral gas under the influence of a traveling wave electric field is dependent on its mobility. Ions with high ion mobility are more able to keep up with the traveling wave and are overtaken by the pulses less often than the ions with low mobility.38, 39 This system will be simply referred to as TWIMS hereafter. In order to enhance the IM resolution, second-generation IM technology has been incorporated into the Synapt G2 instrument.52, 53 The resolving power of the TWIM cell in the Synapt G2 was increased 3~4 times compared to the traditional Synapt.

ESI voltage was at 3.0 KV and nitrogen was used as the drift gas at 90 mL/min. The TWIMS cell in this study was operated at nominally 3 mbar N2 with a 40V, 900 m/s T-Wave. A complete set of instrumental parameters are included in the supporting information. Masslynx 4.1 (Waters Corporation, Milford, MA, USA) was used to collect and process all the data.

Chemicals and Solvents

All sugars used were the D-enantiomers. The α- and β-methyl glycopyranosides of galactose, glucose, mannose and 2-acetamido-2-deoxy-glucose were purchased from Sigma. The α- and β-methyl glycopyranosides of 2-acetamido-2-deoxy-galactose were from Calbiochem. Those of allose, altrose, gulose, idose and talose were synthesized by Fischer-type glycosidation. The synthetic method, NMR spectra, chemical shifts and J-couplings are presented in the supporting information section.

For ion mobility studies, 20 µL of a 500 µM sample stock solution and 10 µL of a 1 mM NaCl stock solution were added to 1mL ESI solvent, resulting in a sample concentration of 10 µM and sugar/NaCl ratio of 1 : 1. Glycosides were examined to avoid any configurational interconversion or additional complexities observed for reducing sugars, which are typically present in aqueous solvent mixtures in multiple anomeric configurations and ring forms. HPLC grade solvents (methanol, water) were used and purchased from J. T. Baker (Phillipsburgh, NJ).

Reduced Mobility Ko, Collision Cross Section Ω, Separation Factor α and Resolving Power Rp

The mobility (K), reduced mobility (Ko) and collision cross section (Ω) of an ion and their calculations have been widely described.24, 27, 3034. Values of Ω can be directly determined from experimental data obtained using DTIMS. Due to the non-uniform electric field in TWIMS, there is currently no method to calculate Ω values directly from experimental data. However, Ω values can be estimated based on the calibration methods detailed previously in the literature45, 46, 5456 for TWIMS. Briefly, ions with known Ω values are used as calibrants and their drift times on TWIMS are measured. In general, a calibration curve by plotting (Ωµ0.5)/(ze)45, 46, 5456 values versus TWIMS corrected drift times, td', is made. The Ω values for unknown compounds in TWIMS are thus determined using the calibration curve and drift time information obtained under exactly the same instrumental conditions. In this study we plot directly the Ω values obtained from the DTIMS versus td' obtained using the TWIMS. Adjustment of Ω for reduced mass and charge state is not essential here since the reduced mass is almost the same for all species studied and all are singly charged. The td' values have been corrected for m/z dependent and independent offsets in the TWIMS as described elsewhere.45, 46 A power trend line of the form Ω=A (td')B is used to fit the data, where A is an incorporated correction factor for the electric field and other parameters on the TWIMS system; B is dependent on many parameters such as T-Wave amplitude and velocity and accounts for the non-linear effects in TWIMS.

The separation factor (α) is by α = td (2)/td (1), where td (2) is the drift time of the slower drifting ion and td (1) is the drift time of the faster drifting ion. The experimental resolving power (Rp) is traditionally defined by the drift time td divided by the peak full width at half maximum (FWHM): Rp = tdtd. The Rp of TWIMS was theoretically studied by Shvartsburg and Smith in 200840 where they showed that due to the non-linear relationship between mobility and drift time on the TWIMS, the mobility resolving power is approximately twice the temporal resolving power, Rp. Zhong et al.53 have experimentally characterized the ion mobility resolution of the second generation TWIMS as a function of different experimental parameters. Both theory and experiment show that the resolution is dependent on wave height, wave velocity, IM cell length, pressure and other parameters.

