MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166038376 · doi:10.1002/rcm.4845

The reactions of a series of terpenoids with H<sub>3</sub>O<sup>+</sup>, NO<sup>+</sup> and O studied using selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry

2010· article· en· W2166038376 on OpenAlexaff
Gianluca Amadei, Brian Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryAdductMass spectrometryFragmentation (computing)TerpenoidPolyatomic ionHydrideIonAlkylTerpeneMass spectrumAnalytical Chemistry (journal)StereochemistryOrganic chemistryChromatographyHydrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reactions of H(3) O(+) , NO(+) and O 2+ with twelve terpenoids and one terpene, all of which occur naturally in plants and which possess important smell and flavourant properties, were characterized using Selected Ion Flow Tube Mass Spectrometry (SIFT-MS). The H(3) O(+) reactions resulted primarily in the formation of the proton transfer product and occasionally in a water elimination product. The NO(+) reactions instead generated the charge transfer product or NO(+) adducts, and occasionally alkyl fragments, or resulted in hydride abstraction. Reaction with O 2+ caused a higher fragmentation of the terpenoids with the molecular ion being the minor product of most reactions. Identification and quantification of each compound in complex mixtures are probably possible in most cases using the H(3) O(+) and/or NO(+) precursors while O 2+ may be useful for isomer discrimination. Our data suggests that SIFT-MS may be a useful tool for the rapid analysis of these compounds in plants and derived foodstuffs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRapid Communications in Mass SpectrometrySame topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207