Molecular composition data interpretation

The molecular composition of sulfur vapor is a complex function of temperature and pressure. Vapor pressure measurements have been interpreted in terms of an equiHbtium between several molecular species (9,10). Mass spectrometric data for sulfur vapor indicate the presence of all possible molecules from S2 to Sg and negligible concentrations of and S q (H)- In general, octatomic sulfur is the predominant molecular constituent of sulfur vapor at low temperatures, but the equihbrium shifts toward smaller molecular species with increasing temperature and decreasing pressure. 

The main goal of data treatment in conventional mass spectrometry (MS) is to facilitate identification and quantification of analytes. The focus of time-resolved mass spectrometry (TRMS) is to track variations of identities and quantities of analytes and products over time. In many chemical reactions, the concentrations of reactants decrease and those of products increase with time. In more complex reactions, reaction intermediates exist and their concentrations may increase and decrease within certain periods of time. The evolution of reaction intermediates is distinct from that of reactants and products. TRMS provides an insight into the progress of reactions by identifying molecules based on their mass-to-charge (m/z) ratios. It also determines concentrations of molecules based on signal intensities of ions. Thus, it is important for TRMS to interpret MS data on highly complex and dynamic systems correctly. This chapter will first introduce definitions of various technical terms, and then discuss how to predict molecular compositions of complex mixtures based on the information contained in mass spectra. 

After high quality mass spectra are obtained, the next step in data interpretation is to deduce the atomic composition of mass spectral features. Since mass spectra relate ion abundances with their mjz values, in order to find the molecular weight (m) of a compound, it is necessary to predict the charge state (z) of recorded ions. The number of electric charges acquired by ions in the gas phase is influenced by the ionization method. This problem used to be less important because old ionization techniques [e.g., electron ionization (El), chemical ionization (Cl), fast atom bombardment (EAB), secondary ion mass... 

The effect of changing solvent composition (polarity) on molecular weight dispersity is noteworthy. Mw/Mn is quite low (1.69) in the experiment carried out by the use of 100% CH2C12 and it increases monotonically with increasing n-C6H14 content. It is very difficult to interpret these data at this time. 

There are several techniques now at our disposal for obtaining this fundamental biophysical information about solutions of polysaccharides (Table 1 [2-7]), but as is well known these substances are by no means easy to characterise. These difficulties arise from their highly expanded nature in solution, their polydispersity, (not only with respect to their molecular weight but also for many with respect to composition), the large variety of conformation and in many cases their high charge and in some their ability to stick together [1,8]. All of these features can complicate considerably the interpretation of solution data. 

In addition, the GPC trace, an example of which is shown in Fig. 42, reflects the composition signature of a given product and reflects the spectrum of molecular chains that are present. Analysis of the area, height, and location of each peak provides valuable quantitative information that is used as input to a CUSUM analysis. Numeric input data from the GPC is mapped into high, normal, and low, based on variance from established normal operating experience. Both the sensor and GPC interpretations are accomplished by individual numeric-symbolic interpreters using limit checking for each individual measurement. 

Measurements of the chemical composition of an aqueous solution phase are interpreted commonly to provide experimental evidence for either adsorption or surface precipitation mechanisms in sorption processes. The conceptual aspects of these measurements vis-a-vis their usefulness in distinguishing adsorption from precipitation phenomena are reviewed critically. It is concluded that the inherently macroscopic, indirect nature of the data produced by such measurements limit their applicability to determine sorption mechanisms in a fundamental way. Surface spectroscopy (optical or magnetic resonance), although not a fully developed experimental technique for aqueous colloidal systems, appears to offer the best hope for a truly molecular-level probe of the interfacial region that can discriminate among the structures that arise there from diverse chemical conditions. 

Raman spectroscopy s sensitivity to the local molecular enviromnent means that it can be correlated to other material properties besides concentration, such as polymorph form, particle size, or polymer crystallinity. This is a powerful advantage, but it can complicate the development and interpretation of calibration models. For example, if a model is built to predict composition, it can appear to fail if the sample particle size distribution does not match what was used in the calibration set. Some models that appear to fail in the field may actually reflect a change in some aspect of the sample that was not sufficiently varied or represented in the calibration set. It is important to identify any differences between laboratory and plant conditions and perform a series of experiments to test the impact of those factors on the spectra and thus the field robustness of any models. This applies not only to physical parameters like flow rate, turbulence, particulates, temperature, crystal size and shape, and pressure, but also to the presence and concentration of minor constituents and expected contaminants. The significance of some of these parameters may be related to the volume of material probed, so factors that are significant in a microspectroscopy mode may not be when using a WAl probe or transmission mode. Regardless, the large calibration data sets required to address these variables can be burdensome. 

Figures 2 and 3 as additional proof to Equation 5. The two solid lines in the upper left corner of Figure 2 are the M - [77] M curves for styrene and butadiene homopolymers. The data points for block copolymers shown as cross and open circle fall in between these two curves. When plotted as M — [77] M curve, all points fall on or near the curve for polystyrene shown as a solid line in the lower right part of Figure 2. The behavior of these copolymers in toluene and dioxane is shown in Figure 3. Since these block copolymers cover a wide range of composition (% S = 3.6-45.9) as well as molecular weight (M = 34,000-620,000), these results prove unequivocally the adequacy of Equation 5. Tliis equation will make it possible to interpretate the chromatogram of block copolymer without preparing monodispersed copolymers which is something difficult, if not impossible.

Gel permeation chromatography of protein linear random coils in guanidinium chloride allows simultaneous resolution and molecular weight analysis of polypeptide components. Column calibration results are expressed in terms of a log M vs. Kd plot or of effective hydrodynamic radius (Re/). For linear polypeptide random coils in 6M GuHCl, Re is proportional to M0 555, and M° 555 or Re may be used interchangeably. Similarly, calibration data may be interpreted in terms of N° 555 (N is the number of amino acid residues in the polypeptide chain), probably the most appropriate calibration term provided sequence data are available for standards. Re for randomly coiled peptide heteropolymers is insensitive to amino acid residue side-chain composition, permitting incorporation of chromophoric, radioactive, and fluorescent substituents to enhance detection sensitivity. 

---