What changed at SGN in June, and what the company says prompted it
Documentation practice is the only part of vendor quality a buyer can assess before purchase.
TheCompound Journal
Reporting on incretins, compounding & the peptide supply chain
Identity
A peptide has a monoisotopic mass and an average mass, they differ by several daltons at this molecular size, and a certificate that does not say which it quotes cannot be checked.
There is a piece of arithmetic that resolves most of this, and it takes about ten seconds. Isotope peaks in a charge-state cluster are separated by one dalton divided by the charge. A spacing of one indicates a singly charged ion, half indicates doubly charged, a third indicates triply charged. Read the spacing, assign the charge, subtract the appropriate number of proton masses, multiply, and you have the neutral molecular weight. Any spectrum with sufficient resolution to show the isotope peaks contains its own charge assignment, which is why the resolving power of the instrument matters even when nobody is looking for an impurity.
It is worth being exact about what a mass spectrometer does, because the imprecision propagates. The instrument generates ions from a sample, separates them according to the ratio of their mass to their charge, and counts them at a detector. The horizontal axis of every spectrum is mass-to-charge, conventionally written m/z and expressed in thomsons or in dimensionless units depending on the vendor’s software. Nothing is weighed. Nothing is measured against a reference mass in the sense that a balance measures against a calibration weight.
What follows from this is that every molecular weight on every certificate of analysis in this market is a calculated quantity, derived from a measured m/z by assigning a charge and subtracting the mass contribution of whatever adducted to the molecule to give it that charge — usually protons, sometimes sodium, occasionally potassium or ammonium. The assignment is normally straightforward and normally correct. It is nonetheless an assignment, and when it goes wrong it goes wrong by an integer factor, which is the kind of error that produces confident nonsense rather than a plausible discrepancy.
The practical consequence for a reader is a habit: when a mass figure appears, ask what was observed and what was inferred. A report that gives both — the m/z, the charge, and the derived neutral mass — has answered the question before it was asked.
The monoisotopic mass of a molecule is calculated using the exact mass of the most abundant stable isotope of each element: carbon-12 at exactly 12, hydrogen-1 at 1.00783, nitrogen-14 at 14.00307, oxygen-16 at 15.99491. The average mass uses the standard atomic weights, which are abundance-weighted means over the natural isotopic distribution: carbon at 12.011, nitrogen at 14.007, and so on. For a small molecule the two differ negligibly. For a peptide of four thousand daltons containing roughly one hundred and ninety carbon atoms, the difference is on the order of two and a half daltons.
Which one a laboratory should quote depends on what it measured. If the instrument resolved the isotopic envelope, the monoisotopic peak is identifiable and monoisotopic mass is the correct quantity to report. If the envelope was not resolved — which is the ordinary situation on a linear time-of-flight instrument at this molecular weight — the centroid of the unresolved cluster approximates the average mass, and that is what should be quoted.
The error is not in choosing one convention. It is in comparing across them. An observed monoisotopic value set against a theoretical average value will disagree by two to three daltons at incretin molecular weights, and the resulting apparent discrepancy has the size and shape of a real analytical finding. Any identity statement that does not name its convention is one step removed from being uncheckable.1
Glutamine against lysine is thirty-six thousandths of a dalton. Most identity confirmations sold in this market cannot see it.
For a peptide of neutral monoisotopic mass M observed as a protonated ion carrying z protons, the mass-to-charge ratio is (M + z × 1.00728) divided by z, where 1.00728 is the mass of a proton — the mass of a hydrogen atom less the mass of an electron, a distinction that matters at parts-per-million accuracy and not at all below it.
Run this for a peptide of average mass 4113.58. The singly protonated ion appears at 4114.59. The doubly protonated ion appears at 2057.80, the triply at 1372.20, the quadruply at 1029.40 and the quintuply at 823.72. All five describe the same molecule. A reader shown only the fourth of those figures, without a charge assignment, would reasonably conclude the vial contained a peptide of about a thousand daltons.
Inverting the calculation is how the neutral mass is recovered: multiply the observed m/z by the charge and subtract z proton masses. Doing this for two or three charge states from the same spectrum and finding agreement to within the instrument’s stated accuracy is the standard internal consistency check, and it is the check that catches a misassigned charge. A single m/z with a single assumed charge has no such redundancy, which is one reason electrospray with a visible charge-state envelope is more informative than a single MALDI peak even when both instruments are equally well calibrated.
Leucine and isoleucine are the standing example and they settle the argument on their own. Same formula, same mass, different residues, and no accuracy on the intact molecule will ever separate them. An instrument reporting a perfect match is behaving perfectly and telling you less than the report implies.
| Element of the identity claim | Certificates stating it (of 20) |
|---|---|
| A mass spectrometric identity test was performed | 14 |
| Both observed and theoretical mass given | 8 |
| Instrument or analyser class named | 6 |
| Ionisation source or mode named | 5 |
| A spectrum reproduced in the document | 5 |
| Charge state of the reported ion stated | 4 |
| Monoisotopic or average convention stated | 3 |
| An acceptance tolerance stated | 3 |
| Peptide mapping or MS/MS performed | 1 |
| Counts are of the most recent certificate supplied to the Journal by each of the twenty companies in the dossier programme as at the last quarterly cycle. A company is credited where the element appears anywhere on the document or on an attached laboratory report. No inference about material quality should be drawn from a documentary count. | |
Because carbon-13 is present at roughly 1.1% natural abundance, a peptide containing one hundred and ninety carbon atoms will exist substantially as molecules containing one, two or three carbon-13 atoms. In a spectrum this appears as a series of peaks above the monoisotopic peak, separated in mass by approximately 1.00336 daltons and distributed in intensity according to the binomial statistics of the composition.
Two things follow, and both are practically useful. First, the spacing between adjacent isotope peaks in a charge-state cluster is one over the charge: a spacing of 0.5 on the m/z axis means the ion is doubly charged, 0.333 means triply, 0.25 means quadruply. This is the simplest charge assignment available and it requires no assumptions about the sample at all. Second, the relative intensities of the isotope peaks are predictable from the elemental composition, so a cluster whose shape departs markedly from the calculated envelope is evidence that two species are overlapping.
Both observations require an instrument capable of resolving the isotope peaks at the relevant m/z, which is where resolving power stops being a specification-sheet number and becomes the thing that determines whether a spectrum can be interpreted at all. Below roughly ten thousand resolving power, a multiply charged peptide envelope collapses into a single broad hump that carries neither the spacing nor the shape information.
m/z — mass-to-charge ratio, the quantity a mass spectrometer actually measures. Monoisotopic mass — mass calculated using the lightest stable isotope of each element. Average mass — mass calculated using standard atomic weights. Nominal mass — the integer sum of integer isotope masses; adequate for small molecules, useless here.
Resolving power — m divided by peak width at half height; the ability to separate nearby masses. Mass accuracy — deviation of a measurement from the true value, in parts per million. Mass defect — the difference between an exact mass and its nominal value, and the property that makes near-isobars separable.
Adduct — an ion formed by association with something other than a proton, commonly sodium or potassium. Charge-state envelope — the family of differently charged ions from one compound. Isobaric — of identical mass at the achieved precision. Isomeric — of identical composition and different structure. b and y ions — the complementary fragment series produced by amide-bond cleavage.
Precision in these terms is not decoration. Several disputes this department has been asked to adjudicate turned out, on inspection, to be disagreements about whether the word mass meant monoisotopic or average.
What a mass measurement cannot see is the more useful list. Deamidation shifts the mass by one dalton and is invisible on most instruments in use here. Isomerisation and racemisation shift it by nothing at all. Aggregates do not survive the ionisation and are simply absent from the spectrum.
The Journal will keep asking suppliers for the underlying laboratory report rather than the certificate, and will keep recording, without editorialising, who supplies one. That register is not a ranking of honesty and we decline to present it as one; readers who think it functions as one anyway should write to standards@compoundjournal.com, where the argument is already under way. It is a measurement of how far back the documentary chain reaches, which is a different property and, in a market assembled from resellers, a useful one.
Selected from correspondence received on this article. Writers are identified by initial, surname and city, verified before printing. Replies are from the desk that filed the piece or from the standards editor. Write to letters@compoundjournal.com.
Monoisotopic and average mass differ by enough at peptide scale to matter, and the two are quoted interchangeably in supplier literature. For a forty-residue sequence the gap is a couple of daltons, which is exactly the size of the modification a buyer might be trying to exclude.
— N. Aftab, Lahore
Your charge-state arithmetic is correct and I would set it out for readers as a rule they can apply. Take the observed mass-to-charge value, multiply by the charge, then subtract the charge multiplied by the mass of a proton. Two adjacent peaks in an envelope give you the charge and therefore the mass without any assumption at all.
— N. Prasetyo, Surabaya
The claim that a reproduced spectrum is worth more than any number in the document seems overstated. Most buyers cannot read a spectrum, and a printed image invites false confidence rather than scrutiny.
— A. Wiśniewski, Szczecin
Partly conceded. A spectrum is worth more to a reader who can read one, and this department exists partly to increase that number. But it is also an artefact that can be checked by a third party later, which a bare verdict is not, and that alone justifies printing it.
Aspartate isomerisation changes nothing about the mass at all. Nor does racemisation of a single residue. Both alter the molecule in ways that a chromatographic method developed for the purpose can sometimes resolve, and that a mass measurement cannot see under any circumstances.
— T. Abubakar, Kano
I disagree with rather more of this than I expected to and I am glad it was printed. An argument I can take issue with is more use than a summary I cannot.
— J. Halloway, Dundee
Disagreement in the column is the point of having one. We would rather be argued with in print than agreed with in silence.
Documentation practice is the only part of vendor quality a buyer can assess before purchase.
Every certificate circulating in this market answers a question about molecules. Almost none answers a question about organisms, pyrogens, or the integrity of the seal.
Purity, content, identity, sterility and endotoxin are five separate determinations. A single sheet of paper carrying one of them is not evidence about the other four.
A reminder that a purity figure is the output of a method, and that methods differ.
Residual moisture is measured routinely in regulated manufacture, is reported almost nowhere in this trade, and predicts long-term stability better than any other single…
Dye ingress and microbial immersion are probabilistic. Vacuum decay, high-voltage leak detection and helium mass spectrometry are deterministic and far more sensitive.