MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W133206515 · doi:10.1093/jaoac/90.4.1011

Determination of Domoic Acid Toxins in Shellfish by Biosense ASP ELISAA Direct Competitive Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay: Collaborative Study

2007· article· en· W133206515 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hans Kleivdal, Sven-Inge Kristiansen, Mona V. Nilsen, Anders Goks�yr, Lyn Briggs, Patrick T. Holland, Paul McNabb, A Aasheim, Tore Aune, Stephen S. Bates, Charles D. Bavington, David A. Caron, Gregory J. Doucette, Ana Gago-Martı́nez, S Gallacer, M.C. Grieve, Stephen M. Haley, Peter Hughes, C Léger, C Macaillou-Le Baut, C Myrland, Tracey Neil, Liem H. Nguyen, Kathryn Ross, Ingunn A. Samdal, Rebecca A. Schaffner, Emma L. Smith, Silvio Sosa, N. R. Towers, Aurelia Tubaro, E. Vaquero, Mike Wells, Michael T. Werner, P.A. White

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of AOAC International · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Toxins and Detection Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Ocean ServiceInstitut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la MerAgResearchFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of Southern California
KeywordsDomoic acidShellfishMusselChromatographyChemistryContaminationBiologyFisheryToxinAquatic animalFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A collaborative study was conducted on the Biosense amnesic shellfish poisoning (ASP) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the determination of domoic acid (DA) toxins in shellfish in order to obtain interlaboratory validation data for the method. In addition, a method comparison study was performed to evaluate the ASP ELISA as an alternative to the current liquid chromatography (LC) reference method for DA determination. The study material comprised 16 shellfish samples, including blue mussels, Pacific oysters, and king scallops, spiked with contaminated mussel homogenates to contain 0.1-20 mg DA/kg shellfish flesh. The shellfish samples were extracted with 50% aqueous methanol, and the supernatants were directly analyzed. Sixteen participating laboratories in 10 countries reported data from the ASP ELISA, and 4 of these laboratories also reported data from instrumental LC analysis. The participating laboratories achieved interlaboratory precision estimates for the 8 Youden paired shellfish samples in the range of 10-20% for RSD(r) (mean 14.8 +/- 4%), and 13-29% for RSDR (mean 22.7 +/- 6%). The precision estimates for the ELISA data did not show a strong dependence on the DA concentration in the study samples, and the overall precision achieved was within the acceptable range of the Horwitz guideline with HorRat values ranging from 1.1 to 2.4 (mean HorRat 1.7 +/- 0.5). The analysis of shellfish samples spiked with certified reference material (CRM)-ASP-MUS-b gave recoveries in the range of 88-122%, with an average recovery of 104 +/- 10%. The estimate on method accuracy was supported by a correlation slope of 1.015 (R2 = 0.992) for the determined versus the expected DA values. Furthermore, the correlation of the ASP ELISA results with those for the instrumental LC analyses of the same sample extracts gave a correlation slope of 1.29 (R2 = 0.984). This indicates some overestimation of DA levels in shellfish by the ELISA, but it is also a result of apparent low recoveries for the LC methods. This interlaboratory study demonstrates that the ASP ELISA is suitable for the routine determination and monitoring of DA toxins in shellfish, and that it offers a rapid and cost-effective methodology with high sample throughput.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AOAC InternationalSame topicMarine Toxins and Detection MethodsFrench-language works237,207