Combining Mass Spectrometry of Picoliter Samples with a Multicompartment Electrodynamic Trap for Probing the Chemistry of Droplet Arrays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single droplet levitation provides contactless access to the microphysical and chemical properties of micrometer-sized samples. Most applications of droplet levitation to chemical and biological systems use nondestructive optical techniques to probe droplet properties. To provide improved chemical specificity, we coupled a multicompartment quadrupole electrodynamic trap (QET) with single droplet mass spectrometry. Our QET continuously traps a monodisperse droplet population (tens to hundreds of droplets) and allows for the simultaneous sizing of a single droplet using its Mie scattering pattern. Single droplets are subsequently ejected into the ionization region of an ambient pressure inlet mass spectrometer. We optimized two complementary soft ionization techniques for picoliter aqueous droplets: (1) paper spray (PS) ionization and (2) thermal desorption glow discharge (TDGD) ionization. Both techniques detect oxygenated organic acids in single droplets, with signal-to-noise ratios >100 and detection limits on the order of 10 pg. Sensitivity and reproducibility across single droplets are driven by the droplet deposition location and spray stability in PS-MS and the ionization region humidity and analyte evaporation rate in TDGD-MS. Importantly, the analyte evaporation rate can control the TDGD-MS quantitative capability because high evaporation rates result in significant ion suppression. This effect is mitigated by optimizing the vaporization temperature, droplet size range, and analyte volatility. We demonstrate quantitative and reproducible measurements with a droplet internal standard (<10% RSD) and compare the sensitivity of PS-MS and TDGD-MS. Finally, we demonstrate the application of QET-MS to the study of heterogeneous chemical kinetics with the reaction of gas phase O 3 and aqueous maleic acid droplets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".