
==== Front
Nat Commun
Nat Commun
Nature Communications
2041-1723
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39231934
51455
10.1038/s41467-024-51455-x
Article
Nanopore ion sources deliver individual ions of amino acids and peptides directly into high vacuum
Drachman Nicholas 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0244-9939
Lepoitevin Mathilde 1
Szapary Hannah 1
Wiener Benjamin 1
Maulbetsch William 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5917-4986
Stein Derek derek_stein@brown.edu

12
1 https://ror.org/05gq02987 grid.40263.33 0000 0004 1936 9094 Physics Department, Brown University, Providence, RI USA
2 https://ror.org/05gq02987 grid.40263.33 0000 0004 1936 9094 School of Engineering, Brown University, Providence, RI USA
4 9 2024
4 9 2024
2024
15 770923 5 2022
7 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Electrospray ionization is widely used to generate vapor phase ions for analysis by mass spectrometry in proteomics research. However, only a small fraction of the analyte enters the mass spectrometer due to losses that are fundamentally linked to the use of a background gas to stimulate the generation of ions from electrosprayed droplets. Here we report a nanopore ion source that delivers ions directly into high vacuum from aqueous solutions. The ion source comprises a pulled quartz pipette with a sub-100 nm opening. Ions escape an electrified meniscus by ion evaporation and travel along collisionless trajectories to the ion detector. We measure mass spectra of 16 different amino acid ions, post-translationally modified variants of glutathione, and the peptide angiotensin II, showing that these analytes can be emitted as desolvated ions. The emitted current is composed of ions rather than charged droplets, and more than 90% of the current can be recovered in a distant collector.

Electrospray ionization loses most ions upon transfer into high vacuum in a mass spectrometer. Here, the authors present a nanopore ion source that emits ions directly into vacuum from aqueous solutions, achieving an ion transmission efficiency of over 90%.

Subject terms

Nanopores
Proteomic analysis
Mass spectrometry
100010890 Oxford Nanopore Technologies (Oxford Nanopore) 100000051 U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) HG012938 issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature Limited 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Mass spectrometry (MS) is the workhorse of proteomics research thanks to its ability to distinguish amino acids and small peptides by their mass-to-charge ratio (m/z)1. Its utility also significantly derives from the availability of soft ionization techniques for transferring peptide ions into the gas phase intact2. In particular, electrospray ionization (ESI) transfers analyte into a mass spectrometer via a plume of charged droplets that emerge from a liquid cone-jet at the end of a voltage-biased emitter, as illustrated in Fig. 1a3,4. The droplets pass through a background gas that induces a series of evaporation and Coulomb explosion cycles that ultimately release analyte ions into the gas phase5. However, the background gas needed to liberate ions from droplets is also a source of significant sample loss that limits the sensitivity of MS.Fig. 1 Comparison of conventional electrospray ion source with nanopore ion source.

a Schematic of conventional electrospray ionization highlighting the background gas that stimulates evaporation of solvent from droplets, as well as the transfer capillary where significant ion loss occurs. P represents pressure. b Schematic of a nanopore ion source showing the liquid-filled nanopipette tip, the extractor electrode, and the extraction voltage VE applied between them. Inset shows an scanning electron microscopy image of the tip of a pulled quartz nanopipette with a tip ID of 30 nm. c Schematic of the mass spectrometer used in this study. Ion optics comprising an extractor electrode and an Einzel lens extract ions from the liquid meniscus at the ion source and focus them through a quadrupole mass filter and an electrostatic ion bender. The transmitted ions strike a channel electron multiplier detector which is sensitive to single ions. d Mass spectrum of 100 mM arginine in aqueous solution obtained with a 41 nm ID nanopore ion source in our quadrupole mass spectrometer. Peaks are labeled as Arg+(H2O)n, where Arg+ represents protonated arginine [Arg + H]+, and n denotes the number of attached water molecules. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

The background gas and the plume of charged droplets it creates widely-disperse ions, the majority of which collide with the transfer capillary, which bridges the ambient-pressure ion source and the first pumping stage of the mass spectrometer, and other hardware components upstream of the detector2. The ion transmission efficiency of an ion source, which refers to the fraction of emitted ions that enter the mass analyzer, is a key determinant of the sensitivity of mass spectrometry6. Early ESI sources had emitter tips with diameters of hundreds of micrometers, and only one ion in  ~104 reached the mass analyzer7. Nano-electrospray ionization (nano-ESI) increased the ion transmission efficiency to  ~1% in typical measurements (occasionally reaching as high as 12%) by using emitters with micrometer-scale tips that reduced the flow rates to the range of several nL per min8–10. Marginean et al. demonstrated that by optimizing the background gas pressure, the sheath gas flow rate, and the ion funnel voltages of a subambient pressure nano-ESI source, they could achieve an ion utilization efficiency (the fraction of analyte originally in solution reaching the detector) as high as 50% for a particular small peptide11. However, co-optimizing the efficiency of multiple analytes is fundamentally challenging because ESI involves processes that physically separate different ion species within the plume12. State-of-the-art MS instrumentation still requires thousands to millions of copies of proteins for their identification13,14. This sensitivity falls short of what is desired for single-cell proteomics and single-molecule analyses15–18. Achieving single-molecule sensitivity requires an ion source that circumvents the loss mechanisms intrinsic to spraying charged droplets into a background gas.

We have developed a nanopore ion source that emits amino acid and small peptide ions directly into high vacuum from aqueous solution at its tip (Fig. 1b). The heart of the ion source is a pulled quartz pipette with a tip whose inner diameter (ID) is smaller than 100 nm19,20. We reason that the smallness of the tip will influence ion emission in three important ways: First, the surface tension of water can maintain a stable liquid-vacuum interface that supports many atmospheres of pressure when stretched across a nanoscale opening21. Second, the fluid flow rate, which scales as the inverse cube of the tip diameter, is too low for a stable electrospray cone jet to form22,23, and this may prevent charged droplets from being emitted altogether. Third, electric fields will concentrate at a sharp, conductive tip like an electrolyte-filled nanopipette, and may reach  ≈1 V per nm at the meniscus, the approximate field needed to draw out ions at high rates by the process of ion evaporation24,25.

Here we characterize the emission of amino acid and small peptide ions from aqueous solutions directly into high vacuum using a nanopore ion source. We obtain mass spectra using a custom quadrupole mass spectrometer in which the nanopore ion source operates at pressures below 10−6 torr (Fig. 1c)26. Separately, we measure the transmission efficiency between the ion source and a downstream Faraday cup for both aqueous salt solutions and aqueous amino acid solutions and find it to exceed that of ESI by two orders of magnitude. We further use a magnetic sector to separate charged droplets from small ions and thereby demonstrate that the nanopore source can be made to emit only ions. We also measured the pH dependence of amino acid ion emission rates to probe the emission mechanism.

Results

Emitting amino acid ions from a nanopore ion source

We characterize the emission of amino acids from aqueous solution in a custom quadrupole mass spectrometer shown in Fig. 1c26. In a typical experiment, ion emission from a nanopore ion source is initiated by applying an extraction voltage, VE, in the range +190 to +380 V between the tip and the extraction electrode. The emission current, IE, is typically in the range of 2–20 pA. Significantly higher currents, ranging from hundreds of pA to a few nA are often measured when working with aqueous salt solutions. The onset of current is abrupt and accompanied by the measurement of ions striking the instrument’s detector. We collect easily interpretable mass spectra within seconds to minutes at these low-emission currents. We observed that an individual nanopore ion source can be kept in operation for several weeks without clogging.

Figure 1d shows a typical mass spectrum obtained from a 100 mM solution of arginine in water. This spectrum is obtained in positive ion mode using a nanopore ion source with inner tip diameter of 41 nm. Five peaks are clearly visible. The m/z peak at 175 corresponds to the singly protonated arginine ion (labeled as Arg+, shorthand for the protonated form [Arg +  H+]). The higher m/z peaks are all separated by 18, the shift induced by an additional water molecule. Thus, the other peaks correspond to solvated arginine clusters (labeled as Arg+(H2O)n, where the integer n denotes the number of attached water molecules).

