Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 396

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Performance Characteristics of Electron Transfer Dissociation Mass Spectrometry

Open access
Good, David M., Wirtala, Matthew, McAlister, Graeme C., Coon, Joshua J.·2007·Molecular & Cellular Proteomics

Abstract

We performed a large scale study of electron transfer dissociation (ETD) performance, as compared with ion trap collision-activated dissociation (CAD), for peptides ranging from approximately 1000 to 5000 Da (n approximately 4000). These data indicate relatively little overlap in peptide identifications between the two methods ( approximately 12%). ETD outperformed CAD for all charge states greater than 2; however, regardless of precursor charge a linear decrease in percent fragmentation, as a function of increasing precursor m/z, was observed with ETD fragmentation. We postulate that several precursor cation attributes, including peptide length, charge distribution, and total mass, could be relevant players. To examine these parameters unique ETD-identified peptides were sorted by length, and the ratio of amino acid residues per precursor charge (residues/charge) was calculated. We observed excellent correlation between the ratio of residues/charge and percent fragmentation. For peptides of a given residue/charge ratio, there is no correlation between peptide mass and percent fragmentation; instead we conclude that the ratio of residues/charge is the main factor in determining a successful ETD outcome. As charge density decreases so does the probability of non-covalent interactions that can bind a newly formed c/z-type ion pair. Recently we have described a supplemental activation approach (ETcaD) to convert these non-dissociative electron transfer product ions to useful c- and z-type ions. Automated implementation of such methods should remove this apparent precursor m/z ceiling. Finally, we evaluated the role of ion density (both anionic and cationic) and reaction duration for an ETD experiment. These data indicate that the best performance is achieved when the ion trap is filled to its space charge limit with anionic reagents. In this largest scale study of ETD to date, ETD continues to show great promise to propel the field of proteomics and, for small- to medium-sized peptides, is highly complementary to ion trap CAD.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1074/mcp.m700073-mcp200

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Cited by

See all 396

Metadata

Authors
Good, D. M., Wirtala, M., McAlister, G. C., & Coon, J. J.
Venue
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-11
Volume
6
Issue
11
Pages
1942-1951
ISSN
1535-9476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2111306975
Cited by
396
References
41
FWCI
16.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Performance Characteristics of Electron Transfer Dissociation Mass Spectrometry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1074/mcp.m700073-mcp200
The paper
Good, D. M., Wirtala, M., McAlister, G. C., & Coon, J. J. (2007). Performance Characteristics of Electron Transfer Dissociation Mass Spectrometry. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.m700073-mcp200

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.