Technical note: Air compared to nitrogen as nebulizing and drying gases for electrospray ionization mass spectrometry

In the present study we tested the application of compressed air instead of pure nitrogen as the nebulizing and drying gas, and its influence on the quality of electrospray ionization (ESI) mass spectra. The intensities of the signals corresponding to protonated molecules were significantly (twice) higher when air was used. Inspection of signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios revealed that, in both cases, sensitivity was comparable. A higher ion abundance after the application of compressed air was followed by a higher background. Another potential risk of using air in the ESI source is the possibility for sample oxidation due to the presence of oxygen. To test this, we selected five easily oxidizing compounds to verify their susceptibility to oxidation. In particular, the presence of methionine was of interest. For all the compounds studied, no oxidation was observed. Amodiaquine oxidizes spontaneously in water solutions and its oxidized form can be detected a few hours after preparation. Direct comparison of the spectra where nitrogen was used with the corresponding spectra obtained when air was applied did not show significant differences. The only distinction was slightly different patterns of adducts when air was used. The difference concerns acetonitrile, which forms higher signals when air is the nebulizing gas. It is also important that the replacement of nitrogen with air does not affect quantitative data. The prepared calibration curves also visualize an intensity twice as high (independent of concentration within tested range) of the signal where air was applied. We have used our system continuously for three months with air as the nebulizing and drying gas and have not noticed any unexpected signal deterioration caused by additional source contamination from the air. Moreover, compressed air is much cheaper and easily available using oil-free compressors or pumps.