BioNMR
NMR aggregator & online community since 2003
BioNMR    
Learn or help to learn NMR - get free NMR books!
 

Go Back   BioNMR > NMR community > News from NMR blogs
Advanced Search



Jobs Groups Conferences Literature Pulse sequences Software forums Programs Sample preps Web resources BioNMR issues


Webservers
NMR processing:
MDD
NMR assignment:
Backbone:
Autoassign
MARS
UNIO Match
PINE
Side-chains:
UNIO ATNOS-Ascan
NOEs:
UNIO ATNOS-Candid
UNIO Candid
ASDP
Structure from NMR restraints:
Ab initio:
GeNMR
Cyana
XPLOR-NIH
ASDP
UNIO ATNOS-Candid
UNIO Candid
Fragment-based:
BMRB CS-Rosetta
Rosetta-NMR (Robetta)
Template-based:
GeNMR
I-TASSER
Refinement:
Amber
Structure from chemical shifts:
Fragment-based:
WeNMR CS-Rosetta
BMRB CS-Rosetta
Homology-based:
CS23D
Simshift
Torsion angles from chemical shifts:
Preditor
TALOS
Promega- Proline
Secondary structure from chemical shifts:
CSI (via RCI server)
TALOS
MICS caps, β-turns
d2D
PECAN
Flexibility from chemical shifts:
RCI
Interactions from chemical shifts:
HADDOCK
Chemical shifts re-referencing:
Shiftcor
UNIO Shiftinspector
LACS
CheckShift
RefDB
NMR model quality:
NOEs, other restraints:
PROSESS
PSVS
RPF scores
iCing
Chemical shifts:
PROSESS
CheShift2
Vasco
iCing
RDCs:
DC
Anisofit
Pseudocontact shifts:
Anisofit
Protein geomtery:
Resolution-by-Proxy
PROSESS
What-If
iCing
PSVS
MolProbity
SAVES2 or SAVES4
Vadar
Prosa
ProQ
MetaMQAPII
PSQS
Eval123D
STAN
Ramachandran Plot
Rampage
ERRAT
Verify_3D
Harmony
Quality Control Check
NMR spectrum prediction:
FANDAS
MestReS
V-NMR
Flexibility from structure:
Backbone S2
Methyl S2
B-factor
Molecular dynamics:
Gromacs
Amber
Antechamber
Chemical shifts prediction:
From structure:
Shiftx2
Sparta+
Camshift
CH3shift- Methyl
ArShift- Aromatic
ShiftS
Proshift
PPM
CheShift-2- Cα
From sequence:
Shifty
Camcoil
Poulsen_rc_CS
Disordered proteins:
MAXOCC
Format conversion & validation:
CCPN
From NMR-STAR 3.1
Validate NMR-STAR 3.1
NMR sample preparation:
Protein disorder:
DisMeta
Protein solubility:
camLILA
ccSOL
Camfold
camGroEL
Zyggregator
Isotope labeling:
UPLABEL
Solid-state NMR:
sedNMR


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 09-13-2017, 03:58 AM
nmrlearner's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 17,704
Points: 193,617, Level: 100
Points: 193,617, Level: 100 Points: 193,617, Level: 100 Points: 193,617, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 50.7%
Activity: 50.7% Activity: 50.7% Activity: 50.7%
Last Achievements
Award-Showcase
NMR Credits: 0
NMR Points: 193,617
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default Optimizing the Signal-to-Noise-Ratio with Spin-Noise Probe Tuning

Optimizing the Signal-to-Noise-Ratio with Spin-Noise Probe Tuning

We have all been taught to tune our NMR probes to maximize the pulse power delivered to our sample (or minimize the reflected power back to the amplifier). This prevents damage to the amplifiers and minimizes the duration of 90° pulses at fixed power levels. This is typically done with the spectrometer hardware (eg, "atmm" or "wobb" on a Bruker spectrometer), with a sweep generator and oscilloscope or a dedicated tuning device. Tuning a probe in this way optimizes the transmission of rf to the sample, however, the NMR probe must also detect signals from the sample to be amplified and sent to the receiver. The "receive" function uses a different electronic path compared to the "transmit" function. Since the electronic paths for the "transmit" and "receive" functions are completely different, they are expected to have different tuning characteristics. A probe optimized to transmit rf to the sample is not necessarily optimized to receive the rf NMR signal from the sample. As a result, one may not be getting the optimum signal-to-noise-ratio with a probe tuned and matched in the conventional manner. The question then arises as to how can we tune an NMR probe optimized to detect and receive the NMR signals from the sample. This can be done by measuring a spin noise spectrum of the sample - using no rf pulses whatsoever. It has been shown1 that a probe is optimized to detect and receive the NMR signals when one observes an inverted spin noise NMR signal from the sample. Since the spin noise signal is measured without any pulses from the "transmit" function of the spectrometer, it depends only on the electronic path of the "receive" function. To tune a probe for optimum "receive" function, one must adjust the tuning frequency and matching of the probe followed by the measurement of a spin noise spectrum until an inverted spin noise signal is observed. The figure below illustrates an example of this using a 2 mM sucrose solution in 90% H2O/10% D2O.
The proton channel of a 600 MHz cryoprobe on a Bruker AVANCE III HD NMR spectrometer was tuned and matched at 10 different frequencies using the "atmm" function of the spectrometer. The tuning offset frequencies were measured using the "wobb" display of the spectrometer. For each tuning offset frequency, a spin noise spectrum of water was measured using 64 power spectra collected in a a pseudo 2D scheme and summed to produce the spin noise spectrum displayed. The spin noise spectrum for the probe optimized for the "transmit" function is highlighted in pink and the spin noise spectrum for the probe optimized for the "receive" function is highlighted in yellow. For every tuning offset frequency, the 90° pulse was measured with the "pulsecal" routine of the spectrometer which uses this method. As expected, the minimum 90° pulse is obtained for the probe tuned to optimize the "transmit" function. With all pulses optimized, a 1H spectrum of the sample for each tuning offset frequency was measured using excitation sculpting as a means of solvent suppression (pulprog= zgespg). The sucrose signal at ~ 3.9 ppm is displayed in the figure. The maximum signal intensity (highlighted in yellow) is obtained at a tuning offset frequency of -695 kHz corresponding closely to where the spin noise spectrum is inverted (-895 kHz). The noise levels in the spectra were found to vary somewhat at higher tuning offset frequencies. As a result, the maximum signal-to-noise-ratio (highlighted in yellow) was observed at a tuning offset frequency of -488 kHz. This represents a 21% improvement in the signal-to-noise-ratio compared to that observed for a probe tuned in the conventional manner (highlighted in pink). The degree of solvent suppression using excitation sculpting was also found to deteriorate at higher tuning offset frequencies. In conclusion, one can obtain spectra with higher signal-to-noise-ratios by using a tuning offset frequency other than zero. One expects the specific optimum tuning offset frequency to be probe, instrument and sample dependent. This phenomenon is described much more elegantly in the reference below.