Results and Discussion

Structures of 20 monosaccharide methyl glycoside isomers and MS spectra

Monosaccharides are the basic units of larger carbohydrate molecules. For the methyl-D-pyranosides of hexoses, where the chirality at C-5 by definition is invariant, four additional chiral carbons are present that may vary in stereochemistry (C-1 to C-4), giving rise to 16 isomeric forms with the same exact mass and chemical formula. In addition, 4 isomers of the methyl glycosides of two important N-acetylhexosamines: N-acetylgalactosamine and N-acetylglucosamine, were also included in this study. The structures and nomenclature for all 16 methyl-D-glycopyranosides and the 4 methyl-N-acetyl-D-hexosamines are shown in Fig. 1a. Representative mass spectra for the sodiated adduct of α-Me-glucopyranoside at m/z 217 and α-Me-N-acetylglucosamine at m/z 258 are shown in Fig. 1b and Fig. lc. Other methyl-glycopyranosides and methyl-N-acetylhexosamines had identical mass spectra to those shown in Fig. 1b and Fig. 1c, respectively. Therefore using MS alone, it is impossible to differentiate those isomers that have identical m/z values. Carbohydrates have an especially large number of stereo-isomeric variants differing at anomeric and/or epimeric positions. Anomers are cyclic structures that only differ in the configuration at the acetal carbon for glycosides (carbon 1) which is called the anomeric carbon. For the 4C1 chair conformations as drawn in Fig. 1a, α-glycosides have the -OCH3 in the axial position, and β-glycosides have the -OCH3 in the equatorial position. Epimers are diastereomers that differ at only one asymmetric carbon. For example, α-methyl-talopyranoside and α-methyl-galactopyranoside are epimers differing only at carbon two (Fig. 1a). Overall, all the structures are categorized into β and α configurations in Fig. 1a with their corresponding names shown in the right column. It is evident that all the isomers only vary in subtle structural differences.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

(a) Structures and nomenclature for the 16 methyl-D-glycopyranosides and 4 methyl-N-acetylhexosamines used in this study. (b) The mass spectrum of α-Me-glucopyranoside as a [M+Na]+ adduct at m/z 217. The other 15 methyl-D-glycopyranosides showed essentially the same mass spectrum. (c) The mass spectrum of α-Me-N-acetyl glucosamine as a [M+ Na]+ adduct at m/z 258. The other 3 methyl-N-acetylhexosamines showed essentially the same mass spectrum. Sugar carbons are numbered as illustrated.

Overall mobility separation patterns of monosaccharide structural isomers by DTIMS and TWIMS

The overall ion mobility spectra of the16 structural isomers of the methyl-D-glycosides obtained on the DTIMS and TWIMS instruments are displayed in Fig. 2a and Fig. 2b, respectively. Corresponding abbreviations are listed on the right. Each DTIMS mobility spectrum was acquired for 5 minutes with 3 µL/min ESI sample flow rate. Each dataset shown in Fig. 2b from TWIMS was acquired for two minutes with a 5 µL/min infusion of the sample. The results showed that the majority of monosaccharide structural isomers exhibited unique mobility drift times, even though not all of them were fully resolved. Many drift time orders matched between these two sets of data, but not all. Based on the traditional definition, Rp for DTIMS was ~75 with FWHM of 0.3 ms; for TWIMS the temporal Rp was ~15–20 with FWHM of around 0.16 ms, which translates to a mobility resolution of 30–40 (see above), which is in keeping with results presented previously for singly charged species.52 It should be noted that the experimental conditions for DTIMS in this study were for high sensitivity (operating conditions for the DTIMS were set to approximate the sensitivity of the TWIMS), not optimum resolving power; the measured resolving power for the DTIMS was ~83 % of its optimum resolving power under the same operating conditions.57

Figure 2.

