Applied Magnetic Resonance

, Volume 46, Issue 7, pp 723–729 | Cite as

Improved Stability and Spectral Quality in Ex Situ Dissolution DNP Using an Improved Transfer Device

  • Sotirios Katsikis
  • Ildefonso Marin-Montesinos
  • Miquel Pons
  • Christian Ludwig
  • Ulrich L. Günther


Dissolution dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP) has become one of the predominant implementations for DNP. However, the technical implementation of transferring the sample from the polarizer to the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) system remains challenging. There is a need for additional technical optimizations in order to use dissolution DNP for biochemical and chemical applications. Here we show how a newly designed pressure dissolution kit considerably improves spectral quality and stability by enabling highly reliable and fast sample transfer to the NMR system.


Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectrum Dynamic Nuclear Polarization Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Measurement Sample Transfer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported by the EC within the MarieCurie ITN network (METAFLUX, FP7-PEOPLE-2010-ITN-264780). We also thank Oxford Instruments for hosting SK as a student within the METAFLUX project. We are greatly indebted to Bruker for the loan of a 500-MHz parallel receiver console. IMM was supported by the Spanish and Catalan governments (contracts Juan de la Cierva and Beatriu de Pinos) and BioNMR contract 261863 to use the polarizer in Birmingham. We are also grateful to Walter Köckenberger for sharing design elements of Senczenko’s implementation of a dissolution device and we thank Leonhard Günther and the King Edwards School Birmingham for helping with an initial design of a flow detector.

Supplementary material

723_2015_680_MOESM1_ESM.docx (11.3 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 11531 kb)


  1. 1.
    J.H. Ardenkjaer-Larsen, B. Fridlund, A. Gram, G. Hansson, L. Hansson, M.H. Lerche, R. Servin, M. Thaning, K. Golman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 10158 (2003)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Bowen, C. Hilty, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 12, 5766 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    W. Senczenko, Ph. D. Thesis, University of Nottingham, Dissolution Dynamic Nuclear Polarisation NMR Spectroscopy In Conjunction With Fast Sample Injection, Nottingham, 2012Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I.J. Day, J.C. Mitchell, M.J. Snowden, A.L. Davis, J. Magn. Reson. 187, 216 (2007)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Kaptein, K. Dijkstra, C.E. Tarr, J. Magn. Reson. 24, 295 (1976)ADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    T.B. Rodrigues, E.M. Serrao, B.W. Kennedy, D.E. Hu, M.I. Kettunen, K.M. Brindle, Nat. Med. 20, 93 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    C. Ludwig, I. Marin-Montesinos, M.G. Saunders, U.L. Günther, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 2508 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sotirios Katsikis
    • 1
  • Ildefonso Marin-Montesinos
    • 2
  • Miquel Pons
    • 2
  • Christian Ludwig
    • 1
  • Ulrich L. Günther
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Cancer SciencesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  2. 2.Biomolecular NMR Laboratory, Organic Chemistry DepartmentUniversity of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations