MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030829945 · doi:10.3390/chromatography1010009

Micellar Electrokinetic Chromatography with Laser-Induced Fluorescence Detection for Separation of Red and Yellow Historical Dyes

2013· article· en· W2030829945 on OpenAlexafffund
Shokoufeh Ahmadi, Douglas B. Craig, Douglas M. Goltz

Bibliographic record

VenueChromatography · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyMicellar electrokinetic chromatographyAnthraquinoneMyricetinAlizarinKaempferolDetection limitCapillary electrophoresisSodium dodecyl sulfateFluorescenceALIZARIN REDAcetonitrileQuercetinNuclear chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the separation parameters in micellar electrokinetic chromatography (MEKC)-laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) were optimized for the separation of red and yellow historical dyes in 20 mM borate buffer with 20 mM sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS). Separation conditions were optimized by changing pH, organic modifier (methanol and acetonitrile) concentrations and applied voltage. The mixtures of dyes used in this study included four anthraquinone dyes (alizarin, purpurin, emodin and carmine) and six flavonoid dyes (luteolin, apigenin, kaempferol, quercetin, morin and myricetin). For this work, dyes were introduced electro-kinetically (10 kV for 5 s) into a 50 cm capillary (10 µm id) and separated using a running potential of 18, 20, 22 and 25 kV. Absolute limits of detection for most of these dyes was less than 1 pg. For dyes such as alizarin, improved detection limits were achieved at pH = 9.24; however dyes such as purpurin had significantly improved detection limits at pH = 8.0. The successful extraction and identification of a number of dyes in plants and textiles samples is also described.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChromatographySame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207