Figure 2a illustrates how the tip diameter can influence the mass spectrum obtained from an aqueous amino acid solution, again using 100 mM arginine. The spectra shown are obtained using tips with IDs of 20, 125, and 300 nm. The largest tip produces a broad spectrum of peaks that includes the bare arginine ion, eight incrementally hydrated arginine ion clusters, and an m/z peak at 349 that corresponds to the arginine dimer ion ((Arg)2+). The intermediate-sized tip produces a narrower spectrum that includes the bare arginine ion, six incrementally hydrated arginine ion clusters, and a relatively diminished arginine dimer ion peak. The smallest tip primarily produces the bare arginine ion, but attenuated peaks corresponding to the singly and doubly hydrated arginine ion clusters are also visible in the spectrum. Smaller tips tend to produce relatively stronger signals and less noisy spectra than larger tips, as can be seen by comparing the baselines of the three spectra in Fig. 2a. We observe some variance in the distribution of solvation states between nanopore ion sources with similar tip sizes, and even in repeated measurements with the same tip. This is illustrated, for example, by the different distributions of arginine solvation states obtained with a 20 nm ID tip (Fig. 2a) and obtained with a 24 nm ID tip (see below). However, only tips with IDs smaller than about 65 nm produced spectra where most of the amino acid ions were in the desolvated state.Fig. 2 Amino acid and peptide spectra.

a Mass spectrum of 100 mM arginine solution in H2O using nanopore ion sources with three different inner tip diameters (ID of 20 nm, 125 nm, and 300 nm). b Gallery of 16 amino acid mass spectra, ordered from top left to bottom right by mass. Peaks labeled wn correspond to water clusters (H3O+(H2O)n), peaks labeled 0 correspond to the desolvated amino acid ion, 1 corresponds to the singly solvated amino acid ion, etc, and peaks labeled D correspond to the desolvated amino acid dimer ion. All experiments were carried out using nanopore ion sources with 20–60 nm inner tip diameters (see Table 1). Each spectrum comprises thousands of individual detection events. Supplementary Fig. 3 shows how the mass spectrum develops with increasing number of events. c Overlaid mass spectra of glutathione (GSH, green) and two of its PTM variants, S-nitrosoglutathione (GSNO, red) and S-acetylglutathione (SAG, blue). Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Figure 2b shows mass spectra obtained from 16 different aqueous amino acid solutions, all at 100 mM concentration with the exception of tryptophan which was 50 mM. Four different tips with IDs of 20, 25, 57, and 58 nm were used for these measurements. The most prominent amino acid peak in every spectrum shown in Fig. 2b corresponds to a singly charged and unsolvated ion. The spectra for glycine, alanine, proline, valine, cysteine, glutamine, and phenylalanine show no additional peaks which could correspond to solvated amino acid ions. The spectra for serine, threonine, asparagine, lysine, methionine, histidine, arginine, and tryptophan show a secondary m/z peak 18 to the right of the unsolvated peak, corresponding to the singly hydrated amino acid ion. Leucine shows a third and fourth peak corresponding to higher solvation states. The spectra for leucine, methionine, and histidine show additional small peaks corresponding to bare, singly charged amino acid dimers. A number of spectra also show peaks below 200 corresponding to singly protonated water clusters (H3O+(H2O)n); the same peaks appear in control measurements of aqueous solutions with no amino acid present (Suppl. Fig. 1). Four proteinogenic amino acids are absent from Fig. 2b: we do not attempt to measure aspartic acid and glutamic acid in positive ion mode because of their low isoelectric points; we also left out isoleucine because it is indistinguishable from leucine based on m/z; and tyrosine gave poor emission characteristics, likely related to its low solubility in water. We worked with high (50–100 mM) analyte concentrations to obtain interpretable spectra quickly. Reliable identification of amino acids in these measurements required the release of only attomoles of analyte from the ion source (Suppl. Note 1, Suppl. Fig. 3). The minimum concentration of analyte at which identification is possible is an alternative measure of sensitivity that we did not explore in this work.

Measuring post-translationally modified peptides

Figure 2c shows mass spectra of glutathione and two chemically modified variants, S-nitrosoglutathione, and S-acetylglutathione. Glutathione is a tripeptide (amino acid sequence: GSH) found in high concentrations in most cells27, and the variants we studied result from common post-translational modifications28,29. Ion sources with 20 nm ID tips generate the peptide ions from 100 mM aqueous solutions with a pH between 3.1 and 3.9, adjusted by the addition of acetic acid. The glutathione spectrum shows a single m/z peak at 308, which corresponds to the singly protonated, unsolvated glutathione ion. The spectra of S-acetylglutathione and S-nitrosoglutathione show dominant peaks at 350 and 337, respectively, corresponding to the singly protonated, unsolvated peptide ions; each spectrum also shows two progressively smaller peaks 18 and 36 to the right of the dominant peak, corresponding to singly and doubly solvated peptide ions, respectively.

Measuring a multiply charged peptide

Figure 3 shows mass spectra obtained from an experiment where an aqueous glutathione solution was replaced with an angiotensin II solution (amino acid sequence: DRVYIHPF) inside a 29 nm ID tip. The mass spectrum of the 100 mM glutathione solution (pH 3.0) initially inside the tip shows a large peak at 308 that we assign to protonated glutathione, along with additional smaller peaks at 326, 344, and 615 that we assign, respectively, to singly protonated, singly hydrated glutathione, singly protonated, doubly hydrated glutathione, and singly protonated glutathione dimer. We gradually introduced a 1 mM angiotensin II solution into the tip using a previously described tube-in-tube fluid handling system26. Additional peaks appeared in the mass spectrum at 524 and 350, which we assign to doubly and triply protonated angiotensin II, respectively. The emission current throughout the measurement was 10 ± 3 pA with an extraction voltage of 400 V.Fig. 3 Detection of angiotensin II.

Mass spectra of 100 mM glutathione (dashed blue line) and a mixture of glutathione and angiotensin II were obtained about 45 min after introducing a 1 mM angiotensin II solution into the tip of the ion source (solid red line). Peaks assigned to glutathione (GSH+), singly hydrated glutathione ((GSH+) + H2O), glutathione dimer ((GSH)2+), and the doubly and triply protonated states angiotensin II (DRVYIHPFn+, n  = 2, 3) are indicated. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Ion transmission efficiency

We measure the efficiency with which ions pass from the nanopore source to a distant detector in a high-vacuum environment as illustrated in Fig. 4a. Ions emitted by the source are focused into the 2.4 cm diameter opening of a Faraday cup located  ≈ 50 cm away. The ion transmission efficiency is the ratio of the current transmitted to the Faraday cup, IT, to the current emitted from the nanopore, IE. Figure 4b, c shows IE, IT, and the ion transmission efficiency measured over several minutes using a 39 nm ID tip filled with a 100 mM aqueous solution of sodium iodide. The mean ion transmission efficiency in this measurement is 93.4% ± 1.7%. Figure 4d, e shows the results of a similar measurement made with a 49 nm ID tip filled with 100 mM arginine in aqueous solution at pH 8.95. The mean ion transmission efficiency is 65.3% ± 8.1%. In both measurements, small changes in IE are mirrored by IT. We had more difficulty optimizing the focusing voltages in the amino acid measurement because of the very low emission currents, which were at the single pA level.Fig. 4 Ion transmission efficiency and ion/droplet current fractions.

a Setup used to measure the ion transmission efficiency of a nanopore ion source. IE: emission current, IT: transmitted current, VT: tip voltage, VE, extraction voltage (difference between VT and voltage on first element of the ion optics). b IE and IT and the resulting transmission efficiency (c) of a 39 nm ID nanopore ion source containing a 100 mM aqueous solution of NaI. d IE and IT and the resulting transmission efficiency (e) of a 49 nm ID nanopore ion source containing a 100 mM aqueous solution of arginine at pH 8.95. f Setup used to separately measure the ion current, IIon, and the droplet current, IDrop. g IIon and IDrop and the resulting ion fraction (h) emitted 739 by a 39 nm ID nanopore ion source containing a 100 mM aqueous solution of NaI. 740 i, IIon and IDrop and the resulting ion current fraction (j) emitted by a 41 nm ID 741 nanopore ion source containing a 100 mM aqueous solution of Arginine at pH 8.95. 742 a–c, f, h Adapted with permission from ref. 72. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Separating ions and charged droplets

We investigate the possibility that the nanopore ion source emits charged droplets in addition to ions by adding a magnetic sector to the flight path as shown in Fig. 4f. The 6 cm diameter, 0.54 T magnetic sector deflects charged species based on their mass-to-charge ratio. Droplets with an m/z > 33,000 deflect by less than 3.1∘ and enter the Faraday cup where their current, IDrop, is measured. We do not expect the droplet size to change appreciably between emission and detection because nanoscale aqueous droplets freeze rapidly in vacuum30,31. Meanwhile, ions with m/z in the range of about 70–325 deflect onto a separate Faraday plate where the ion current, IIon, is measured (Suppl. Fig. 4). Figure 4g, h shows IIon, IDrop, and the ion fraction, defined as (IIonIIon+IDrop), for a measurement performed using a 28 nm ID tip filled with a 100 mM aqueous solution of NaI. IIon varies between about 60 pA and 80 pA while no IDrop is observed. Figure 4i, j shows the results of a similar measurement made using a 41 nm ID tip filled with a 100 mM aqueous solution of arginine at pH 8.75. IIon varies between about 1 pA and 2 pA while there is no detectable IDrop. In both measurements, the nanopore source was only observed to emit ions.

