MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006087781 · doi:10.1002/jms.1742

A novel liquid–liquid extraction and stable isotope dilution NCI‐GC‐MS method for quantitation of agmatine in postmortem brain cortex

2010· article· en· W2006087781 on OpenAlexafffund
Gary Gang Chen, Gustavo Turecki, Orval Mamer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mass Spectrometry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPolyamine Metabolism and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyIsotope dilutionAgmatineExtraction (chemistry)Gas chromatography–mass spectrometryLiquid–liquid extractionMass spectrometryBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The group of biologically important amines includes putrescine, spermidine and spermine, as well as agmatine, which is a guanidino-amine. There is considerable evidence supporting a role of these amines in the etiology and pathology of mental disorders. We have previously developed a quantitative GC-MS method for simultaneous measurement of three major polyamines to support our studies linking polyamines to mental disorders. However, a unique GC-MS method is required for agmatine. To efficiently extract agmatine from postmortem brain tissues, we developed an isopropanol based liquid-liquid extraction protocol using potassium carbonate as a salting-out agent which showed a much greater recovery than n-butanol used in earlier methods. The GC-MS analysis employed hexafluoroacetylacetone as derivatization reagent and was carried out using negative chemical ionization with total ion and selected ion monitoring. (15)N(4)-agmatine was synthesized from (15)N(4)-L-arginine and used as internal standard in a conventional stable isotope dilution assay. This method accurately measures the level of agmatine from very small quantities (10-20 mg) of postmortem brain tissue, with a quantitation limit down to 1 ng/g of wet tissue. The limit of detection is 0.01 ng/g of wet tissue.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mass SpectrometrySame topicPolyamine Metabolism and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207