Figure 2

(a) Overall mobility spectra of 16 structural isomers of methyl-D-glycopyranosides obtained on the AP-DTIM-TOFMS instrument. (b) Overall mobility spectra of the same 16 structural isomers collected using the Synapt G2 TWIMS instrument. All mobility spectra were extracted for sodiated ions [M+Na]+ having m/z 217.

In all of the spectra, the predominant carbohydrate ions produced by ESI were found to be the Na+ adduct of the saccharide. The formation of metal ion-saccharide adducts are common in electrospray ionization. [M+H]+ ions were also detected at low abundance for certain monosaccharide structural isomers, however, the mobility separation between isomers was less than for the sodiated ions (see supporting information). Cerda and Wesdemiotis58 using ab initio calculations demonstrated that Na+ interacts with sugars through multidentate coordination with oxygen lone electron pairs. The favored [monosaccharide + Na]+ structures contained pyranose rings in the chair or boat conformation that permits tri or tetradentate coordination of Na+. Thus the resolution observed among structural isomers of monosaccharide methyl glycosides is attributed not only to their different stereochemistries but also to the conformational changes induced by the Na+ metal ion. Clearly, different methyl glycosides vary in the compactness of their Na+ adducts which is reflected in their overall cross-sectional areas and drift times. With both instruments, the α-Tal stereochemical arrangement showed the shortest drift time and α-Glc had the longest drift time. The major differences observed between mobility profiles in comparing the two instruments were between the α-, β-Ido, and α-, β-Gul configurations. With DTIMS, very similar drift times were observed, and reduced mobility differences (Table 1) were within the expected experimental variation and could be considered not separated. While TWIMS exhibited better separation, the α-Gul (2.89 ms) and β-Gul (2.81 ms) anomers had longer drift times than the α- and β-Ido anomers (2.70 ms). The TWIMS and DTIMS techniques, while similar, are different in pressure, electric field homogeneity and temperature, thus some differences in resolution and relative order of separations empirically might have been expected.

Table 1.

Drift times (td and td'), reduced mobilities (Ko), collision cross sections (Ω) and separation factors (α) for the sodiated adducts of all 16 structural isomers of Me-D-glycopyranosides and 4 structural isomers of methyl-N-acetylhexosamines employing ion mobility mass spectrometry

Compound td (a) (ms) td' (b) (ms) Ko (a) α(a) α(b) Ω(a) (Å2)
β-Tal 22.24 2.70 1.48 1.03 1.02 131.34
α-Tal 21.40 2.66 1.53 126.98
β-Man 22.81 2.77 1.45 1.02 1.01 134.01
α-Man 23.34 2.81 1.42 136.80
β-Ido 22.65 2.70 1.47 1.01 1.00 132.19
α-Ido 22.63 2.70 1.46 133.04
β-Gul 22.33 2.81 1.48 1.00 1.03 131.34
α-Gul 22.30 2.89 1.48 131.34
β-Glc 23.65 2.96 1.40 1.02 1.04 139.83
α-Glc 24.22 3.08 1.37 141.77
β-Gal 23.11 2.81 1.43 1.04 1.04 135.83
α-Gal 24.14 2.93 1.38 140.80
β-Alt 22.31 2.77 1.48 1.06 1.06 131.34
α-Alt 23.78 2.93 1.40 138.74
β-All 23.87 2.96 1.39 1.05 1.05 139.83
α-All 22.76 2.81 1.46 133.04
β-GalNAc 24.65 3.23 1.33 1.01 1.00 146.14
α-GalNAc 24.56 3.23 1.34 145.05
β-GlcNAc 25.70 3.47 1.28 1.00 1.00 151.84
α-GlcNAc 25.61 3.47 1.28 151.84

Note:

a

data obtained or derived from ESI-DTIM-TOFMS (DTIMS).

b

data obtained or derived from ESI-TWIM-TOFMS (TWIMS).