pH dependence of amino acid emission

To further investigate the emission mechanism, we measured the pH dependence of the emission rates of histidine and arginine. For each amino acid, we prepared solutions at two different pH values but with a fixed concentration of Na+ to serve as a reference ion. We made all measurements with a single, 24 nm ID tip. Figure 5a shows the mass spectra of 100 mM aqueous histidine solutions with pH values of 5.5 and pH 8.5; the concentration of Na+ is 24 mM. At pH 5.5, peaks corresponding to the bare histidine ion and several solvated states appear at m/z between approximately 150 and 275; the histidine peaks are more intense than the solvated sodium peaks which appear between approximately 50 and 150. At pH 8.97, the histidine peaks are still visible, but their intensity is significantly diminished relative to the sodium peaks. Figure 5b shows the mass spectra of 100 mM arginine solutions with pH values of 9.1 and 10.8; the solutions also contain 50 mM of Na+. Similarly to histidine, bare and solvated arginine peaks, which appear in the m/z range between 170 and 350, have a higher intensity than the sodium peaks at the lower pH of 9.1. The relative intensity of the arginine peaks decreases dramatically at the higher pH of 10.8. The results shown in Fig. 5 are representative of repeated measurements. To quantify the pH dependence of the amino acid emission rates, we normalized them by the sodium emission rates. The histidine emission rate increased by an average factor of 8.14 ± 1.65 as the pH decreased from 8.5 to 5.5. The arginine emission rate increased by an average factor of 22.6 ± 10.5 as the pH decreased from 10.8 to 9.1.Fig. 5 Amino acid ion emission pH.

a Normalized mass spectra of 100 mM Histidine and 24 mM NaI/NaOH in aqueous solution at pH 5.5 (darker solid curve) and 8.5 (lighter dashed curve) respectively. b Normalized mass spectra of 100 mM Arginine and 50 mM NaI at pH 9.1 (darker solid curve) and 10.8 (lighter dashed curve) respectively. In both panels, the vertical dashed line shows the m/z value used in the analysis to separate the amino acid signal from sodium signal. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Calculating the probability of ions scattering

Calculations indicate that most ions trace collisionless trajectories from the ion source to the detector. Figure 6a shows the probability that an amino acid ion dressed with a hydration shell will collide with a gas molecule, based on the kinetic theory of gases. We assume that ions pass through a distribution of evaporating water molecules32 and a homogeneous low-pressure background of N2. Figure 6a sketches the physical situation and plots the number density of gas molecules and the cumulative collision probability as functions of the distance from the meniscus. The cumulative probability of an ion colliding with a gas molecule over the entire 50 cm trajectory from the source to the detector is just 2.1%, meaning the vast majority of ions do not experience any collisions. Most of the collisions occur within 200 nm of the liquid meniscus due to the high density of evaporated water molecules there. A detailed description of these calculations is found in Suppl. Note 2.Fig. 6 Ion emission mechanism.

a Plot of the cumulative probability that an emitted amino acid with a small hydration shell (radius = 7 Å) will collide with an evaporated water molecule or background gas molecule as a function of distance from the meniscus, r. The green curve shows the calculated maximum water vapor density as a function of the distance from the meniscus. b Diagram of the potential energy, U(r), showing the contributions to the energy barrier for ion evaporation: the solvation energy, ΔG0, image charge attraction, Uimage, and electrostatic repulsion, UE. rmax represents the distance from the meniscus where the potential energy is highest. G(E) is the reduction in the energy barrier height due to the presence of an electric field of magnitude E. c Plot of the approximate limiting fields for ion evaporation and droplet generation (Rayleigh limit). The region where ion evaporation should dominate is highlighted in green. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Discussion

There are two distinct mechanisms by which the nanopore source could generate the ions that we measure. The first is conventional electrospray ionization, a multi-step mechanism in which an ion source first produces charged droplets which go on to evaporate ions into the vapor phase2. The second is a single-step mechanism in which ions evaporate directly from the electrified meniscus of the ion source33. We highlight the important physical distinctions between these two mechanisms before presenting an analysis that rules out the former.

ESI begins when a voltage applied to the liquid sample generates electrical forces on the meniscus that are strong enough to overcome the surface tension and draw out charged droplets (Fig. 1a). The droplets typically measure hundreds of nanometers to tens of micrometers in radius and contain fully solvated analyte molecules34. A background gas is used to evaporate solvent from the droplets34. As a droplet shrinks, its charge density increases, and the resulting internal Coulomb forces can once again overcome surface tension when the electric field strength at the surface reaches the Rayleigh limit, ER=2γϵ0r, where γ is the surface tension, ϵ0 is the permittivity of free space, and r is the droplet radius3,35. The unstable droplet undergoes a Coulomb explosion and expels smaller charged droplets3,5. The cycle repeats, producing ever smaller droplets requiring ever stronger electric fields to reach the Rayleigh limit. When the field strength at the surface reaches about 109 V m−1, it becomes possible for ions to quickly escape the droplet by a different process: Ion evaporation is a thermal process in which ions overcome an energy barrier associated with their solvation energy, ΔG0S, to enter the vapor phase24. Coulomb explosions cease and ion evaporation becomes the main charge release mechanism for small molecules when droplets reach around 10 nm in radius24,36,37.

Alternatively, the nanopore source might deliver ions and ion clusters into the vapor phase directly from the meniscus at the tip by an ion evaporation process. This alternative mechanism circumvents the emission of droplets and their interactions with a background gas that are integral to ESI. Figure 6b illustrates the direct evaporation of a solvated ion cluster from an electrified meniscus and a schematic of the energy landscape24,38. An ion inside the nanopore source is fully solvated by water molecules, which reduce the free energy by an amount ΔG0S, called the solvation energy. The free energy increases as the ion protrudes from the meniscus, distorting it against surface tension. At this point, the ion is also attracted by its own image charge as it begins to break free of the solvent. Far from the meniscus, Coulomb forces drive the ion (or cluster) away from the tip and its free energy decreases. Modeling the height of the energy barrier as ΔG0S−G(E), where G(E) is the field-dependent reduction in the barrier height3,24,38,39, the current density of ions escaping the meniscus is given by1 j=σkBThexp−ΔG0S−G(E)kBT,

where σ is the surface charge density, kBT is the thermal energy, and h is the Planck constant. The ion evaporation current density only becomes appreciable when the electric field at the meniscus approaches  ≈109 V m−1, at which point ΔG0S−G(E)~kBT40. The ion evaporation mechanism applies equally well to bare ions and small ion clusters, as each is a charged species that can escape the liquid over a solvation energy barrier24,41,42. On the other hand, charged nano-droplets comprising hundreds of solvent molecules or more are too large to evaporate.

Multiple lines of evidence lead us to conclude that the nanopore source produces ions directly by ion evaporation rather than by the conventional ESI mechanism in which ions emerge from charged droplets. First, the chain of Coulomb explosions that characterizes ESI cannot occur under the high vacuum conditions of our experiments. Droplets quickly freeze before shedding a significant fraction of their mass when there is no background gas to provide the thermal energy that normally sustains solvent evaporation30. A previous study showed that nanoscale-charged aqueous droplets survive under high vacuum for more than a second without undergoing Coulomb explosions43.

Secondly, we searched for droplets and measured none among the charged species delivered by the source (Fig. 4f–j). Our measurements, which are sensitive to species with m/z > 33,000, exclude droplets with a radius larger than 14 nm and a charge as high as the Rayleigh limit. For comparison, nano-ESI begins with a spray of droplets that are in the detectable range of tens to hundreds of nanometers in diameter2,44. If even smaller charged droplets were produced45,46, they would evaporate ions readily, lose a significant fraction of their charge, and move into the detectable range of m/z; when the electric field at the surface falls to 0.75 V per nm, the approximate threshold for ion evaporation, droplets as small as 7 nm in radius are detectable.

Thirdly, the nanopore source is sufficiently small that as the electric field at the liquid meniscus increases, it reaches the threshold for ion evaporation well before the Rayleigh limit. Figure 6c, which compares the critical electric field for ion evaporation with the Rayleigh limit, illustrates why ions evaporate from the meniscus while the meniscus remains stable. If we consider a nanopore source with a radius of 15 nm, we expect ions to evaporate from the meniscus when the electric field reaches about 0.75 V per nm, whereas droplets cannot emerge unless the electric field grows about twice as strong. On the other hand, a conventional ESI source with a radius of 1 μm produces charged droplets when the electric field at the meniscus reaches about 0.2 V per nm, which is well below the threshold for ion evaporation. The crossover from a conventional droplet-emitting source to a nanopore source that can evaporate ions directly is predicted to occur at a radius of about 60 nm.

