Within-Day Reproducibility of an HPLC−MS-Based Method for Metabonomic Analysis: Application to Human Urine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-evidently, research in areas supporting "systems biology" such as genomics, proteomics, and metabonomics are critically dependent on the generation of sound analytical data. Metabolic phenotyping using LC-MS-based methods is currently at a relatively early stage of development, and approaches to ensure data quality are still developing. As part of studies on the application of LC-MS in metabonomics, the within-day reproducibility of LC-MS, with both positive and negative electrospray ionization (ESI), has been investigated using a standard "quality control" (QC) sample. The results showed that the first few injections on the system were not representative, and should be discarded, and that reproducibility was critically dependent on signal intensity. On the basis of these findings, an analytical protocol for the metabonomic analysis of human urine has been developed with proposed acceptance criteria based on a step-by-step assessment of the data. Short-term sample stability for human urine was also assessed. Samples were stable for at least 20 h at 4 degrees C in the autosampler while queuing for analysis. Samples stored at either -20 or -80 degrees C for up to 1 month were indistinguishable on subsequent LC-MS analysis. Overall, by careful monitoring of the QC data, it is possible to demonstrate that the "within-day" reproducibility of LC-MS is sufficient to ensure data quality in global metabolic profiling applications.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".