The mobility spectra of four methyl-N-acetylhexosamines that are commonly found in mammalian oligosaccharides are shown in Fig. 3. While separation between sodium adducts of the epimers was observed, no separation was seen between anomers. Interestingly, the α- and β-Me-GalNAc anomers drifted faster (higher mobility) than the α- and β-Me-GlcNAc anomers (lower mobility). This suggests, at least with sodium adducts, that the methyl-GalNAc species adopt more compact overall structures than those of the methyl-GlcNAc anomers. In addition, the drift time profile of these four isomers matched exactly between the two IMS systems. Overall, monosaccharides having different stereochemistries coordinate the sodium ion differently, depending on the electron donor groups available and their relative 3-dimensional spatial orientations. This clearly results in different overall shapes and compactness for the coordination complexes of different methyl glycosides, thereby resulting in different ion mobilities.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

(a) Overall mobility spectra of four structural isomers: α- and β-methyl-N-acetyl glucosamine and α- and β-methyl-N-acetylgalactosamine obtained on the AP-DTIM-TOFMS. (b) Overall mobility spectra of the same four structural isomers collected using the WATERS Synapt G2 instrument. All mobility spectra were extracted for sodiated ions [M+Na]+ having m/z 258

Separation between anomers and epimers

All the monosaccharide structural isomers in this study can be categorized as 10 pairs of anomers based on the orientation of the –OCH3 group in either the axial (α) or equatorial positions (β) as shown in Fig. 1a. Six pairs of anomers including the α and β-Tal, Man, Glc, Gal, Alt and All were baseline or fully separated in DTIMS. Separation for the same six pairs of anomers was also observed on TWIMS, however, with lower resolution. However, as mentioned previously, the anomer pair of α and β-Gul was partially separated in TWIMS, while no separation was observed in DTIMS. Examples of the separation profiles of 4 pairs of anomers on the two different systems are shown in Fig. 4. Two-dimensional IMMS plots overlaid from individual IMS spectra obtained from DTIMS are shown with m/z along the×axis and mobility drift time along the y axis having units in µs. For each anomeric pair, the equivalent 1D overlaid TWIMS spectra are also displayed.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Overlaid two-dimensional IMMS plots (top of each panel, from DTIMS) and IMS plots (1-D data from TWIMS, bottom of each panel) of selected pairs of anomeric methyl glycopyranosides: (a) Overlaid α- and β-methyl-talopyranosides; (b) Overlaid α- and β-methyl-mannopyranosides; (c) Overlaid α- and β-methyl-altropyranosides; (d) Overlaid α- and β-methyl-allopyranosides. All the β configurations are in red color.

It is worthy of note that in some cases (Fig. 4, panels a and d) the α anomer showed a shorter drift time than the β, but in other cases (Fig. 4, panels b and c), the reverse was true. It is important to point out that ab initio calculations58 have indicated that some sugars coordinate with preferred conformations that can be either 4C1 or 1C4 chair forms, or boat forms, and more generally for all stereoisomeric variants, other forms such as the skew, half-chair or sofa forms would need to be seriously considered in theoretical calculations. Depending on the stereochemistry and relative orientation of hydroxyl groups, different methyl glycosides could participate in different multidentate coordination complexes having different shapes and compactness and with different positioning of the central Na+ either above or below a plane drawn between C-1, C-3 and C-5, for example. While the detailed coordination complexes are beyond the scope and intent of this paper, it is evident that solely modifying the stereochemistry at C-1 can dramatically affect the ion mobility of sodium complexes, and their overall cross-sectional areas are experimentally significantly different as evaluated by ion mobility spectrometry.

In the same way, all the 20 monosaccharide methyl glycosides can be classified as 26 pairs of epimers depending on the asymmetry at carbons 2, 3 and 4. For each α and β anomeric configuration, C-2 epimers include the pairs of Tal and Gal, Man and Glc, Ido and Gul and Alt and All; C-3 epimers include the pairs of Tal and Ido, Man and Alt, Gul and Gal and Glc and All; C-4 epimers include pairs of Tal and Man, Ido and Alt, Glc and Gal, Gul and All and GalNAc and GlcNAc. Six out of eight pairs of C-2 epimers, five out of eight pairs of C-3 epimers and eight out of ten pairs of C-4 epimers were baseline/fully separated using DTIMS. For TWIMS, five pairs of C-2 epimers demonstrated good separation and eight pairs of C-4 epimers were baseline or partially differentiated, however, only α-Glc and α-All showed significant separation for C-3 epimers. Fig. 5 shows the overlaid 2D IMMS plots and overlaid 1D IMS plots for 4 representative epimeric pairs including (a) C-2 epimers of β-Glc and β-Man; (b) C-3 epimers of α-Gal and α-Gul; (c) C-4-epimers of β-All and β-Gul; (d) C-4 epimers of α-GlcNAc and α-GalNAc. Specific epimeric carbons are highlighted by blue dots. These four epimeric pairs having the same m/z were all fully separated on the mobility scale in the DTIMS system. In the TWIMS system, separation between epimeric pairs of β-Glc and β-Man, β-All and β-Gul, and α-GlcNAc and α-GalNAc was observed, although peaks were partially overlapping. There was a little separation between α-Gal and α-Gul in TWIMS. The higher separation degree and resolution for these 4 epimeric pairs in the DTIMS compared to the TWIMS system is apparent. Clear separation was achieved when glycosides varied solely in the stereochemistry at one carbon as shown in Fig. 5, for many epimeric pairs. It can therefore be concluded that metal ion coordination of carbohydrates as characterized by ion mobility measurements in the gas phase is exquisitely sensitive to changes in the saccharide stereochemistry. The stereochemistry at positions C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 all influence complexation with the metal ion as measured by ion mobility and evidently contribute to the shapes and overall conformations of the sugar complexes.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Overlaid two-dimensional IMMS plots (top of each panel, from DTIMS) and IMS plot (1-D data from TWIMS, bottom of each panel) of selected pairs of epimeric methyl glycopyranosides: (a) Overlaid C-2 epimers: β-methyl-glucopyranoside and β-methyl-mannopyranoside; (b) Overlaid C-3 epimers: α-methyl-galactopyranoside and α-methyl-gulopyranoside; (c) Overlaid C-4 epimers: β- methyl-allopyranoside and β-methyl-gulopyranoside; (d) Overlaid 4-epimers of methyl-N-acetylhexosamines: α-methyl-N-acetylglucosamine and α-methyl-N-acetylgalactosamine. All the slower drifting (longer drift time) epimeric ions are shown in red.

Separation of these compounds as mixtures was also considered an important point to demonstrate. Selected mixtures of different isomers having equal concentrations of 10 µM were examined and it was demonstrated that the same mobilities were observed in the mixture as seen with the compounds run individually (see supporting information).

Ko, Ω and α calculations

The parameters of drift time (td and td'), reduced mobility (Ko), collision cross section (Ω) and separation factor (α) for the anomeric pairs of all 20 monosaccharides are displayed in Table 1. Reproducibility was checked with selected individual samples (see supporting information), indicating variations in Ko of ±0.01 (cm2.V−1.S−1) on the DTIMS system; Drift time variation is ± 0.03 ms on the TWIMS system. The reported Ko and Ω values were determined directly from the experimental data obtained from the DTIMS. Ambient pressure in Pullman, Washington ranged from 690 Torr to 700 Torr during this study. As listed, Ko values ranged from 1.53 to 1.28 cm2·V−1·S−1 with corresponding Ω values ranging from 127 to 152 Å2 for all 20 methyl glycoside structural isomers. Values of α(a) were calculated by using the ratio of Ko(2)/Ko(1) (where 2 is the ion having the higher Ko, and 1 is the ion having the lower Ko). This ratio accounts for any pressure and temperature influence on the variation of drift time values. Values of α(b) were obtained from the ratio of td' values obtained using the TWIMS system. Even though, as shown in Fig. 4, some isomeric mobility peaks were better separated in the DTIMS system as compared to TWIMS, the separation factors from the two systems for the same anomeric pairs generally matched with little variation. TWIMS had similar α values in most of the cases or even higher α values in some cases (such as between α- and β-Gul and α- and β-Glc) compared to DTIMS. In the same way, α between any pairs of monosaccharide structural isomers could also be calculated and compared. However, the data reported in Table 1 were determined using one set of experimental conditions on each system and the variation of α values between the two instruments could be observed under a range of different experimental conditions.