Finally, the pH dependence of the emission rates of arginine and histidine we measured (Fig. 7) is consistent with a simple kinetic model of ion evaporation from the meniscus. We consider a two-step process in which an analyte molecule M can undergo reversible protonation/deprotonation with rates kon[H+] and koff, and non-reversible evaporation from the protonated state with rate kevap,2 H++M⇌koffkonMH+→kevapMHvapor+.

We assume that evaporation is the rate-limiting step and that kevap ≪ koff, justified by the pA-level currents measured in this work. Holding the concentration [MH+] constant, we find that the quasi-steady-state emission rate, v ≡  [MH+]kevap, scales as3 v∝10−pH10−pKa+10−pH.

Figure 7 plots the relative emission rates predicted by this model for both histidine and arginine and compares them to the measured values. For histidine, two protonation reactions occur within the experimental pH range (with pKa,1 = 6.04 and pKa,2 = 9.09); a single dissociation constant corresponding to the isoelectric point (pKa = 7.59) models the combined effect47. For arginine, only the protonation of the amino group (pKa = 9.00) is relevant47,48. The kinetic model predicts that the emission rates should increase by factors of 9.2 and 27.3 over the pH ranges investigated for histidine and arginine, respectively, in agreement with our measured values of 8.14 ± 1.65 and 22.5 ± 10.5. By contrast, ESI emits arginine and histidine at rates that depend much more weakly on pH (by a factor less than three over the same pH range), and this observation was attributed to the acidification of droplets that accompanies the ESI process49,50.Fig. 7 pH dependence of amino acid emission, comparison to model.

Summary of repeated measurements of the relative emission rates of histidine (circles, N = 8) and arginine (triangles, N = 3) compared to theoretical predictions (solid curve for arginine, dashed curve for histidine). The emission rate at the lower pH, vlow, is calculated using Eq. (3), and the emission rate at the higher pH is calculated using vlow/F, where F is the ratio of measured signal between low and high pH. The error bars represent standard error of the mean. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

The nanopore source appears to operate in a pure ion mode where no droplets are emitted. Pure ion emission was previously observed from highly conductive liquids including liquid metals51, ionic liquids33,52, and concentrated electrolyte solutions in formamide40,41, but not aqueous solutions. Previous attempts to evaporate ions directly into vacuum from a fixed water meniscus encountered significant challenges, as the evaporation of water led to electrical arcing and freezing53,54. The nanopore source overcomes those challenges because the evaporation rate from the nanoscale meniscus is minuscule (less than 1 pL of water evaporating per min); this low gas load also eases the pumping requirements of the instrument26. Previously, even the smallest ion emitters were used in combination with a background gas and the emission mechanism was presumed to be conventional ESI55.

It is striking that we measure mostly desolvated amino acid and small peptide ions in many experiments (Figs. 2b, c, 3). This property simplifies the interpretation of mass spectra without requiring a drying gas. Were the ions emitted in an already desolvated state, or clustered with one or more water molecules which were shed on the way to the detector? Given that just 2% of emitted ions collide with a gas molecule even once (see Fig. 6a), post-emission collisions can be dismissed as a primary desolvation mechanism. Furthermore, the tip size appears to influence the solvation state, as only sub-100 nm nanopores produced bare ions (Fig. 2a). These observations suggest that it is the local environment at the source that controls the solvation state rather than processes occurring in flight. The conditions that give rise to bare ion emission are not entirely clear. The electric fields that develop near the smallest tips are strong enough to reorient and weaken hydration bonds, which may play a role56,57. Joule heating may also play a role by raising the local temperature and further weakening hydration bonds58,59. In addition to single amino acid ions, we observed desolvated amino acid dimer ions in some spectra (e.g., Fig. 2b, His). This is likely due to the aggregation of amino acids in solution, which is known to occur at concentrations of 1 mM and above60. We also observed glutathione and its post-translationally modified variants as bare, singly charged ions. Subsequent work should investigate how the charge and hydration states depend on the peptide length, composition, and other properties.

The present study makes three significant contributions: First, our measurements and analyses of the nanopore source provide strong evidence for the direct ion evaporation mechanism. Second, the nanopore source achieves near-unit ion transmission efficiency. This holds the promise of significant improvements in the sensitivity of MS measurements, which are universally desirable and could be achieved by combining a nanopore source with a sensitive mass filter (e.g., a trap-based mass filter). Third, the nanopore source is compatible with biologically relevant aqueous samples.

The findings reported here present multiple opportunities for further research. We envision sequencing a single protein molecule by fragmenting it and delivering its constituent amino acids into a mass spectrometer in sequential order18,26,61. The nanopore ion source provides the crucial means of transmitting virtually every amino acid to the detector, and because they avoid collisions in flight, the timing of detection events can be used to accurately reconstruct the order in which they left the source. However, significant challenges persist. A means of reliably fragmenting polypeptides into free monomers is required, as is a means of preserving the order of monomers prior to emission, perhaps using force gradients61 or a narrow nanotube emitter62 to prevent amino acids from diffusing past one another. These findings could also impact various fields outside of single-molecule sequencing or proteomics. Electrospray propulsion, a method for generating thrust through ion emission, is currently constrained by a limited selection of non-volatile ionic liquids that can be used as propellants63,64, but the nanopore ion source highlights the possibility of using volatile liquids. Atom probe tomography, a technique for generating compositional maps of materials using field-emitted ions, is entering a new frontier with studies of liquid samples65–67, which may be simplified by using a nanopore ion source. Finally, the nanopore source may shed new experimental light on the ionization of water, its orientation, or its evaporation at highly electrified surfaces68,69.

Methods

Preparing nanopore ion sources

We pulled nanopipettes from 7.5 cm long quartz capillaries with 0.7 mm inner diameter and 1 mm outer diameter (QF100-70-7.5, Sutter Instruments) using a laser puller (P-2000, Sutter Instruments) according to the following single-line recipe: heat = 660, velocity = 45, delay = 175, pull = 190. The heat and pull values were often adjusted by  ±20 and  ±10 respectively to optimize the geometry and smoothness of the tip. To prepare a nanopore for imaging, we deposited  ≈5 nm of carbon to the nanopipettes using thermal evaporation (CED 030, BalTec) with double-stranded carbon thread (Leica Microsystems). We imaged the nanopipettes by scanning electron microscopy (LEO 1530 VP, Zeiss, Inc.) to measure the inner diameter and outer diameter (OD) of each nanopipette’s tip. Nanopipettes were plasma cleaned in air for 2 min (Plasma Preen II-973, Plasmatic Systems Inc.) to make the surfaces hydrophilic prior to filling with sample solution.

Amino acid solutions

Amino acid solutions comprised the amino acid of interest (≥98%, Sigma-Aldrich, Merck) dissolved in deionized water (18  MΩ cm, Millipore) at a concentration of 100 mM, with the exception of tryptophan, whose concentration was 50 mM. We reduced the pH below the amino acid’s isoelectric point by adding 0.1–0.5% v/v glacial acetic acid (≥99%, Sigma-Aldrich, Merck). Peptide solutions comprised the peptide of interest (glutathione, S-acetylglutathione, or S-nitrosoglutathione) dissolved in deionized water at a concentration of 100 mM. We purchased glutathione and S-acetylglutathione in powder form (≥98%, Sigma-Aldrich, Merck), and synthesized S-nitrosoglutathione from glutathione according to a protocol from T.W. Hart70. We measured the pH and conductivities of each solution using a pH meter (Ultrabasic Benchtop, Denver Instruments) and conductivity meter (Sension + EC71 GLP, Hach), respectively.Amino acid	Molecular weight (g mol−1)	Conc. (mM)	pH	K (S m−1)	Tip ID (nm)	Tip OD (nm)	P (torr)	VE (V)	IE (pA)	Tip number	
Arginine	174.20	100	8.06	0.205	20	64	8 ×  10−8	225	2	1	
Lysine	146.19	100	5.75	0.486	20	64	5 × 10−8	225	1	1	
Histidine	155.16	100	6.22	0.247	20	64	1.3 × 10−7	280	2	1	
Glycine	75.07	100	4.96	1.96 × 10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	4	2	
Alanine	89.09	100	4.03	1.94 ×  10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	4	2	
Proline	115.13	100	3.96	1.25 × 10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	4	2	
Valine	117.15	100	3.95	1.75 × 10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	4	2	
Threonine	119.12	100	3.88	1.82 × 10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	4	2	
Cysteine	121.15	100	3.78	1.53 × 10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	4	2	
Leucine	131.18	100	3.86	2.10 × 10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	5	2	
Phenylalanine	165.19	100	4.01	1.08 × 10−2	25	58	6 × 10−8	190	4	2	
Serine	105.09	100	4.08	1.56 × 10−2	58	111	6 × 10−8	311	5	3	
Asparagine	132.12	100	4.50	1.74 × 10−2	58	111	1.4 × 10−7	380	25	3	
Methionine	149.21	100	3.90	1.35 × 10−2	58	111	6 × 10−8	311	5	3	
Tryptophan	204.23	50	4.20	0.50 × 10−2	58	111	6 × 10−8	311	5	3	
Glutamine	146.15	100	3.39	5.58 × 10−2	57	115	3 × 10−8	360	30	4	
Experimental conditions of amino acid measurements are presented in Fig. 2b of the main text. The table lists the solution properties (amino acid identity and mass, concentration, pH, and conductivity), the ion source properties (tip inner diameter, tip outer diameter, and tip number), as well as the time-averaged chamber pressure, extraction voltage, and emission current.

