MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034361672 · doi:10.1039/b212545e

A comparison of alkyl derivatization methods for speciation of mercury based on solid phase microextraction gas chromatography with furnace atomization plasma emission spectrometry detection

2003· article· en· W2034361672 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Patrícia Grinberg, Reinaldo Campos‐Vargas, Zoltán Mester, Ralph E. Sturgeon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAnalytical chemistry methods development
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council CanadaFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e Inovação do Espírito Santo
KeywordsSolid-phase microextractionChemistryChromatographyDetection limitMercury (programming language)DerivatizationGas chromatographyCertified reference materialsMass spectrometryGas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several derivatizing agents were evaluated for use in speciating mercury in biological samples using solid phase microextraction in conjunction with tandem gas chromatography-furnace atomization plasma emission spectrometry (SPME-GC-FAPES). Following digestion with methanolic potassium hydroxide, the pH of the samples was adjusted and NaCl added when necessary. The mercury species were then derivatized with sodium tetraphenylborate or sodium tetrapropylborate and extracted by SPME using a 100 µm PDMS coated fiber. The derivatized species were then separated by GC and detected by FAPES. All experimental parameters were optimized for best separation and analytical response. Propylation proved to be more sensitive, robust and faster than ethylation or phenylation, leading to procedural detection limits of 0.55 ng g−1 for methylmercury, 0.34 ng g−1 for ethylmercury and 0.23 ng g−1 for inorganic mercury. An intra-day and intra-fiber precision of typically 2.2% was achieved whereas long-term (4 months) and inter-fiber reproducibility precision was typically 4.4%. The accuracy of the method was validated by the analysis of Certified Reference Materials (DORM-2, DOLT-2 and TORT-2) from the National Research Council of Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations53
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Analytical Atomic SpectrometrySame topicAnalytical chemistry methods developmentFrench-language works237,207