A plot of Ω vs. td' is shown in Fig. 6 by using the data in Table 1. Two points overlapped, therefore only 18 points are observable in the figure. Fitting the data using the power law expression given earlier, a curve with the relationship Ω = 73.06(td')0.59 and R2 =0.91 is found. Good correlations have been observed previously for TWIMS calibration curves of this type in a wide range of applications.45, 46, 5456 However, in reality the isomeric monosaccharide methyl glycosides do not serve as particularly good calibrants since they all share m/z values that were too close and as shown in Fig. 1(b) and 1(c), very similar drift times hence only cover an extremely small drift time region (mainly distributed between 2.6–3.0 ms), which could contribute to the relatively low R2 value. In addition, it was observed that some isomers were distributed in vertical or horizontal patterns in Fig. 6, which means that some specific isomers were separable in one mobility system (different Ω values or td' values), while not in the other (same td' values or Ω values). The TWIMS and DTIMS techniques, while similar, have fundamental differences in the way they separate ions such as electric field homogeneity, temperature and pressure, thus some differences in resolution is not unexpected.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Plot of Ω vs. td' for TWIMS using Ω values of 20 monosaccharide methyl glycosides structural isomers calculated from DTIMS (y axis) and their corrected drift time values derived from TWIMS (x axis).

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the separation of 20 structural isomers of monosaccharide methyl glycosides using two different ion mobility instruments: ESI-AP-DTIM-TOFMS (DTIMS) and the Synapt G2 (TWIMS). It was shown that stereoisomers of methyl glycopyranosides exhibited different mobilities and although some of them were well resolved, some isomeric pairs showed overlapping peaks. Using only one separation gas with each instrument and only one alkaline earth metal, sodium, it was possible to baseline separate a number of isomeric compounds having only subtle structural differences. Coordination strength, -OH and -OCH3 group configurations and coordination geometry induced by Na+ adduction all influenced ion mobility drift times of the different sugar stereoisomers. Different drift gases and metal ions30, 59 may be needed to resolve other pairs of isomers in future studies. As expected, the DTIMS system provided higher resolving powers than the TWIMS system but the separation factors for anomeric pairs between the two instruments were similar. Even though there were many similarities between the separations using DTIMS and TWIMS, some differences were observed.

Supplementary Material

1_si_001

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health with Grant # 5R33RR020046. Hilary Major (Waters, Manchester) is thanked for help in obtaining the Synapt G2 data.