The nanopore mass spectrometer

A custom-built quadrupole mass spectrometer, described previously in ref. 26, measured all the amino acid and peptide mass spectra presented here. The instrument, illustrated schematically in Fig. 1c, comprises a custom Einzel lens, a quadrupole mass filter (QC MAX-500, Extrel Inc.), an ion bender (Extrel Inc.), and a channel electron multiplier detector with a conversion dynode (DeTech 413) sensitive to single ions. The quadrupole is driven by a 440 kHz RF oscillator and scans across an m/z range of 50–1000 in about 0.6 s. The quadrupole’s Δm and Δres parameters were periodically tuned to optimize the peak shape while acquiring spectra of NaI in formamide. The pole bias was set to ensure the ions had a kinetic energy of about 5–10 eV as they traversed the mass filter. The base pressure of the instrument is 10−8 torr. A tube-in-tube system (previously described in ref. 26) enables us to deliver fresh sample solution to the nanopipette tip while flushing away old solution without breaking the vacuum. A 150 μm ID, 360 μm OD polyether ether ketone (PEEK) tube (IDEX Health and Science) carries fresh sample solution into the tip, displacing and pushing out old solution through a wider outer PEEK tube (0.04 inc ID, 1/16 in. OD, IDEX Health and Science). We used the tube-in-tube system to swap between different analyte solutions on the fly during experiments. We swapped between aqueous solutions of 100 mM cysteine and 100 mM phenylalanine while continuously recording spectra and found find that it takes around 30 min to switch between solutions (Suppl. Fig. 2). We prepare Ag/AgCl electrodes by placing a length of 0.5 mm diameter silver wire (Alfa-Aesar) in bleach for 15–20 min. The Ag/AgCl electrode is threaded far into the outer PEEK tubing, enabling us to control the voltage of the solution near the tip of the ion source.

Quadrupole MS measurements

We prefilled the nanopipette with the amino acid, peptide solution, or pure deionized water (Suppl. Fig. 1) using a Microfil flexible needle (World Precision Instruments) before mounting the nanopipette inserting them into the mass spectrometer. We continuously refreshed the solution at the tip by pumping solution through the tube-in-tube system at rate of 0.4 mL h−1 using a syringe pump (NE-300, New Era Pump Systems). Note that this is not the flow rate of fluid emitted from the tip, as the tube-in-tube system carries the vast majority of the sample solution out of the tip through the rear of the capillary, as described in ref. 26. A voltage of +100 or +200 V was applied to the electrode in contact with the solution inside the nanopore ion source using a high voltage source measure unit (2657A, Keithley Instruments) while a negative voltage applied to the extraction electrode was slowly strengthened using a high voltage power supply (Bertan 230, Spellman HV) until ionization was observed. The onset of emission typically occurred when VE was between 200 and 350 V.

Ion transmission efficiency measurements

We measured ion transmission efficiencies in a custom vacuum chamber containing a nanopore ion source and a Faraday cup (Fig. 4a). A high voltage source measure unit (Keithley 2657a or Keithley 2410) measured the current emitted from the nanopore, IE, while also applying a voltage, VT, to it. A current-preamplifier (SR570, Stanford Research Systems) converted IT at the Faraday cup into a voltage that was recorded by a DAQ (NI PCIe-6251, National Instruments). An 8-channel high-voltage power supply (DT8033, CAEN) supplied the focusing voltages to the ion optics. A custom Labview (National Instruments) program controlled VT and recorded IE and IT. The currents emitted from aqueous salt solutions (Fig. 4b), which ranged from 100 pA to 1 nA, were measured with a Keithley 2410. To reliably measure the low, pA-level currents emitted from aqueous amino acid solutions (Fig. 4d), we used a more sensitive source measure unit (Keithley 2657a) and a shielded, tri-axial cable that more effectively suppressed leakage currents. To further suppress noise, the source measure unit averaged three sequential measurements of IE with an NPLC setting of 5, then an 8th-order, low-pass Bessel filter with a cutoff frequency of 0.1 Hz filtered the data to obtain the results plotted in Fig. 4d. IT was sampled at a rate of 50 kHz, and 10k samples were averaged to give each data point in Fig. 4d. The setup records IE and IT data points sequentially with an overall sampling rate of  ≈0.6 Hz. A small leakage current measured at the source measure unit with VE = 0 V and VT = 500 V was subtracted from measurements of IE. The leakage current was about 5 pA when using the Keihtley 2657a (arginine measurements) and about 100 pA when using the Keithley 2410 (NaI measurements). An instrumental offset of about 200 fA was subtracted from measurements of IT.

Magnetic sector measurements

We constructed a simple magnetic sector mass spectrometer by adding a magnetic sector and a Faraday plate downstream of the ion source in the vacuum chamber described above, as illustrated in Fig. 4f. The magnetic sector comprises a neodymium magnet and a yoke made of low-carbon magnetic iron (ASTM A848) which concentrates magnetic fields of (0.54 ± 0.02) T in a flat circular region 6 cm in diameter and 1 cm in height. The Faraday plate is a stainless steel disk, 12.5 cm in diameter, mounted about 25 cm from the center of the magnetic sector, with its center offset 45∘ from the undeflected beam axis. Two separate current pre-amplifiers (Stanford Research Systems SR570) measured the currents striking the Faraday plate and cup. The currents were measured and processed in the same manner described above for the ion transmission efficiency measurements.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Peer Review File

Source data

Source Data

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41467-024-51455-x.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Luke McNeill and Kristen Stoops for helpful feedback on this work. Research reported here was supported by Oxford Nanopore Technologies plc (D.S., N.D., M.L., B.W., W.M.), NHGRI of the National Institutes of Health under award number HG012938 (D.S. and N.D.), the Brown IMSD program (N.D., under NIH award R25GM083270), the Graduate Fellowships for STEM Diversity (N.D.), the National Science Foundation under award 1409577 (B.W.), and the Brown UTRA program (H.S).

Author contributions

D.S. conceived this project and supervised all aspects of the work. D.S., N.D., M.L., and W.M. designed the research. M.L., N.D., and H.S. performed the mass spectrometry measurements. N.D., W.M., and B.W. characterized the ion source. N.D. and D.S. wrote and edited the manuscript with input from the other authors. N.D. prepared the figures. All authors contributed to discussions of the results and their interpretation.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Communications thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. A peer review file is available.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the Harvard Dataverse71 and from the corresponding author upon request. Data from this study forms the basis for a patent72, which was published in advance. Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

All code needed to analyze the data and reproduce the figures presented are available from the Harvard Dataverse71 and from the corresponding author upon request.

