Determination of Malachite Green and Leucomalachite Green in a Variety of Aquacultured Products by Liquid Chromatography with Tandem Mass Spectrometry Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) method was developed for determining the residues of malachite green (MG) and leucomalachite green (LMG) in a number of aquatic species. MG and its metabolite were extracted from homogenized tissues with a perchloric acid-acetonitrile solution; the extract was centrifuged; and an aliquot was taken, concentrated, and passed through a chemically bonded octadecyl C18 solid-phase extraction column. The compounds of interest were eluted with acetonitrile, and the eluate was evaporated to dryness. The residue was dissolved in acetonitrile and diluted with water in preparation for analysis by LC/MS/MS. MG and its metabolite were determined by reversed-phase LC using a Luna C18 column with an ammonium hydroxide-formic acid buffer in acetonitrile gradient and MS/MS detection using multiple reaction monitoring. Calibration curves were linear for all analyses between 5 and 500 pg injected for both analytes, with recoveries ranging from 81% for LMG to 98% for MG in salmon spiked at the 1 ng/g level. Detection limits of 0.1 ng/g for both MG and LMG were easily obtainable using the recommended method. The operational errors, interferences, and recoveries for spiked samples compared favorably with those obtained by established methodology. The recommended method is simple, rapid, and specific for monitoring residues of MG and LMG in a number of aquatic species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".