Two Novel Thio-Arsenosugars in Scallops Identified with HPLC–ICPMS and HPLC–ESMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental Context . A new group of arsenic compounds, namely thio-arsenosugars, has recently been discovered in some marine samples, including seafood products. We do not yet understand how these arsenic compounds are produced by living organisms, nor do we know their implications for human health. Their unusual chromatographic properties are the reason that they are difficult to detect by existing methods. We present a new method for finding these thio-arsenosugars, and we also report two new thio-arsenosugars. Abstract. Two new thio-arsenosugars were identified in aqueous and methanol extracts from the gonad and the muscle of the great scallop by using high-performance liquid chromatography–inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (HPLC–ICPMS) and HPLC–electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ESMS). The gonad of the scallops contained thio-arsenosugar–sulfonate [0.067 mg (As) kg-1; dry mass ± 3.7%] and thio-arsenosugar–sulfate [0.267 mg (As) kg-1; dry mass ± 1.2%]. The muscle also contained both thio-arsenosugar–sulfonate [0.030 mg (As) kg-1; dry mass ± 2.6%] and thio-arsenosugar–sulfate [0.200 mg (As) kg-1; dry mass ± 2.6%]. Methanol increased the extraction efficiency threefold for the two thio-arsenosugars as compared to water. Fresh and freeze-dried samples from both parts of the scallop showed no significant difference with respect to the concentration of the two thio-arsenosugars. In order to confirm the presence of the thio-arsenosugars, a new method for their determination with HPLC–ESMS was developed. Under optimized conditions [Hamilton PRP-X100; 150 by 1.0 mm; 20 mM NH4HCO3 with 55% (v/v) methanol at pH 10.3] we succeeded in determining the pseudomolecular ions of thio-arsenosugar–glycerol, thio-arsenosugar–phosphate, thio-arsenosugar–sulfonate, and thio-arsenosugar–sulfate at concentrations less than 5 µg (As) dm-3 in standard solutions and real samples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".