Competing interests

D.S., N.D., M.L., and B.W. are listed as inventors on patents and patent applications that are licensed to Oxford Nanopore Technologies plc, in which they declare a financial interest. Prior to submitting the original version of this manuscript for publications, Brown University submitted a provisional patent application on the material described here with the following patent information: Title: NANOTIP ION SOURCES AND METHODS. Applicants: Brown University. Inventors: Derek M. Stein, Mathilde Lepoitevin, and Nicholas Drachmans. Related patent documents: WO/2021/217076, CN115667937, and EP4139687. Furthermore, authors of this manuscript are inventors on other patents relating to the same general field of study. These are: Title: System and methods for determining molecules using mass spectrometry and related techniques. Applicants: Brown University. Inventors: Derek M. Stein. Related patent documents: EP2342359, EP2851433, and WO/2010/014235 US20130233700. Title: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SINGLE-ION MASS SPECTROMETRY WITH TEMPORAL INFORMATION. Applicants: Brown University. Inventors: Derek M. Stein, Nicholas Drachman, and Benjamin Wiener. Related patent documents: WO/2022/226279, CN117546269, EP4327352, KR1020240026444, JP2024519194. Title: NANOTIP ION SOURCES AND METHODS. Applicants: Brown University Inventors: Derek M. Stein, Mathilde Lepoitevin, and Nicholas Drachman. Related patent documents: WO/2021/217076, CN115667937, US20230298878. Apart from this, the authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Aebersold R Mann M Mass-spectrometric exploration of proteome structure and function Nature 2016 537 347 355 10.1038/nature19949 27629641
Aebersold, R. & Mann, M. Mass-spectrometric exploration of proteome structure and function. Nature 537, 347–355 (2016).27629641 10.1038/nature19949
2. Cole, R. B. Electrospray and MALDI Mass Spectrometry: Fundamentals, Instrumentation, Practicalities, and Biological Applications (John Wiley & Sons, 2011).
3. Fenn JB Mann M Meng CK Wong SF Whitehouse CM Electrospray ionization for mass spectrometry of large biomolecules Science 1989 246 64 71 10.1126/science.2675315 2675315
Fenn, J. B., Mann, M., Meng, C. K., Wong, S. F. & Whitehouse, C. M. Electrospray ionization for mass spectrometry of large biomolecules. Science 246, 64–71 (1989).2675315 10.1126/science.2675315
4. Taylor GI Electrically driven jets Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 1969 313 453 475 10.1098/rspa.1969.0205
Taylor, G. I. Electrically driven jets. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 313, 453–475 (1969).10.1098/rspa.1969.0205
5. Kebarle P Verkerk UH Electrospray: from ions in solution to ions in the gas phase, what we know now Mass Spectrom. Rev. 2009 28 898 917 10.1002/mas.20247 19551695
Kebarle, P. & Verkerk, U. H. Electrospray: from ions in solution to ions in the gas phase, what we know now. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 28, 898–917 (2009).19551695 10.1002/mas.20247
6. Page JS Kelly RT Tang K Smith RD Ionization and transmission efficiency in an electrospray ionization—mass spectrometry interface J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2007 18 1582 1590 10.1016/j.jasms.2007.05.018 17627841
Page, J. S., Kelly, R. T., Tang, K. & Smith, R. D. Ionization and transmission efficiency in an electrospray ionization—mass spectrometry interface. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 18, 1582–1590 (2007).17627841 10.1016/j.jasms.2007.05.018
7. Smith RD Loo JA Edmonds CG Barinaga CJ Udseth HR New developments in biochemical mass spectrometry: electrospray ionization Anal. Chem. 1990 62 882 899 10.1021/ac00208a002 2194402
Smith, R. D., Loo, J. A., Edmonds, C. G., Barinaga, C. J. & Udseth, H. R. New developments in biochemical mass spectrometry: electrospray ionization. Anal. Chem. 62, 882–899 (1990).2194402 10.1021/ac00208a002
8. Wilm M Mann M Analytical properties of the nanoelectrospray ion source Anal. Chem. 1996 68 1 8 10.1021/ac9509519 8779426
Wilm, M. & Mann, M. Analytical properties of the nanoelectrospray ion source. Anal. Chem. 68, 1–8 (1996).8779426 10.1021/ac9509519
9. El-Faramawy A Siu KM Thomson BA Efficiency of nano-electrospray ionization J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2005 16 1702 1707 10.1016/j.jasms.2005.06.011 16095913
El-Faramawy, A., Siu, K. M. & Thomson, B. A. Efficiency of nano-electrospray ionization. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 16, 1702–1707 (2005).16095913 10.1016/j.jasms.2005.06.011
10. Hawkrdige, A. M. in Quantitative Proteomics (eds Eyers, C. E. & Gaskell, S. J.) Practical considerations and current limitations in quantitative mass spectrometry-based proteomics, Ch. 1, 3–25 (Royal Society of Chemistry, 2014).
11. Marginean I Page JS Tolmachev AV Tang K Smith RD Achieving 50% ionization efficiency in subambient pressure ionization with nanoelectrospray Anal. Chem. 2010 82 9344 9349 10.1021/ac1019123 21028835
Marginean, I., Page, J. S., Tolmachev, A. V., Tang, K. & Smith, R. D. Achieving 50% ionization efficiency in subambient pressure ionization with nanoelectrospray. Anal. Chem. 82, 9344–9349 (2010).21028835 10.1021/ac1019123
12. Tang K Smith RD Physical/chemical separations in the break-up of highly charged droplets from electrosprays J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2001 12 343 347 10.1016/S1044-0305(01)00222-7 11281610
Tang, K. & Smith, R. D. Physical/chemical separations in the break-up of highly charged droplets from electrosprays. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 12, 343–347 (2001).11281610 10.1016/S1044-0305(01)00222-7
13. Li S An integrated platform for isolation, processing, and mass spectrometry-based proteomic profiling of rare cells in whole blood Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2015 14 1672 1683 10.1074/mcp.M114.045724 25755294
Li, S. et al. An integrated platform for isolation, processing, and mass spectrometry-based proteomic profiling of rare cells in whole blood. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 14, 1672–1683 (2015).25755294 10.1074/mcp.M114.045724
14. Callahan N Tullman J Kelman Z Marino J Strategies for development of a next-generation protein sequencing platform Trends Biochem. Sci. 2020 45 76 89 10.1016/j.tibs.2019.09.005 31676211
Callahan, N., Tullman, J., Kelman, Z. & Marino, J. Strategies for development of a next-generation protein sequencing platform. Trends Biochem. Sci. 45, 76–89 (2020).31676211 10.1016/j.tibs.2019.09.005
15. Budnik B Levy E Harmange G Slavov N Scope-ms: mass spectrometry of single mammalian cells quantifies proteome heterogeneity during cell differentiation Genome Biol. 2018 19 1 12 10.1186/s13059-018-1547-5 29301551
Budnik, B., Levy, E., Harmange, G. & Slavov, N. Scope-ms: mass spectrometry of single mammalian cells quantifies proteome heterogeneity during cell differentiation. Genome Biol. 19, 1–12 (2018).29301551 10.1186/s13059-018-1547-5
16. Kelly RT Single-cell proteomics: progress and prospects Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2020 19 1739 1748 10.1074/mcp.R120.002234 32847821
Kelly, R. T. Single-cell proteomics: progress and prospects. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 19, 1739–1748 (2020).32847821 10.1074/mcp.R120.002234
17. Restrepo-Pérez L Joo C Dekker C Paving the way to single-molecule protein sequencing Nat. Nanotechnol. 2018 13 786 796 10.1038/s41565-018-0236-6 30190617
Restrepo-Pérez, L., Joo, C. & Dekker, C. Paving the way to single-molecule protein sequencing. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 786–796 (2018).30190617 10.1038/s41565-018-0236-6
18. Alfaro JA The emerging landscape of single-molecule protein sequencing technologies Nat. Methods 2021 18 604 617 10.1038/s41592-021-01143-1 34099939
Alfaro, J. A. et al. The emerging landscape of single-molecule protein sequencing technologies. Nat. Methods 18, 604–617 (2021).34099939 10.1038/s41592-021-01143-1
19. Steinbock LJ Otto O Chimerel C Gornall J Keyser UF Detecting DNA folding with nanocapillaries Nano Lett. 2010 10 2493 2497 10.1021/nl100997s 20515038
Steinbock, L. J., Otto, O., Chimerel, C., Gornall, J. & Keyser, U. F. Detecting DNA folding with nanocapillaries. Nano Lett. 10, 2493–2497 (2010).20515038 10.1021/nl100997s
20. Jordan JS Xia Z Williams ER Tips on making tiny tips: Secrets to submicron nanoelectrospray emitters J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2022 33 607 611 10.1021/jasms.1c00372 35157433
