Talk:Electrospray ionization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Physics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.

Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
Electrospray ionization is part of WikiProject Mass spectrometry, which collaborates on Mass spectrometry and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
Comments
It is requested that a diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.


"As like charges repel, the liquid pushes itself out of the capillary and forms a mist or an aerosol of small droplets about 10μm across." Since the size of the droplets generated by electrospray depends on too many factors, I would suggest leaving it at "small droplets", without giving a size estimate.

"The proximity of the molecules becomes unstable as the similarly charged molecules come closer together and the droplets once again explode." This would be a good place to talk about the Rayleigh limit. "Explosion" is not the most accurate way of describing the process, there are wonderful pictures outthere showing what happens when a droplet reaches the Rayleigh limit (Gomez and Tang Phys Fluids 1994, Duft et al, Nature 2003).

"Schulz, F.; Franzka, S.; Schmid, G.; Nanostructured Surfaces by Deposition of Metal Nanoparticles by Means of Spray Techniques. Advanced Functional Materials 2002, 12,532-536." Shouldn't we wait a little to see what is the impact of a paper before adding it as a reference? Would I be surprised if it was added here by one of the authors? What would happen if everybody who writes a paper on electrospray adds a referece here?

I thought that in a bulk material like the liquid here there is no net charge so what does this "As like charges repel, the liquid pushes itself out of the capillary" refer to? Is this really a accurate description of what's happening?

Dougher 04:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

i dont think so. I believe there is in fact a high voltage power supply on the needle tip which causes the taylor cone to form. the counterelectrode of the high voltage supply goes to a plate which attracts the positively charged droplets. this article doesnt mention it, of course. http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/ms/images/esi-mechanism.gif

Contents

[edit] External link to thesis

I don't see any issues with the linking to Dr. Bokman's dissertation. We are not violating coi, npov or link. It is selective and useful not random or exhaustive, represents scientific consensus, and was not added by Dr. Bokman or any of his associates. I personally would respect a request by Dr. Bokman to not link to his publicly available dissertation if he requests that we not, but there is no rule preventing it being linked to here. Perhaps there may be a better choice of external link but this one is not a bad choice.--Nick Y. 17:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I do see an issue with linking to a thesis. Who decided that this thesis is so relevant to deserve a link in an Encyclopedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgnelu (talk • contribs) 00:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ES-MS vs. ESI-MS

I see ESI-MS much more than ES-MS. The former makes more sense as an abbreviation for electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. --Kkmurray 14:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Good point. I added the ES-MS and related abbreviations because I found them in a paper and wasn't certain what they meant. I usually find that Wikipedia is excellent for finding a quick answer to the meaning of an acronym, but it didn't have this one yet. So, after I found what it meant, I added it. I think both ES-MS and ESI-MS should be mentioned, as both are in use. A search in Google books gives hundreds of hits for all these abbreviations, although ESI-MS seems to be the most common indeed. --Itub 14:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Both is best. Google seems to like "ESI-MS" over " ES-MS" but both are clearly used. --Kkmurray 16:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Electrospray is used as ion source for mass spectrometry, so ESI-MS makes perfect sense. ES-MS... not really. I don't think both ESI-MS and ES-MS should be featured here as acceptable abbreviations. Clearly, the one that doesn't make much sense is used less. Mgnelu (talk) 02:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree in that that ESI-MS[1] sounds better to me than ES-MS.[2] On the other hand fast atom bombardment (FAB) is used as ion source for mass spectrometry, but no one uses "FABI-MS" (or ICPI-MS, etc.) --Kkmurray (talk) 17:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
199 thousand hits for ICP-MS? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I assume that people started using FAB and ICP without questioning whether adding an "I" would make sense or not. And it is good that others payed attention and didn't start using another abbreviation - at least there is no confusion. What do you think about the use of MALD-MS[3]? I know, I know, the ratio is much smaller than in the case of ES-MS, but ES-MS makes as much sense as MALD-MS. Having two acronym for the same thing can get confusing. At least we could encourage the use of the one that makes more sense. Mgnelu (talk) 02:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
It's somewhat arbitrary (unfortunately). I remember using MALD and MALDI interchangeably in the early 90's and now the former seems completely wrong. I think that we're left with general consensus aided by counting Google hits (etc). --Kkmurray (talk) 02:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How it works

I intend to remove this section. Most of the text would go into the "Ionization Mechanism" section, except the discussion of the charged droplets formation, which would be replaced by a reference to "Electrospray". Mgnelu (talk) 03:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Static nanospray mass spectrometry

I haven't heard of "static nanospray" - does that imply the existence of a "dynamic nanospray"? Fraction collection during liquid chromatography followed by off-line analysis (by any method) is not an application of electrosprays. It could be mentioned in the topic dedicated to liquid chromatography, but I don't think it belongs here. Any other opinions? Mgnelu (talk) 06:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't heard of it either, but it apparently means nanospray not connected to a separation (e.g. [4]). It should be defined in the section on nanospray (once someone writes that section). --Kkmurray (talk) 02:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Do you really think it should be defined? A Google search for "static nanospray" returns only 490 hits, it is clearly not widely used. I wonder if those who used this unfortunate expression ever thought how meaningless it was. Mgnelu (talk) 02:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)