Table 2.
MF1 | adduct | accurate mass2 | lipid assignment3 | RF | LASSO |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||
C44H82N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 784.58508 | PC(18:1_18:2) | Yes | Yes |
C44H84N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 786.60073 | PC(18:0_18:2) | Yes | No |
C46H80N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 806.56943 | PC(16:0_22:6) | Yes | No |
C42H80N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 758.56943 | PC(16:0_18:2) | Yes | No |
C39H79N2O6P1 | [M+H]+ | 703.57485 | SM(d18:1_16:0) | Yes | No |
C46H86N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 812.61638 | PC(18:0_20:3) | Yes | Yes |
C44H80N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 782.56943 | PC(16:0_20:4) | Yes | No |
C46H82N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 808.58508 | PC(16:0_22:5) | Yes | No |
C47H76O2 | [M+Na]+ | 695.57375 | CE(20:4) | Yes | No |
C55H98O6 | [M+Na]+ | 877.72556 | TAG(52:5) | Yes | No |
C47H93N2O6P1 | [M+H]+ | 813.68440 | SM(d18:1_24:1) | Yes | No |
C44H86N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 788.61638 | PC(18:0_18:1) | Yes | No |
C40H80N1O8P1 | [M+H]+ | 734.56943 | PC(16:0_16:0) | Yes | No |
C57H100O6 | [M+Na]+ | 903.74121 | TAG(54:6) | Yes | Yes |
C24H50N1O7P1 | [M+H]+ | 496.33977 | LysoPC(16:0) | Yes | No |
C20H42N1O6P1 | [M+H]+ | 424.28225 | LysoPC-pmg(12:0)4 | Yes | No |
Molecular formula
estimated mass error <±0.1 ppm. These lipid features (as defined in the text) were verified by further MS1 analysis as described in the Methods, except that the resolving power was set to 500,000 at m/z=200.
In this study lipid features (monoisotopic accurate m/z values) were used for classification. The molecular formulae and lipid name assignments are interpretations listed for the reader. The assignments were based on accurate mass and MS2 fragmentation patterns. CE, cholesterol esters; TAG, triacylglyceride; LysoPC-pmg, lysophosphatidylcholine-plasmalogen; PC phosphatidyl choline; SM sphingomyelin. Nomenclature according to [60,61].
This molecular formula and lipid assignment was the closest from our comprehensive lipids database. Among non-lipids there is the possibility of the non-phosphate 31P-containing compound C19H37N8O1P1, which is inconsistent with the phosphocholine fragment in the MS2 data (Fig. S2).