Jordan, J. S., Xia, Z. & Williams, E. R. Tips on making tiny tips: Secrets to submicron nanoelectrospray emitters. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 33, 607–611 (2022).35157433 10.1021/jasms.1c00372
21. Liu H Cao G Effectiveness of the young-laplace equation at nanoscale Sci. Rep. 2016 6 1 10 28442746
Liu, H. & Cao, G. Effectiveness of the young-laplace equation at nanoscale. Sci. Rep. 6, 1–10 (2016).28442746
22. Maulbetsch, W. Nanopore Mass Spectrometry. Ph.D. thesis, https://repository.library.brown.edu/studio/item/bdr:792908/ (Brown University, 2018).
23. Higuera F Qualitative analysis of the minimum flow rate of a cone-jet of a very polar liquid J. Fluid Mech. 2017 816 428 441 10.1017/jfm.2017.111
Higuera, F. Qualitative analysis of the minimum flow rate of a cone-jet of a very polar liquid. J. Fluid Mech. 816, 428–441 (2017).10.1017/jfm.2017.111
24. Iribarne JV Thomson BA On the evaporation of small ions from charged droplets J. Chem. Phys. 1976 64 2287 2294 10.1063/1.432536
Iribarne, J. V. & Thomson, B. A. On the evaporation of small ions from charged droplets. J. Chem. Phys. 64, 2287–2294 (1976).10.1063/1.432536
25. Higuera F Model of the meniscus of an ionic-liquid ion source Phys. Rev. E 2008 77 026308 10.1103/PhysRevE.77.026308
Higuera, F. Model of the meniscus of an ionic-liquid ion source. Phys. Rev. E 77, 026308 (2008).10.1103/PhysRevE.77.026308
26. Bush J The nanopore mass spectrometer Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2017 88 113307 10.1063/1.4986043 29195372
Bush, J. et al. The nanopore mass spectrometer. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 88, 113307 (2017).29195372 10.1063/1.4986043
27. Meister A Anderson ME Glutathione Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1983 52 711 760 10.1146/annurev.bi.52.070183.003431 6137189
Meister, A. & Anderson, M. E. Glutathione. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 52, 711–760 (1983).6137189 10.1146/annurev.bi.52.070183.003431
28. Broniowska KA Diers AR Hogg N S-nitrosoglutathione Biochim. Biophys. Acta, Gen. Subj. 2013 1830 3173 3181 10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.02.004
Broniowska, K. A., Diers, A. R. & Hogg, N. S-nitrosoglutathione. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, Gen. Subj. 1830, 3173–3181 (2013).10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.02.004
29. Mann M Jensen ON Proteomic analysis of post-translational modifications Nat. Biotechnol. 2003 21 255 261 10.1038/nbt0303-255 12610572
Mann, M. & Jensen, O. N. Proteomic analysis of post-translational modifications. Nat. Biotechnol. 21, 255–261 (2003).12610572 10.1038/nbt0303-255
30. Caleman C van der Spoel D Temperature and structural changes of water clusters in vacuum due to evaporation J. Chem. Phys. 2006 125 154508 10.1063/1.2357591 17059273
Caleman, C. & van der Spoel, D. Temperature and structural changes of water clusters in vacuum due to evaporation. J. Chem. Phys. 125, 154508 (2006).17059273 10.1063/1.2357591
31. Sellberg JA Ultrafast x-ray probing of water structure below the homogeneous ice nucleation temperature Nature 2014 510 381 384 10.1038/nature13266 24943953
Sellberg, J. A. et al. Ultrafast x-ray probing of water structure below the homogeneous ice nucleation temperature. Nature 510, 381–384 (2014).24943953 10.1038/nature13266
32. Smith JD Cappa CD Drisdell WS Cohen RC Saykally RJ Raman thermometry measurements of free evaporation from liquid water droplets J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006 128 12892 12898 10.1021/ja063579v 17002384
Smith, J. D., Cappa, C. D., Drisdell, W. S., Cohen, R. C. & Saykally, R. J. Raman thermometry measurements of free evaporation from liquid water droplets. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 12892–12898 (2006).17002384 10.1021/ja063579v
33. Romero-Sanz I Bocanegra R Fernandez De La Mora J Gamero-Castano M Source of heavy molecular ions based on Taylor cones of ionic liquids operating in the pure ion evaporation regime J. Appl. Phys. 2003 94 3599 3605 10.1063/1.1598281
Romero-Sanz, I., Bocanegra, R., Fernandez De La Mora, J. & Gamero-Castano, M. Source of heavy molecular ions based on Taylor cones of ionic liquids operating in the pure ion evaporation regime. J. Appl. Phys. 94, 3599–3605 (2003).10.1063/1.1598281
34. Kebarle P Tang L From ions in solution to ions in the gas phase-the mechanism of electrospray mass spectrometry Anal. Chem. 1993 65 972A 986A
Kebarle, P. & Tang, L. From ions in solution to ions in the gas phase-the mechanism of electrospray mass spectrometry. Anal. Chem. 65, 972A–986A (1993).
35. Rayleigh L On the equilibrium of liquid conducting masses charged with electricity Lond. Edinb. Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 1882 14 184 186 10.1080/14786448208628425
Rayleigh, L. On the equilibrium of liquid conducting masses charged with electricity. Lond. Edinb. Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 14, 184–186 (1882).10.1080/14786448208628425
36. Loscertales I Fernández De La Mora J Experiments on the kinetics of field evaporation of small ions from droplets J. Chem. Phys. 1995 103 5041 5060 10.1063/1.470591
Loscertales, I. & Fernández De La Mora, J. Experiments on the kinetics of field evaporation of small ions from droplets. J. Chem. Phys. 103, 5041–5060 (1995).10.1063/1.470591
37. Konermann L Ahadi E Rodriguez AD Vahidi S Unraveling the mechanism of electrospray ionization Anal. Chem. 2012 85 2 9 10.1021/ac302789c 23134552
Konermann, L., Ahadi, E., Rodriguez, A. D. & Vahidi, S. Unraveling the mechanism of electrospray ionization. Anal. Chem. 85, 2–9 (2012).23134552 10.1021/ac302789c
38. Magnani M Gamero-Castaño M Energy barrier for ion field emission from a dielectric liquid sphere Phys. Rev. E 2022 105 054802 10.1103/PhysRevE.105.054802 35706165
Magnani, M. & Gamero-Castaño, M. Energy barrier for ion field emission from a dielectric liquid sphere. Phys. Rev. E 105, 054802 (2022).35706165 10.1103/PhysRevE.105.054802
39. Fenn, J. B. Ion formation from charged droplets: Roles of geometry energy and time. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 4, 524–535 (1993).
40. Gamero-Castano M Fernandez De La Mora J Direct measurement of ion evaporation kinetics from electrified liquid surfaces J. Chem. Phys. 2000 113 815 832 10.1063/1.481857
Gamero-Castano, M. & Fernandez De La Mora, J. Direct measurement of ion evaporation kinetics from electrified liquid surfaces. J. Chem. Phys. 113, 815–832 (2000).10.1063/1.481857
41. Luedtke W Nanojets, electrospray, and ion field evaporation: Molecular dynamics simulations and laboratory experiments J. Phys. Chem. A 2008 112 9628 9649 10.1021/jp804585y 18828572
Luedtke, W. et al. Nanojets, electrospray, and ion field evaporation: Molecular dynamics simulations and laboratory experiments. J. Phys. Chem. A 112, 9628–9649 (2008).18828572 10.1021/jp804585y
42. Kwan V Consta S Conical shape fluctuations determine the rate of ion evaporation and the emitted cluster size distribution from multicharged droplets J. Phys. Chem. A 2022 126 3229 3238 10.1021/acs.jpca.2c02056 35549274
Kwan, V. & Consta, S. Conical shape fluctuations determine the rate of ion evaporation and the emitted cluster size distribution from multicharged droplets. J. Phys. Chem. A 126, 3229–3238 (2022).35549274 10.1021/acs.jpca.2c02056
43. Harper CC Brauer DD Francis MB Williams ER Direct observation of ion emission from charged aqueous nanodrops: effects on gaseous macromolecular charging Chem. Sci. 2021 12 5185 5195 10.1039/D0SC05707J 34168773
Harper, C. C., Brauer, D. D., Francis, M. B. & Williams, E. R. Direct observation of ion emission from charged aqueous nanodrops: effects on gaseous macromolecular charging. Chem. Sci. 12, 5185–5195 (2021).34168773 10.1039/D0SC05707J
44. Hollerbach A Sizing sub-diffraction limit electrosprayed droplets by structured illumination microscopy Analyst 2018 143 232 240 10.1039/C7AN01278K
Hollerbach, A. et al. Sizing sub-diffraction limit electrosprayed droplets by structured illumination microscopy. Analyst 143, 232–240 (2018).10.1039/C7AN01278K
45. Li H Allen N Li M Li A Conducting and characterizing femto flow electrospray ionization Analyst 2022 147 1071 1075 10.1039/D1AN02190G 35195636
Li, H., Allen, N., Li, M. & Li, A. Conducting and characterizing femto flow electrospray ionization. Analyst 147, 1071–1075 (2022).35195636 10.1039/D1AN02190G
46. Báez Bolivar EG Submicron emitters enable reliable quantification of weak protein–glycan interactions by esi-ms Anal. Chem. 2021 93 4231 4239 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c05003 33630563
