MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119933588 · doi:10.1194/jlr.d300009-jlr200

Quantitative analysis of fatty acid precursors in marine samples

2003· article· en· W2119933588 on OpenAlexafffund
Suzanne M. Budge, Sara J. Iverson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lipid Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFatty acidChemistryBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To apply fatty acid analyses to the study of foraging ecology and diet determination, all compounds that may be deposited as fatty acids in a predator must be quantified in the prey. These compounds include the usual fatty acids in acyl lipids, but also the alcohols of wax esters and the vinyl ethers of plasmalogens. In routine fatty acid analysis, samples are extracted and transesterified (methylated), resulting in the formation of fatty acid methyl esters (FAMEs); however, fatty alcohols and dimethylacetals (DMAs) are also generated if wax esters or plasmalogens are present. Here, we present a new method using a modified Jones' reagent to oxidize these alcohols and DMAs to free fatty acids (FFAs). These FFAs are then easily methylated and quantitatively recombined with FAMEs from the same sample. This generates a fatty acid signature of prey that is equivalent to that which the predator has available for deposition upon digestion of that prey. This method is validated with alcohol and DMA standards. Its application to typical marine samples is also presented, demonstrating the change in effective fatty acid signature after inclusion of fatty acids derived from wax esters and plasmalogens.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lipid ResearchSame topicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture StudiesFrench-language works237,207