Agent-almanac interpret-mass-spectrum
git clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/i18n/wenyan/skills/interpret-mass-spectrum" ~/.claude/skills/pjt222-agent-almanac-interpret-mass-spectrum-6f4b28 && rm -rf "$T"
i18n/wenyan/skills/interpret-mass-spectrum/SKILL.mdInterpret Mass Spectrum
Analyze mass spectra from any common ionization method to determine the molecular ion, molecular formula, fragmentation pathways, and structural features of the analyte.
When to Use
- Determining the molecular weight and formula of an unknown compound
- Confirming the identity of a synthetic product by molecular ion and fragmentation
- Identifying impurities or degradation products in a sample
- Proposing structural features from characteristic fragmentation losses
- Analyzing isotope patterns to detect halogens, sulfur, or metals
Inputs
- Required: Mass spectrum data (m/z values with relative intensities, at minimum the full scan spectrum)
- Required: Ionization method used (EI, ESI, MALDI, CI, APCI, APPI)
- Optional: High-resolution mass data (exact mass, measured vs. calculated)
- Optional: Molecular formula from other sources (elemental analysis, NMR)
- Optional: Tandem MS/MS data (fragmentation of selected precursor ions)
- Optional: Chromatographic context (LC-MS or GC-MS retention time, purity)
Procedure
Step 1: Identify Ionization Method and Expected Ion Types
Determine what species the spectrum contains before assigning peaks:
- Classify the ionization method:
| Method | Energy | Primary Ion | Fragmentation | Typical Use |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EI (70 eV) | Hard | M+. (radical cation) | Extensive | Small volatile molecules, GC-MS |
| CI | Soft | [M+H]+, [M+NH4]+ | Minimal | Molecular weight confirmation |
| ESI | Soft | [M+H]+, [M+Na]+, [M-H]- | Minimal | Polar, biomolecules, LC-MS |
| MALDI | Soft | [M+H]+, [M+Na]+, [M+K]+ | Minimal | Large molecules, polymers, proteins |
| APCI | Soft | [M+H]+, [M-H]- | Some | Medium polarity, LC-MS |
- Note polarity mode: Positive mode produces cations; negative mode produces anions. ESI commonly uses both.
- Check for adducts and clusters: Soft ionization often produces [M+Na]+ (M+23), [M+K]+ (M+39), [2M+H]+, and [2M+Na]+ in addition to [M+H]+. Identify these before assigning the molecular ion.
- Identify multiply charged ions: In ESI, multiply charged ions appear at m/z = (M + nH) / n. Look for peaks separated by fractional m/z values (e.g., 0.5 Da spacing indicates z=2).
Expected: Ionization method documented, expected ion types listed, and adducts/clusters identified so the true molecular ion can be determined.
On failure: If the ionization method is unknown, examine the spectrum for clues: extensive fragmentation suggests EI, adduct patterns suggest ESI, and matrix peaks suggest MALDI. Consult the instrument log if available.
Step 2: Determine Molecular Ion and Molecular Formula
Identify the molecular ion peak and derive the molecular formula:
- Locate the molecular ion (M): In EI, M+. is the highest m/z peak with a reasonable isotope pattern (it may be weak or absent for labile compounds). In soft ionization, identify [M+H]+ or [M+Na]+ and subtract the adduct to get M.
- Apply the nitrogen rule: An odd molecular weight indicates an odd number of nitrogen atoms. An even molecular weight indicates zero or an even number of nitrogen atoms.
- Calculate degrees of unsaturation (DBE): DBE = (2C + 2 + N - H - X) / 2, where X = halogens. Each ring or pi bond contributes one DBE. Benzene = 4 DBE, carbonyl = 1 DBE.
- Use high-resolution data: If exact mass is available, calculate the molecular formula using the mass defect. Compare the measured mass with all candidate formulas within the mass accuracy window (typically < 5 ppm for modern instruments).
