One of the reasons that thermally induced reactions are not considered a crucial mechanism in ultraviolet matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (UV-MALDI) is the low ion-to-neutral ratios. Large ion-to-neutral ratios (10(-4)) have been used to justify the unimportance of thermally induced reactions in UV-MALDI. Recent experimental measurements have shown that the upper limit of the total ion-to-neutral ratio is approximately 10(-7) at a high laser fluence and less than 10(-7) at a low laser fluence. Therefore, reexamining the possible contributions of thermally induced reactions in MALDI may be worthwhile. In this study, the concept of polar fluid was employed to explain the generation of primary ions in MALDI. A simple model, namely thermal proton transfer, was used to estimate the ion-to-neutral ratios in MALDI. We demonstrated that the theoretical calculations of ion-to-neutral ratios exhibit the same trend and similar orders of magnitude compared with those of experimental measurements. Although thermal proton transfer may not generate all of the ions observed in MALDI, the calculations demonstrated that thermally induced reactions play a crucial role in UV-MALDI.

Abstract. The ion-to-neutral ratios of four commonly used solid matrices, α-cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid (CHCA), 2,5-dihydroxybenzoic acid (2,5-DHB), sinapinic acid (SA), and ferulic acid (FA) in matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) at 355 nm are reported. Ions are measured using a time-of-flight mass spectrometer combined with a time-sliced ion imaging detector. Neutrals are measured using a rotatable quadrupole mass spectrometer. The ion-to-neutral ratios of CHCA are three orders of magnitude larger than those of the other matrices at the same laser fluence. The ion-to-neutral ratios predicted using the thermal proton transfer model are similar to the experimental measurements, indicating that thermal proton transfer reactions play a major role in generating ions in ultraviolet-MALDI.

An incorrect version of Figure 2(a) was shown in our recently published article. The correct figure and caption are given below. The authors regret this error. Figure 2. (a) represents the solvation energy. The Gibbs free energy, ΔG 1 , is illustrated by the above figure