1. M. Nausner, J. Schlagnitweit, V. Smrecki, X. Yang, A. Jerschow, N. Müller. J. Mag. Res. 198, 73 (2009).


Source: University of Ottawa NMR Facility Blog
Reply With Quote


Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

Reply
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[U. of Ottawa NMR Facility Blog] Receiver Gain and Signal-to-Noise Ratio
Receiver Gain and Signal-to-Noise Ratio The signal-to-noise ratio in an NMR spectrum can be affected drastically the choice of the receiver gain setting, so care should be taken to set the receiver gain correctly for optimum results. At very low receiver gain settings, both the signal and the noise use only a fraction of the available digitization levels of the analog-to-digital concertor (ADC). As a result, the intensity of each point in the FID is represented with only a few possible values and the FID is "choppy". This is analogous to a black and white photograph being represented...
nmrlearner News from NMR blogs 0 02-15-2013 04:27 AM
[U. of Ottawa NMR Facility Blog] NMR Tube Thickness and Signal-to-Noise-Ratio
NMR Tube Thickness and Signal-to-Noise-Ratio The amount of NMR signal is expected to be proportional to the amount of sample inside the coil of the NMR probe. As a result, the signal-to-noise ratio for samples run in NMR tubes with thick walls is expected to be lower than that for comparable samples run in NMR tubes with thinner walls due to a reduced filling factor of the NMR probe coil. I was curious to see how much of a difference in signal-to-noise ratio there would be. 0.68 mL of CDCl3 (99.8 % D) was put in 5 mm NMR tubes with wall thicknesses of 0.38 mm and 0.80 mm. The NMR...
nmrlearner News from NMR blogs 0 12-08-2012 02:48 AM
Low concentration of a Gd-chelate increases the signal-to-noise ratio in fast pulsing BEST experiments
Low concentration of a Gd-chelate increases the signal-to-noise ratio in fast pulsing BEST experiments Publication year: 2012 Source:Journal of Magnetic Resonance</br> Nathalie Sibille, Gaëtan Bellot, Jing Wang, Hélène Déméné</br> Despite numerous developments in the past few years that aim to increase the sensitivity of NMR multidimensional experiments, NMR spectroscopy still suffers from intrinsic low sensitivity. In this report, we show that the combination of two developments in the field, the Band-selective Excitation Short-Transient (BEST) experiment and the...
nmrlearner Journal club 0 08-08-2012 07:16 PM
[Question from NMRWiki Q&A forum] Pt 195 NMR Signal to Noise
Pt 195 NMR Signal to Noise I need help with parameters on a Varian system for Pt-195 NMR. I am having trouble with signal to noise. From what I've read the sensitivity should be better than carbon but I'm not seeing that at all. Any suggestions? Check if somebody has answered this question on NMRWiki QA forum
nmrlearner News from other NMR forums 0 05-04-2012 11:06 AM
Signal enhancement in protein NMR using the spin-noise tuning optimum
Signal enhancement in protein NMR using the spin-noise tuning optimum Abstract We have assessed the potential of an alternative probe tuning strategy based on the spin-noise response for application in common high-resolution multi-dimensional biomolecular NMR experiments with water signal suppression on aqueous and salty samples. The method requires the adjustment of the optimal tuning condition, which may be offset by several 100 kHz from the conventional tuning settings using the noise response of the water protons as an indicator. Although the radio frequency-pulse durations are...
nmrlearner Journal club 0 10-09-2010 03:03 AM
Signal enhancement in protein NMR using the spin-noise tuning optimum.
Signal enhancement in protein NMR using the spin-noise tuning optimum. Signal enhancement in protein NMR using the spin-noise tuning optimum. J Biomol NMR. 2010 Oct 6; Authors: Nausner M, Goger M, Bendet-Taicher E, Schlagnitweit J, Jerschow A, Müller N We have assessed the potential of an alternative probe tuning strategy based on the spin-noise response for application in common high-resolution multi-dimensional biomolecular NMR experiments with water signal suppression on aqueous and salty samples. The method requires the adjustment of the...
nmrlearner Journal club 0 10-07-2010 10:33 AM
[Stan NMR blog] Noise Figure and Equivalent Input Noise
Noise Figure and Equivalent Input Noise An educational article about the definitions of - and the relation between - the two concepts. More...
nmrlearner News from NMR blogs 0 08-21-2010 06:14 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



BioNMR advertisements to pay for website hosting and domain registration. Nobody does it for us.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright, BioNMR.com, 2003-2013
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:44 PM.


Map