Paradigm Shift: Major Role of Ion-Pairing-Dependent Size Exclusion Effects in Bottom-Up Proteomics Reversed-Phase...

Can reversed-phase peptide retention be the same for C8 and C18 columns? or increase for otherwise identical columns with a smaller surface area? Can replacing trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) with formic acid (FA) improve the peak shape? According to our common understanding of peptide chromatography, absolutely not. Surprisingly, a thorough comparison of the peptide separation selectivity of 100 and 120 Å fully porous C18 sorbents to maximize the performance of our in-house proteomics LC-MS/MS setup revealed an unexpectedly higher peptide retentivity for a wider pore packing material, despite it having a smaller surface area. Concurrently, the observed increase in peptide retention─which drives variation in separation selectivity between 100 and 120 Å pore size materials─was more pronounced for smaller peptides. These findings contradict the central dogmas that underlie the development of all peptide RP-HPLC applications: (i) a larger surface area leads to higher retention and (ii) increasing the pore size should benefit the retention of larger analytes. Based on our intriguing findings, we compared reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography peptide retention for a total of 20 columns with pore sizes between 60 and 300 Å using FA- and TFA-based eluents. Our results unequivocally attest that the larger size of ion pairs in FA- vs TFA-based eluents leads to the observed impact on selectivity and peptide retention. For FA, peptide retention peaks at 200 Å pore size, compared to between 120 and 200 Å for TFA. However, the decrease in retention for narrow-pore particles is more profound in FA. Our findings suggest that common assumptions about analyte size and accessible surface area should be revisited for ion-pair RP separation of small peptides, typical for proteomic applications that are predominantly applying FA eluents. Hybrid silica-based materials with pore sizes of 130-200 Å should be specifically targeted for bottom-up proteomic applications to obtain both superior peak shape and peptide retentivity. This challenging task of attaining the best RPLC column for proteomics calls for closer collaboration between LC column manufacturers and proteomic LC specialists.