- Cross-check with isotope pattern: The observed isotope pattern must match the proposed molecular formula (see Step 3).
Expected: Molecular ion identified, molecular weight determined, nitrogen rule applied, and a molecular formula proposed (confirmed by HRMS if available).
On failure: If no molecular ion is visible in EI (common for thermally labile or highly branched compounds), try a softer ionization method. If the molecular ion is ambiguous, check for loss of common small fragments from the highest m/z peak (e.g., M-1, M-15, M-18 can help identify M).
Step 3: Analyze Isotope Patterns
Use isotopic signatures to detect specific elements:
- Monoisotopic elements: H, C, N, O, F, P, I have characteristic natural abundance patterns. For molecules containing only C, H, N, O, the M+1 peak is approximately 1.1% per carbon.
- Halogen patterns:
| Element | Isotopes | M : M+2 Ratio | Visual Pattern |
|---|---|---|---|
| 35Cl / 37Cl | 35, 37 | 3 : 1 | Doublet, 2 Da apart |
| 79Br / 81Br | 79, 81 | 1 : 1 | Equal doublet, 2 Da apart |
| 2 Cl | -- | 9 : 6 : 1 | Triplet |
| 2 Br | -- | 1 : 2 : 1 | Triplet |
| 1 Cl + 1 Br | -- | 3 : 4 : 1 | Characteristic quartet-like |
- Sulfur detection: 34S contributes 4.4% at M+2. An M+2 peak of approximately 4--5% relative to M (after correcting for the contribution of 13C2) suggests one sulfur atom.
- Silicon detection: 29Si (5.1%) and 30Si (3.4%) produce distinctive M+1 and M+2 contributions.
- Compare with calculated patterns: Use the proposed molecular formula to calculate the theoretical isotope pattern. Overlay with the observed pattern to confirm or refute the formula.
Expected: Isotope pattern analyzed, presence or absence of Cl, Br, S, Si determined, and pattern consistent with the proposed molecular formula.
On failure: If isotope resolution is insufficient (low-resolution instrument), the M+2 pattern may be unresolvable. Note the limitation and rely on exact mass and other spectroscopic data for elemental composition.
Step 4: Identify Fragmentation Losses and Key Fragment Ions
Map the fragmentation pathways to extract structural information:
- Catalog major fragments: List all peaks above 5--10% relative intensity with their m/z values.
- Calculate neutral losses from the molecular ion:
| Loss (Da) | Neutral Lost | Structural Implication |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | H. | Labile hydrogen |
| 15 | CH3. | Methyl group |
| 17 | OH. | Hydroxyl |
| 18 | H2O | Alcohol, carboxylic acid |
| 27 | HCN | Nitrogen heterocycle, amine |
| 28 | CO or C2H4 | Carbonyl or ethyl |
| 29 | CHO. or C2H5. | Aldehyde or ethyl |
| 31 | OCH3. or CH2OH. | Methoxy or hydroxymethyl |
| 32 | CH3OH | Methyl ester |
| 35/36 | Cl./HCl | Chlorinated compound |
| 44 | CO2 | Carboxylic acid, ester |
| 45 | OC2H5. | Ethoxy |
| 46 | NO2. | Nitro compound |
- Identify characteristic fragment ions:
| m/z | Ion | Origin |
|---|---|---|
| 77 | C6H5+ | Phenyl cation |
| 91 | C7H7+ | Tropylium (benzyl rearrangement) |
| 105 | C6H5CO+ | Benzoyl cation |
| 43 | CH3CO+ or C3H7+ | Acetyl or propyl |
| 57 | C4H9+ or C3H5O+ | tert-Butyl or acrolein |
| 149 | Phthalate fragment | Plasticizer contaminant |
- Map fragmentation pathways: Connect fragment ions by successive losses to build a fragmentation tree from M down to low-mass fragments.
- Identify rearrangement ions: McLafferty rearrangement (gamma-hydrogen transfer with beta-cleavage) produces even-electron ions from carbonyl-containing compounds. Retro-Diels-Alder fragmentation is characteristic of cyclohexene systems.