References

  • 1.Raman R, Raguram S, Venkataraman G, Paulson JC, Sasisekharan R. Nat. Methods. 2005;2:817–824. doi: 10.1038/nmeth807. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ratner DM, Adams EW, Disney MD, Seeberger PH. ChemBioChem. 2004;5:1375–1383. doi: 10.1002/cbic.200400106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Rudd PM, Elliott T, Cresswell P, Wilson IA, Dwek RA. Science. 2001;291:2370–2376. doi: 10.1126/science.291.5512.2370. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.An HJ, Kronewitter SR, de Leoz MLA, Lebrilla CB. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2009;13:601–607. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2009.08.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Kam RKT, Poon TCW. Clin. Proteom. 2008;4:67–79. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Fang TT, Bendiak B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007;129:9721–9736. doi: 10.1021/ja0717313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Hirabayashi J. Trends Biotechnol. 2003;21:141–143. doi: 10.1016/S0167-7799(03)00002-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Mahal LK. Anti-Cancer Agents in Med. Chem. 2008;8:37–51. doi: 10.2174/187152008783330806. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Dua VK, Rao BNN, Wu SS, Dube VE, Bush CA. J. Biol. Chem. 1986;261:1599–1608. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Cumming DA, Hellerqvist CG, Harris-Brandts M, Michnick SW, Carver JP, Bendiak B. Biochemistry. 1989;28:6500–6512. doi: 10.1021/bi00441a051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Jones DNM, Bendiak B. J. Biomol. NMR. 1999;15:157–168. doi: 10.1023/a:1008342510795. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Armstrong GS, Mandelshtam VA, Shaka AJ, Bendiak B. J. Magn. Reson. 2005;173:160–168. doi: 10.1016/j.jmr.2004.11.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Martensson S, Levery SB, Fang TT, Bendiak B. Eur. J. Biochem. 1998;258:603–622. doi: 10.1046/j.1432-1327.1998.2580603.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Currie HA, Perry CC. J. Chromatogr. A. 2006;1128:90–96. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2006.06.045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Karlsson G, Winge S, Sandberg H. J. Chromatogr. A. 2005;1092:246–249. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2005.08.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Wuhrer M, de Boer AR, Deelder AM. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 2009;28:192–206. doi: 10.1002/mas.20195. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Pabst M, Bondili JS, Stadlmann J, Mach L, Altmann F. Anal. Chem. 2007;79:5051–5057. doi: 10.1021/ac070363i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Chu CS, Ninonuevo MR, Clowers BH, Perkins PD, An HJ, Yin H, Killeen K, Miyamoto S, Grimm R, Lebrilla CB. Proteomics. 2009;9:1939–1951. doi: 10.1002/pmic.200800249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zaia J. Chem. Biol. 2008;15:881–892. doi: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2008.07.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Morelle W, Michalski JC. Curr. Pharm. Design. 2005;11:2615–2645. doi: 10.2174/1381612054546897. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Morelle W, Michalski JC. Curr. Anal. Chem. 2005;1:29–57. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Reinhold VN, Reinhold BB, Costello CE. Anal. Chem. 1995;67:1772–1784. doi: 10.1021/ac00107a005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Costello CE, Contado-Miller JM, Cipollo JF. J Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2007;18:1799–1812. doi: 10.1016/j.jasms.2007.07.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Eiceman GA, Karpas Z. Ion Mobility Spectrometry. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC press, Taylor and Francis Group; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ewing RG, Atkinson DA, Eiceman GA, Ewing GJ. Talanta. 2001;54:515–529. doi: 10.1016/s0039-9140(00)00565-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Asbury GR, Klasmeier J, Hill HH., Jr Talanta. 2000;50:1291–1298. doi: 10.1016/s0039-9140(99)00241-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Eiceman GA. Trends in Analytical Chemistry. 2002;21:259–275. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kanu AB, Hill HH., Jr Talanta. 2007;73:692–699. doi: 10.1016/j.talanta.2007.04.058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kanu AB, Dwivedi P, Tam M, Matz L, Hill HH., Jr J. Mass Spectrom. 2008;43:1–22. doi: 10.1002/jms.1383. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Dwivedi P, Bendiak B, Clowers BH, Hill HH., Jr J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2007;18:1163–1175. doi: 10.1016/j.jasms.2007.04.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Clowers BH, Dwivedi P, Steiner WE, Hill HH, Jr, Bendiak B. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2005;16:660–669. doi: 10.1016/j.jasms.2005.01.