Despite the growing importance of the mass spectrometry of membrane proteins,i ti sn ot knownh ow their transfer from solution into vacuum affects their stability and structure.T oaddress this we have carried out asystematic investigation of ten membrane proteins solubilized in different detergents and used mass spectrometry to gain physicochemical insight into the mechanism of their ionization and desolvation. We showt hat the chemicalp roperties of the detergents mediate the charge state,both during ionization and detergent removal. Using ion mobility mass spectrometry,w e monitor the conformations of membrane proteins and show howt he surface charge density dictates the stability of folded states.W ec onclude that the gas-phase stability of membrane proteins is increased when agreater proportion of their surface is lipophilic and is consequently protected by the physical presence of the micelle.Thestudyof membrane proteins is challenging primarily due to the solubilization required for isolation from their natural lipidic environments. [1] Mass spectrometry (MS) of intact membrane protein complexes has recently emerged as acomplementary biophysical approach, providing new insight into subunit stoichiometry,n ucleotide interactions,a nd peptide or lipid binding. [2] Membrane proteins are transferred into the mass spectrometer encapsulated within detergent micelles by means of nanoelectrospray ionization (nESI), followed by their transmission into vacuum. [3] Here we examine the influence of the detergent micelle,w hich adds an additional layer of complexity to the process of generating ions when compared to water-soluble proteins.To explore the relationship between the chemistry of the detergent and charge state of the membrane protein we considered ad ataset of 49 different combinations of membrane proteins and detergents,s panning am ass range of 50-430 kDa (Tables S1-S4). In all detergents examined here, membrane proteins displayed charge state distributions (Dz) 7consistent with afolded structure in solution.[4] Moreover saccharide detergents consistently gave higher charge states than poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) and LDAO detergents (Figures 1a nd S1, and Tables S5-S7) implying that these differences are due to the nature of the detergent, rather than the protein. However,p lotting the observed charge state against properties of the detergent, such as surface tension or micellar mass,s hows no correlation (R 2 of 0.01-0.15, Figure S2). Interestingly,i nt he case of PEG and LDAO detergents,t he maximum charge states (z max )w ere > 20 % below the Rayleigh limit (Table S6). Including the micellar mass [5] in our calculations further increases the difference between the Rayleigh limit and z max (Figure 1b,i nset), in accord with the water-accessible surface acquiring charge while the micelle protects the remainder of the membrane protein from ionization. [6] To examine whether proton transfer from protein to detergent causes charge reduction, we monitored the effect of removing individual detergent molecules b...