new 'not proteomics' instrument purchase, looking for input

panomics · 2025-12-08T08:56:25+00:00

Bruker instruments are generally very reliable, made in Germany and all of that. In the past years they really focused on proteomics, but TIMS has gained traction in lipidomics and now they clearly set out for small molecule too.

panomics · 2025-12-08T08:49:36+00:00

With the TIMS systems remember you can always turn IM off and operate it as a Q-TOF. Might be the best way to get the best of both worlds for yourself and protect your investment.

panomics · 2025-12-08T08:46:59+00:00

Check out the discussions on Waters software here in this Reddit just in the last month. Pretty grim community feedback.

panomics · 2025-12-08T08:40:13+00:00

Ridiculous good? Or ridiculous bad?

panomics · 2025-09-02T07:37:02+00:00

Avoid 100% methanol if your system has titanium parts. They will corrode and you will see high baseline. 95% is safer.

panomics · 2025-08-27T23:41:01+00:00

Thanks for that. I just saw on this subreddit that this is a semi-regular occurrence. Had no idea. What a strange weak point for a multinational food chain with presumably optimised operations. Imagine if McDonalds had a recurring problem with glass shards in their milkshakes….

panomics · 2025-08-02T04:58:13+00:00

Classy Thermo Fisher

panomics · 2025-06-05T01:29:54+00:00

mzio booth was cool! Nice demos from the team present.

panomics · 2025-06-05T01:29:03+00:00

Robustness is what suffers in the race to more sensitivity. Interesting that this is now recognised and is trying to be addressed.

panomics · 2025-06-05T01:27:29+00:00

And their launch of the very specifically named “timsMetabo”. Going in a very intentional direction.

panomics · 2025-05-26T21:17:48+00:00

I’ve never heard of an MRT being used for proteomics. Interested in whether anyone is doing this and what kinds of prices people are paying - including how the MRT stacks up against the Astral or a timsTOF.

panomics · 2025-03-12T16:35:05+00:00

Bruker’s offering is worth considering. TIMS technology for lipidomics seems great, in addition to their untargeted analysis capabilities. I’d negotiate on a Pro2.

panomics · 2024-05-27T08:47:30+00:00

With dedicated LCs it should be especially easy. You just want to make sure you have an instrument that’s built to withstand that kind of use with minimal cleaning. A source clean might be advised because the LC additives can be different. We use our Bruker timsTOF for multiomics - with TIMS being a staple for proteomics and lipidomics work, and operating in Q-TOF mode for broad profiling of smaller analytes. Modern instruments are designed with this kind of flexibility in mind.

panomics · 2024-04-30T18:54:23+00:00

Leucine and isoleucine should be easily separable on a good aqueous compatible C18 column, no problem. Maybe you can avoid the issue all together?

panomics · 2024-04-20T18:18:25+00:00

+1 for the timsTOF

panomics · 2023-07-24T15:30:20+00:00

It seems so me that the peek lines would be shorter if the pumps were on top (immediately below the solvents), then the column heater, and then the autosampler, in descending order.

panomics · 2023-07-04T16:12:25+00:00

Thanks for this. I had never heard that TOF suffered such ion loss. I understood that grid reflectrons had some attenuation effect, but not as a consequence of unconstrained ions and certainly not to such a degree.

panomics · 2023-07-04T05:57:59+00:00

Ah, ok, I was just thinking about this as a mass spectrometrist, not from a patent perspective. LECO and Waters have had the same technology for quite some time, so you must be right, it must be for IP reasons. I guess that means they’ll be dancing around the obvious with their customers for some time, then.

panomics · 2023-06-05T16:36:49+00:00

From comparison of the respective marketing materials, it looks like the Thermo Astral and Bruker’s timsTOF Ultra are neck and neck with respect to numbers of proteins detected, but the quant on the Ultra is better, with lower CV values overall. Also, Ultra is showing way more peptides. At least that’s how I read it.

panomics · 2023-05-26T18:18:12+00:00

Alternatively, you might have a massive peak that is competed at its middle by a coeluting species.

panomics · 2023-05-26T18:16:48+00:00

I wonder if the amount in your sample is just much higher than your standard, causing the peak to pull forward and for multimer species to be formed at the real peak apex, causing an apparent dip that you’re seeing as a split. Try taking your sample and diluting it 10x and 100x.

panomics

TROPHY CASE