MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Separation and determination of the macrolide antibiotics (erythromycin, spiramycin and oleandomycin) by capillary electrophoresis coupled with fast reductive voltammetric detection

2000· article· en· W2052872395 on OpenAlexaff
Jinkui Zhou, Yue Chen, R. M. Cassidy

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiramycinOleandomycinCapillary electrophoresisErythromycinMacrolide AntibioticsChromatographyChemistryAntibioticsTylosinBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Separation and determination of erythromycin, spiramycin and oleandomycin by capillary zone electrophoresis coupled with fast reductive voltammetric detection using an Hg-film electrode was investigated in a simple aqueous phosphate buffer system. The influence of pH, concentration of phosphate, applied voltage, capillary length and dimension on the separation was examined and optimized. The entire separation of erythromycin, spiramycin, and oleandomycin was achieved in a 0.2 mol/L phosphate buffer system without organic modifiers. The electrochemical detection parameters, such as electrode material, applied waveform, scan rate, preconcentration potentials and preconcentration times, were investigated and discussed. This approach provides high separation efficiency and high sensitivity for all compounds, with detection limits (3 x peak-to-peak baseline noise) of 7.5 x 10(-8) mol/L for spiramycin, and 3 x 10(-7) mol/ L for erythromycin and oleandomycin. The calibration plot of peak areas for each separated peak vs. concentration of analyte was found to be linear over three orders of magnitude.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations19
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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