High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Method for Determination of Biogenic Amines in Feedstuffs, Complete Feeds, and Animal Tissues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous methods to analyze biogenic amines in biological materials have been described. A versatile and rapid methodology to analyze these compounds in feedstuffs, complete feeds, and animal tissues, however, has not been reported. The current method was developed to address this need. Biogenic amines in feedstuffs, complete animal feeds, and animal tissues were extracted with 10% trichloroacetic acid, reacted with O-phthaladehyde using high-performance liquid chromatographic employing a cation exchange column. Detection limits were 50 pmol/mL for tyramine, histamine, putrescine, and spermine; 40 pmol/mL for cadaverine; and 25 pmol/mL for spermidine. Extraction efficiency of biogenic amines in feedstuffs, duodenum, liver, ileum + jejunum, and whole shrimp and shrimp hepatopancreas ranged between 99-105, 93-135, 80-85, 65-102, 88-98, and 88-97%, respectively. It can be concluded that the current method can be applied to individual feedstuffs, complete feeds, and animal tissues for the rapid and accurate determination of concentration of biogenic amines.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
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".