Báez Bolivar, E. G. et al. Submicron emitters enable reliable quantification of weak protein–glycan interactions by esi-ms. Anal. Chem. 93, 4231–4239 (2021).33630563 10.1021/acs.analchem.0c05003
47. Lide, D. R. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics Vol. 85 (CRC press, 2004).
48. Fitch CA Platzer G Okon M Garcia-Moreno E B McIntosh LP Arginine: its pka value revisited Prot. Sci. 2015 24 752 761 10.1002/pro.2647
Fitch, C. A., Platzer, G., Okon, M., Garcia-Moreno E, B. & McIntosh, L. P. Arginine: its pka value revisited. Prot. Sci. 24, 752–761 (2015).10.1002/pro.2647
49. Mansoori BA Volmer DA Boyd RK ‘wrong-way-round’electrospray ionization of amino acids Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 1997 11 1120 1130 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0231(19970630)11:10<1120::AID-RCM976>3.0.CO;2-Q
Mansoori, B. A., Volmer, D. A. & Boyd, R. K. ‘wrong-way-round’electrospray ionization of amino acids. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 11, 1120–1130 (1997).10.1002/(SICI)1097-0231(19970630)11:10<1120::AID-RCM976>3.0.CO;2-Q
50. Ojakivi M Liigand J Kruve A Modifying the acidity of charged droplets ChemistrySelect 2018 3 335 338 10.1002/slct.201702269
Ojakivi, M., Liigand, J. & Kruve, A. Modifying the acidity of charged droplets. ChemistrySelect 3, 335–338 (2018).10.1002/slct.201702269
51. Prewett PD Mair GLR Thompson SP Some comments on the mechanism of emission from liquid metal ion sources J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 1982 15 1339 1348 10.1088/0022-3727/15/7/027
Prewett, P. D., Mair, G. L. R. & Thompson, S. P. Some comments on the mechanism of emission from liquid metal ion sources. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 15, 1339–1348 (1982).10.1088/0022-3727/15/7/027
52. Lozano PC Energy properties of an emi-im ionic liquid ion source J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2005 39 126 134 10.1088/0022-3727/39/1/020
Lozano, P. C. Energy properties of an emi-im ionic liquid ion source. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 39, 126–134 (2005).10.1088/0022-3727/39/1/020
53. Stimpson, B. P. & Evans, C. A. Electrohydrodynamic ionization mass spectrometry: Review of instrumentation mechanisms and applications. Journal of Electrostatics 5, 411–430 (1978).
54. Cook KD Electrohydrodynamic mass spectrometry Mass Spectrom. Rev. 1986 5 467 519 10.1002/mas.1280050404
Cook, K. D. Electrohydrodynamic mass spectrometry. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 5, 467–519 (1986).10.1002/mas.1280050404
55. Yuill EM Sa N Ray SJ Hieftje GM Baker LA Electrospray ionization from nanopipette emitters with tip diameters of less than 100 nm Anal. Chem. 2013 85 8498 8502 10.1021/ac402214g 23968307
Yuill, E. M., Sa, N., Ray, S. J., Hieftje, G. M. & Baker, L. A. Electrospray ionization from nanopipette emitters with tip diameters of less than 100 nm. Anal. Chem. 85, 8498–8502 (2013).23968307 10.1021/ac402214g
56. Vegiri A Schevkunov SV A molecular dynamics study of structural transitions in small water clusters in the presence of an external electric field J. Chem. Phys. 2001 115 4175 4185 10.1063/1.1388545
Vegiri, A. & Schevkunov, S. V. A molecular dynamics study of structural transitions in small water clusters in the presence of an external electric field. J. Chem. Phys. 115, 4175–4185 (2001).10.1063/1.1388545
57. He Z Cui H Hao S Wang L Zhou J Electric-field effects on ionic hydration: a molecular dynamics study J. Phys. Chem. B 2018 122 5991 5998 10.1021/acs.jpcb.8b02773 29750528
He, Z., Cui, H., Hao, S., Wang, L. & Zhou, J. Electric-field effects on ionic hydration: a molecular dynamics study. J. Phys. Chem. B 122, 5991–5998 (2018).29750528 10.1021/acs.jpcb.8b02773
58. Gallud X Lozano PC The emission properties, structure, and stability of ionic liquid menisci undergoing electrically assisted ion evaporation J. Fluid Mech. 2022 933 A43 10.1017/jfm.2021.988
Gallud, X. & Lozano, P. C. The emission properties, structure, and stability of ionic liquid menisci undergoing electrically assisted ion evaporation. J. Fluid Mech. 933, A43 (2022).10.1017/jfm.2021.988
59. Zhan D Rose J Fenn JB Solvation studies of electrospray ions—method and early results J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 1998 9 1241 1247 10.1016/S1044-0305(98)00107-X
Zhan, D., Rose, J. & Fenn, J. B. Solvation studies of electrospray ions—method and early results. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 9, 1241–1247 (1998).10.1016/S1044-0305(98)00107-X
60. Toyama N Kohno J-y Mafuné F Kondow T Solvation structure of arginine in aqueous solution studied by liquid beam technique Chem. Phys. Lett. 2006 419 369 373 10.1016/j.cplett.2005.12.013
Toyama, N., Kohno, J.-y, Mafuné, F. & Kondow, T. Solvation structure of arginine in aqueous solution studied by liquid beam technique. Chem. Phys. Lett. 419, 369–373 (2006).10.1016/j.cplett.2005.12.013
61. Maulbetsch W Wiener B Poole W Bush J Stein D Preserving the sequence of a biopolymer’s monomers as they enter an electrospray mass spectrometer Phys. Rev. Appl. 2016 6 054006 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.6.054006
Maulbetsch, W., Wiener, B., Poole, W., Bush, J. & Stein, D. Preserving the sequence of a biopolymer’s monomers as they enter an electrospray mass spectrometer. Phys. Rev. Appl. 6, 054006 (2016).10.1103/PhysRevApplied.6.054006
62. Secchi E Massive radius-dependent flow slippage in carbon nanotubes Nature 2016 537 210 213 10.1038/nature19315 27604947
Secchi, E. et al. Massive radius-dependent flow slippage in carbon nanotubes. Nature 537, 210–213 (2016).27604947 10.1038/nature19315
63. Lozano P Martinez-Sanchez M Ionic liquid ion sources: characterization of externally wetted emitters J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2005 282 415 421 10.1016/j.jcis.2004.08.132 15589547
Lozano, P. & Martinez-Sanchez, M. Ionic liquid ion sources: characterization of externally wetted emitters. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 282, 415–421 (2005).15589547 10.1016/j.jcis.2004.08.132
64. Miller, C. E. Characterization of Ion Cluster Fragmentation in Ionic Liquid Ion Sources. Ph.D. thesis, https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/122372 (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2019).
65. Gault B Atom probe tomography Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 2021 1 51 10.1038/s43586-021-00047-w
Gault, B. et al. Atom probe tomography. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 1, 51 (2021).10.1038/s43586-021-00047-w
66. Schwarz T Field evaporation and atom probe tomography of pure water tips Sci. Rep. 2020 10 20271 10.1038/s41598-020-77130-x 33219263
Schwarz, T. et al. Field evaporation and atom probe tomography of pure water tips. Sci. Rep. 10, 20271 (2020).33219263 10.1038/s41598-020-77130-x
67. Qiu S Direct imaging of liquid–nanoparticle interfaces with atom probe tomography J. Phys. Chem. C 2020 124 19389 19395 10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c05504
Qiu, S. et al. Direct imaging of liquid–nanoparticle interfaces with atom probe tomography. J. Phys. Chem. C 124, 19389–19395 (2020).10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c05504
68. Stuve EM Ionization of water in interfacial electric fields: an electrochemical view Chem. Phys. Lett. 2012 519 1 17 10.1016/j.cplett.2011.09.040
Stuve, E. M. Ionization of water in interfacial electric fields: an electrochemical view. Chem. Phys. Lett. 519, 1–17 (2012).10.1016/j.cplett.2011.09.040
69. Segreto N Understanding the underlying field evaporation mechanism of pure water tips in high electrical fields J. Phys. Chem. A 2022 126 5663 5671 10.1021/acs.jpca.2c04163 35972399
Segreto, N. et al. Understanding the underlying field evaporation mechanism of pure water tips in high electrical fields. J. Phys. Chem. A 126, 5663–5671 (2022).35972399 10.1021/acs.jpca.2c04163
70. Hart TW Some observations concerning the s-nitroso and s-phenylsulphonyl derivatives of l-cysteine and glutathione Tetrahedron Lett. 1985 26 2013 2016 10.1016/S0040-4039(00)98368-0
Hart, T. W. Some observations concerning the s-nitroso and s-phenylsulphonyl derivatives of l-cysteine and glutathione. Tetrahedron Lett. 26, 2013–2016 (1985).10.1016/S0040-4039(00)98368-0
71. Drachman, N., LePoitevin, M., Szapary, H., Wiener, B. & Derek, S. Replication data for: nanopore ion sources deliver individual ions of amino acids and peptides directly into high vacuum 10.7910/DVN/XQG6NJ (2024).
72. Stein, D., Vietorisz, J. & Drachman, N. Systems and methods for analysis of peptide photodissociation for single-molecule protein sequencing (U.S. Patent WO2023023231A1, Feb. 2023).
