Quantitative determination of ochratoxin A by liquid chromatography/electrospray tandem mass spectrometry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mass spectrometry of ochratoxin A (OTA) and B (OTB) under electrospray ionization (ESI) and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI) was studied. ESI offers higher sensitivities and less fragmentation than APCI. A sensitive LC/MS/MS method for the determination of ochratoxin A (OTA) in human plasma samples was developed. The absolute minimum detection limit was around 10-20 pg per injection, corresponding to 0.5 ppb in an injection equivalent to 20-40microg of human plasma. Ochratoxin B (OTB) was used as an internal standard and its absence in real-life samples was carefully checked before samples were spiked with the internal standard. It was found that these two ochratoxins are susceptible to sodium adduct formation. Fragment ions from the [M + H](+) and [M + Na](+) ions of both OTA and OTB were monitored in the multiple reaction monitoring mode. Three quantitative approaches, standard addition method, internal standard method (using ochratoxin B as an internal standard) and external standard method, were compared in the analysis of human blood plasma. Results from the mass spectrometric method were comparable to those from a conventional LC/fluorescence method. The LC/MS/MS method was also applied to the analysis of contaminated coffee 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it