Expected: All major fragment ions assigned, neutral losses calculated and correlated with structural features, fragmentation tree constructed.
On failure: If fragments do not correspond to simple losses from the molecular ion, consider rearrangement processes. Unassigned fragments may indicate unexpected functional groups, impurities, or matrix/background peaks.
Step 5: Assess Purity and Propose Structure
Evaluate the overall spectrum for purity indicators and assemble a structural proposal:
- Purity check: In GC-MS or LC-MS, examine the chromatogram for additional peaks. In direct-infusion MS, look for unexpected ions that are not fragments of or adducts with the main analyte.
- Background and contaminant peaks: Common contaminants include phthalate plasticizers (m/z 149, 167, 279), column bleed (siloxanes at m/z 207, 281, 355, 429 in GC-MS), and solvent clusters.
- Structural proposal: Combine the molecular formula (Step 2), isotope pattern (Step 3), and fragmentation (Step 4) to propose a structure or a set of candidate structures.
- Rank candidates: Use the fragmentation tree to rank structural candidates. The best structure explains the most fragment ions with the fewest ad hoc assumptions.
- Cross-validate: Compare the proposed structure with data from other techniques (NMR, IR, UV-Vis). The mass spectrum alone rarely provides an unambiguous structure for novel compounds.
Expected: Purity assessed, contaminants identified if present, and a structural proposal (or ranked candidate list) consistent with all MS data and cross-validated where possible.
On failure: If the spectrum appears to contain multiple components and chromatographic separation was not used, flag the mixture and recommend LC-MS or GC-MS reanalysis. If no satisfactory structural proposal emerges, identify which additional data (HRMS, MS/MS, NMR) would resolve the ambiguity.
Validation
- Ionization method identified and expected ion types documented
- Molecular ion located and distinguished from adducts, fragments, and clusters
- Nitrogen rule applied and consistent with proposed formula
- Degrees of unsaturation calculated and accounted for in the structure
- Isotope pattern matches the proposed molecular formula
- Major fragment ions assigned with neutral losses and structural rationale
- Fragmentation tree constructed from molecular ion to low-mass fragments
- Common contaminant and background peaks identified and excluded
- Structural proposal cross-validated with other spectroscopic data
Common Pitfalls
- Misidentifying the molecular ion: In EI, the base peak is often a fragment, not the molecular ion. The molecular ion is the highest m/z peak with a chemically reasonable isotope pattern. Adduct ions in ESI ([M+Na]+, [2M+H]+) can also be mistaken for the molecular ion.
- Ignoring the nitrogen rule: An odd-mass molecular ion requires an odd number of nitrogens. Forgetting this leads to impossible molecular formulas.
- Confusing isobaric losses: A loss of 28 Da could be CO or C2H4; a loss of 29 could be CHO or C2H5. High-resolution MS or additional fragmentation data is needed to distinguish isobaric losses.
- Neglecting multiply charged ions: In ESI, doubly or triply charged ions appear at half or one-third the expected m/z. Look for non-integer spacing between isotope peaks as a diagnostic for multiple charges.
- Over-interpreting low-abundance peaks: Peaks below 1--2% relative intensity may be noise, isotope contributions, or minor contaminants rather than meaningful fragments.
- Assuming a pure sample: Many real-world spectra are mixtures. Always check chromatographic purity and look for ions inconsistent with the proposed structure.
Related Skills
-- determine connectivity and hydrogen environments for structural confirmationinterpret-nmr-spectrum
-- identify functional groups that explain observed fragmentationinterpret-ir-spectrum
-- characterize chromophores in the analyteinterpret-uv-vis-spectrum
-- complementary vibrational analysisinterpret-raman-spectrum
-- select and sequence analytical techniques before data acquisitionplan-spectroscopic-analysis
-- analyze GC or LC chromatographic data coupled with MSinterpret-chromatogram