by
lmh » Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:59 pm
This isn't the answer you want, but I'm writing it because I had someone recently ask for the same thing.
Even if there is a technical solution out there that will do this, you almost certainly do not want it! The problem is that every library search on every peak will produce multiple lines of results (there will be multiple hits in the NIST library). Some will be good, some will be certain rubbish. At the very least, you will need to review how good the fit is - the best match will, in some cases, be utterly useless, in others it will be spot on, and in others it will be a close relative, but the third match will be what you're looking for. How can the automated system present the data in such a way that a human can see the top X hits and how good they are, without the result becoming a huge unwieldy morass? It's not a simple one-peak, one-result spreadsheet (at least, if it is presented that way, it's a danger to reality!).
You're absolutely right, the time taken to search each peak individually will be prohibitive, but the time taken to review each peak individually after making the search is far worse, and it's necessary.
I'm convinced that at the moment, there are only two reasonable requests a client can make of an analyst: (1) measure the following range of named chemicals, or (2) look for a particular identifiable needle in my haystack (an active fraction, a difference between two treatments), and identify what this needle is. Anyone who wants you to identify every unknown in a complex sample should expect that it will take a very long time and cost a fortune, and probably generate a data-set that is too large for them to review.