I am exploring the possibility of buying of a Maldi-Tof MS instrument for my lab. I am familiar only with Bruker Maldi-ToF MS. My main application is characterization of novel peptides so accuracy is extremely important. However, I am also interested in the microorganism identification. So, Autoflex (high resolution reflectron mode) from Bruker looks as a good option. Another option could be the MALDI 8020 from Shimatzu.
Could you please share your experiences with this instruments?
Hello Carolina,
my experience is with MALDI-TOF instruments from Bruker. I routinely use Ultraflex, Autoflex and Microflex, depending on application requirements. Ultraflex allows great TOF and TOF/TOF sensitivity/accuracy/resolution, so for peptide analysis and de novo sequencing it is the best. However it is the most expensive. Autoflex with LIFT mode has almost the same output as Ultraflex regarding accuracy and is cheaper. You may use it for microrganism identification as well (I do it) using Biotyper software, available apart. And of course, Microflex (Biotyper licence included) is tailored to microrganism identification and costs less than the other two. I have used Microflex exclusively for microrganism identification (linear mode only), so I do not know about the performance of Microflex reflectron mode. In conclusion, I would choose Autoflex with LIFT, because of application flexibility and price.
Hope it helps.
MMrs/Mmiss Proaño-Bolaños ,
Ultra-high accuracy is gained using ICR or Orbitrap.
I have had good experiences with Bruker Autoflex in the past. And my only experience with Shimatzu is with their HPLCs which although competitive on price compared to Waters or Agilent were not quite the same quality of instrument. My advice (after building up three mass spec labs with instruments from various manufacturers) is going with what you know as long as you are happy with the instruments and can afford it. Also, often overlooked in these things is the relationship you have with the manufacturer after you buy the instrument. And I also agree other posters here that if you can afford it and since you are working in de-novo identification a Thermo Orbitrap of some sort might fit better with your needs. The drawback there is you most likely have to deal with nano-LC which is a challenge still in most cases.
We use a Bruker Autoflex III. It has done well for us, but it does depend on your applications. It has a much smaller footprint than the Ultraflex and is less expensive. You give up a little in resolution to the Ultraflex, but it is adequate for sequencing etc.
SAI of Manchester UK make 3 MALDI ToF products
with Bacterion software for microbiological ID www.saiman.co.uk
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Biochemistry
- Biomolecules
- Peptides