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zhu M, Bendiak B, Clowers B, Hill HH., Jr Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2009;394:1853–1867. doi: 10.1007/s00216-009-2865-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Fenn LS, Mclean JA. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2011;13:2196–2205. doi: 10.1039/c0cp01414a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Plasencia MD, Isailovic D, Merenbloom SI, Mechref Y, Clemmer DE. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2008;19:1706–1715. doi: 10.1016/j.jasms.2008.07.020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Isailovic D, Kurulugama RT, Plasencia MD, Stokes ST, Kyselova Z, Goldman R, Mechref Y, Novotny MV, Clemmer DE. J. Proteome Res. 2008;7:1109–1117. doi: 10.1021/pr700702r. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Fenn LS, Mclean JA. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2008;391:905–909. doi: 10.1007/s00216-008-1951-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Fenn LS, Kliman M, Mahsut A, Zhao SR, Mclean JA. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2009;394:235–244. doi: 10.1007/s00216-009-2666-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Giles K, Pringle SD, Worthington KR, Little D, Wildgoose JL, Bateman RH. Rapid Commun. Mass Spetrom. 2004;18:2401–2414. doi: 10.1002/rcm.1641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Pringle SD, Giles K, Wildgoose JL, Williams JP, Slade SE, Thalassinos K, Bateman RH, Bowers MT, Scrivens JH. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2007;261:1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Shvartsburg AA, Smith RD. Anal. Chem. 2008;80:9689–9699. doi: 10.1021/ac8016295. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Rand KD, Pringle SD, Murphy JP, III, Fadgen KE, Brown J, Engen JR. Anal. Chem. 2009;81:10019–10028. doi: 10.1021/ac901897x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Ridenour WB, Kliman M, Mclean JA, Caprioli RM. Anal. Chem. 2010;82:1881–1889. doi: 10.1021/ac9026115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Eckers C, Laures AM-F, Giles K, Major H, Pringle S. Rapid Commun. Mass spectrom. 2007;21:1255–1263. doi: 10.1002/rcm.2938. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Scarff CA, Patel VJ, Thalassinos K, Scrivens JH. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2009;20:625–631. doi: 10.1016/j.jasms.2008.11.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Ruotolo BT, Benesch JLP, Sandercock AM, Hyung SJ, Robinson CV. Nat. Protoc. 2008;3:1139–1152. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2008.78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Bush MF, Hall Z, Giles K, Hoyes J, Robinson CV, Ruotolo BT. Anal. Chem. 2010;82:9557–9565. doi: 10.1021/ac1022953. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Fenn LS, Mclean JA. Mol. BioSyst. 2009;5:1298–1302. doi: 10.1039/b909745g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Yamagaki T, Sato A. Anal. Sci. 2009;25:985–988. doi: 10.2116/analsci.25.985. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Yamagaki T, Sato A. J. Mass. Spectrom. 2009;44:1509–1517. doi: 10.1002/jms.1641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Williams JP, Grabenauer M, Holland RJ, Carpenter CJ, Wormald MR, Giles K, Harvey DJ, Bateman RH, Scrivens JH, Bowers MT. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2010;298:119–127. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Kaplan K, Graf S, Tanner C, Gonin M, Fuhrer K, Knochenmuss R, Dwivedi P, Hill HH., Jr Anal. Chem. 2010;82:9336–9343. doi: 10.1021/ac1017259. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Giles K, Williams JP, Campuzano I. Rapid Commun. Mass Spetrom. 2011;25:1559–1566. doi: 10.1002/rcm.5013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Zhong Y, Hyung SJ, Ruotolo BT. Analyst. 2011;136:3534–3541. doi: 10.1039/c0an00987c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Smith DP, Knapman TW, Campuzano I, Malham RW, Berryman JT, Radford SE, Ashcroft AE. Eur. J. Mass Spectrom. 2009;15:113–130. doi: 10.1255/ejms.947. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Thalassinos K, Grabenauer M, Slade SE, Hilton GR, Bowers MT, Scrivens JH. Anal. Chem. 2009;81:248–254. doi: 10.1021/ac801916h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Knapman TW, Berryman JT, Campuzano I, Harris SA, Ashcroft AE. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2010;298:17–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Kanu AB, Gribb MM, Hill HH., Jr Anal. Chem. 2008;80:6610–6619. doi: 10.1021/ac8008143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Cerda BA, Wesdemiotis C. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 1999;189:189–204. [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Asbury GR, Hill HH., Jr Anal. Chem. 2000;72:580–584. doi: 10.1021/ac9908952. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

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

Supplementary Materials

1_si_001

RESOURCES