Question:
What converter did you use?
Option 1: Agilent MassHunter
votes: 1
Option 2: Waters Databridge
votes: 7
Option 3: Thermo - native converter
votes: 0
Option 4: msConvert
votes: 2
Option 5: CompassXport
votes: 1
Option 6: Trapper
votes: 0
Option 7: mzWiff
votes: 0
Option 8: proteoWizard
votes: 3
Option 9: Other - post to forum
votes: 0
I have noticed that a lot of people have been getting the mz sort violation error while processing their data. In an effort to know where this is coming from I've created a poll. If people who have had this problem could vote and let us know where and how they converted. Maybe it's a certain instrument/parameter/converter or totally random?
Paul
Hi,
We've now had the problem as well, on a Waters GC/MS.
The conversion included some Xcalibur peak picking, so that could be a culprit as well.
And the violating peak has an incredibly low intensity, so low it looks like a bug.
Yours,
Steffen
[305,] 322.72345 2.577887e-08
[306,] 323.53979 1.403037e-05
[307,] 324.79047 5.404045e+02
[308,] 178.08965 2.829593e-31 <--------
[309,] 326.80518 1.564260e+03
[310,] 327.61475 3.135520e-19
That's the mzXML:
<msRun scanCount="7098" startTime="PT2.0467S" endTime="PT1450.14S">
<parentFile fileName="file://F://XXX.raw"
fileType="RAWData"/>
<dataProcessing centroided="1">
<software type="conversion" name="ProteoWizard" version="2.2.3052"/>
<processingOperation name="Conversion to mzML"/>
<comment>Thermo/Xcalibur peak picking</comment>
</dataProcessing>
<dataProcessing>
<software type="conversion" name="ProteoWizard" version="2.2.3052"/>
<processingOperation name="Conversion to mzML"/>
</dataProcessing>
...
<scan num="419"
scanType="FULL"
centroided="1"
msLevel="1"
peaksCount="438"
polarity="+"
retentionTime="PT87.3367S"
lowMz="40.262493133545"
highMz="449.795928955078"
basePeakMz="77.974868774414"
basePeakIntensity="45256.39453125"
totIonCurrent="3.933262835838e05">
ProteoWizard 3.0.3700 on Q-Exactive raw data, in Peak Picking (Prefer Vendor) mode, conversion to 64 bit mzML. The problem appears to be a mass stick which occurs twice. I tried with and without "remove zero samples" (since the offending data point was a zero-intensity point).