The tunes are all acceptable. The total abundances and relative abundances are within the normal ranges.
The polarity of Q1 was changed between the two tunes from 2015 and the new ones.
What specifically do you think is less sensitive?
Tahnks so much for your reply
The abundance(number of ion count) for extraction source was not what
was suppose to be.
For comparison The previous ion count for mass 69 was 21772768.0 where
as now it become 2645672.
So that is what I mean that there is an indication of sensitivity loss
on analysis using extraction source.
With many thanks & best regards
Technical service Manager
JIJE LaboGlass Pvt. Ltd. Company
Phone: +251-(0) 113720702, 113720701
Fax: +251-(0) 113720703
Mobile: +251-(0) 911412264
Yitna, The raw height counts in the tune report are not an indication of the system sensitivity as the multiplier is adjusted during tune. The range is dependent on the instrument, source type, detector type, and software version. The lowest Electron Multiplier voltage that will begin function when the system is new, or the EM is new, will often create very high tune abundance numbers.
For the extractor source:
- M/z 69 is typically around an abundance of 1.2M on MS1 and 2.7M on MS2. Anything less than 200K would be alarming.
- M/z 264 is typically around an abundance of 300K on MS1 and 625K on MS2. Anything less than 50K would be alarming.
- M/z 502 is typically around an abundance of 75K on MS1 and 60K on MS2. Anything less than 5K would be alarming.
Your current tunes look great to me. Use gain in your methods, as described in these documents, and your sample responses will be stable as the tunes change with use, 'dirtiness', and system age.