The mechanism whereby gaseous protein ions are released from charged solvent droplets during electrospray ionization (ESI) remains a matter of debate. Also, it is unclear to what extent electrosprayed proteins retain their solution structure. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations offer insights into the temporal evolution of protein systems. Surprisingly, there have been no all-atom simulations of the protein ESI process to date. The current work closes this gap by investigating the behavior of protein-containing aqueous nanodroplets that carry excess positive charge. We focus on "native ESI", where proteins initially adopt their biologically active solution structures. ESI proceeds while the protein remains entrapped within the droplet. Protein release into the gas phase occurs upon solvent evaporation to dryness. Droplet shrinkage is accompanied by ejection of charge carriers (Na(+) for the conditions chosen here), keeping the droplet at ∼85% of the Rayleigh limit throughout its life cycle. Any remaining charge carriers bind to the protein as the final solvent molecules evaporate. The outcome of these events is largely independent of the initial protein charge and the mode of charge carrier binding. ESI charge states and collision cross sections of the MD structures agree with experimental data. Our results confirm the Rayleigh/charged residue model (CRM). Field emission of excess Na(+) plays an ancillary role by governing the net charge of the shrinking droplet. Models that envision protein ejection from the droplet are not supported. Most nascent CRM ions retain native-like conformations. For unfolded proteins ESI likely proceeds along routes that are different from the native state mechanism explored here.

Abstract. The question whether electrosprayed protein ions retain solution-like conformations continues to be a matter of debate. One way to address this issue involves comparisons of collision cross sections (Ω) measured by ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) with Ω values calculated for candidate structures. Many investigations in this area employ traveling wave IMS (TWIMS). It is often implied that nanoESI is more conducive for the retention of solution structure than regular ESI. Focusing on ubiquitin, cytochrome c, myoglobin, and hemoglobin, we demonstrate that Ω values and collisional unfolding profiles are virtually indistinguishable under both conditions. These findings suggest that gas-phase structures and ion internal energies are independent of the type of electrospray source. We also note that TWIMS calibration can be challenging because differences in the extent of collisional activation relative to drift tube reference data may lead to ambiguous peak assignments. It is demonstrated that this problem can be circumvented by employing collisionally heated calibrant ions. Overall, our data are consistent with the view that exposure of native proteins to electrospray conditions can generate kinetically trapped ions that retain solution-like structures on the millisecond time scale of TWIMS experiments.

No abstract

Nitrate contamination of water is a worldwide environmental problem. Recent studies have demonstrated that the nitrogen (N) and oxygen (O) isotopes of nitrate (NO3(-)) can be used to trace nitrogen dynamics including identifying nitrate sources and nitrogen transformation processes. This paper analyzes the current state of identifying nitrate sources and nitrogen transformation processes using N and O isotopes of nitrate. With regard to nitrate sources, δ(15)N-NO3(-) and δ(18)O-NO3(-) values typically vary between sources, allowing the sources to be isotopically fingerprinted. δ(15)N-NO3(-) is often effective at tracing NO(-)3 sources from areas with different land use. δ(18)O-NO3(-) is more useful to identify NO3(-) from atmospheric sources. Isotopic data can be combined with statistical mixing models to quantify the relative contributions of NO3(-) from multiple delineated sources. With regard to N transformation processes, N and O isotopes of nitrate can be used to decipher the degree of nitrogen transformation by such processes as nitrification, assimilation, and denitrification. In some cases, however, isotopic fractionation may alter the isotopic fingerprint associated with the delineated NO3(-) source(s). This problem may be addressed by combining the N and O isotopic data with other types of, including the concentration of selected conservative elements, e.g., chloride (Cl(-)), boron isotope (δ(11)B), and sulfur isotope (δ(35)S) data. Future studies should focus on improving stable isotope mixing models and furthering our understanding of isotopic fractionation by conducting laboratory and field experiments in different environments.