Stable chlorine isotope analysis of chlorinated acetic acids using gas chromatography/quadrupole mass spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: The environmental occurrence of chlorinated acetic acids (CAAs) has been extensively studied, but the sources and transport are still not yet fully understood. A promising approach for source apportionment and process studies is the isotopic characterization of target compounds. We present the first on-line stable chlorine isotope analysis of CAAs by use of gas chromatography/quadrupole mass spectrometry (GC/qMS). METHODS: Following approved procedures for concentration analysis, CAAs extracted into MTBE were methylated to GC-amenable methyl esters (mCAAs). These mCAAs were then analyzed by GC/qMS for their stable chlorine isotope composition using a sample/standard-bracketing approach (CAA standards in the range δ(37) Cl -6.3 to -0.2 ‰, Standard Mean Ocean Chloride). RESULTS: Cross-calibration of the herein presented method with off-line reference methods (thermal ionization and continuous-flow GC isotope ratio mass spectrometry; TI-MS and CF-GC/IRMS, respectively) shows good agreement between the methods (regression slope for GC/qMS vs reference method data sets: 0.92 ± 0.29). Sample amounts as small as 10 pmol Cl can herewith be analyzed with a precision of 0.1 to 0.4 ‰. CONCLUSIONS: This method should be useful for environmental studies of CAAs at ambient concentrations in precipitations (<0.06 to 100 nmol L(-1) ), surface waters (<0.2 to 5 nmol L(-1) ) and soil (<0.6 to 2000 nmol kg(-1) dry soil) where conventional off-line methods cannot be applied.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".