Determination of alkanolamines in cattails ( <i>Typha latifolia</i> ) utilizing electrospray ionization with selected reaction monitoring and ion‐exchange chromatography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selected reaction monitoring (SRM) with electrospray ionization was used as a specific detection technique for the analysis of alkanolamines in plant tissue extracts. Ion-exchange chromatography was used as the method of separation. Quantification was based on monitoring the loss of either H2O or 2(H2O) from the protonated molecule [M+H]+. The method provided increased selectivity for all analytes and better detection limits for three of the six analytes investigated compared with an earlier method using selected ion monitoring with liquid chromatography. Instrumental detection limits ranged from 6-300 pg injected for monoethanolamine (MEA), monoisopropanolamine (MIPA), diethanolamine (DEA), methyldiethanolamine (MDEA), diisopropanolamine (DIPA), and triethanolamine (TEA). Method robustness and selectivity were demonstrated by the determination of DIPA and a known transformation product MIPA in over 35 plant extract samples derived from a laboratory study of plant uptake mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".