Headspace versus Direct Immersion Solid Phase Microextraction in Complex Matrixes: Investigation of Analyte Behavior in Multicomponent Mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work aims to investigate the behavior of analytes in complex mixtures and matrixes with the use of solid-phase microextraction (SPME). Various factors that influence analyte uptake such as coating chemistry, extraction mode, the physicochemical properties of analytes, and matrix complexity were considered. At first, an aqueous system containing analytes bearing different hydrophobicities, molecular weights, and chemical functionalities was investigated by using commercially available liquid and solid porous coatings. The differences in the mass transfer mechanisms resulted in a more pronounced occurrence of coating saturation in headspace mode. Contrariwise, direct immersion extraction minimizes the occurrence of artifacts related to coating saturation and provides enhanced extraction of polar compounds. In addition, matrix-compatible PDMS-modified solid coatings, characterized by a new morphology that avoids coating fouling, were compared to their nonmodified analogues. The obtained results indicate that PDMS-modified coatings reduce artifacts associated with coating saturation, even in headspace mode. This factor, coupled to their matrix compatibility, make the use of direct SPME very practical as a quantification approach and the best choice for metabolomics studies where wide coverage is intended. To further understand the influence on analyte uptake on a system where additional interactions occur due to matrix components, ex vivo and in vivo sampling conditions were simulated using a starch matrix model, with the aim of mimicking plant-derived materials. Our results corroborate the fact that matrix handling can affect analyte/matrix equilibria, with consequent release of high concentrations of previously bound hydrophobic compounds, potentially leading to coating saturation. Direct immersion SPME limited the occurrence of the artifacts, which confirms the suitability of SPME for in vivo applications. These findings shed light into the implementation of in vivo SPME strategies in quantitative metabolomics studies of complex plant-based systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".