MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2303032673 · doi:10.1194/jlr.m067199

In-depth sphingomyelin characterization using electron impact excitation of ions from organics and mass spectrometry

2016· article· en· W2303032673 on OpenAlexaffabout
Takashi Baba, J. Larry Campbell, J. C. Yves Le Blanc, Paul R.S. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lipid Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMass spectrometryIonChemistryElectron ionizationCharacterization (materials science)ExcitationSphingomyelinAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChromatographyMaterials sciencePhysicsIonizationNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electron impact excitation of ions from organics (EIEIO), also referred to as electron-induced dissociation, was applied to singly charged SM molecular species in the gas phase. Using ESI and a quadrupole TOF mass spectrometer equipped with an electron-ion reaction device, we found that SMs fragmented sufficiently to identify their lipid class, acyl group structure, and the location of double bond(s). Using this technique, nearly 200 SM molecular species were found in four natural lipid extracts: bovine milk, porcine brain, chicken egg yolk, and bovine heart. In addition to the most common backbone, d18:1, sphingosines with a range of carbon chain lengths, sphingadienes, and some sphinganine backbones were also detected. Modifications in natural SMs were also identified, including addition of iodine/methanol across a carbon-carbon double bond. This unparalleled new approach to SM analysis using EIEIO-MS shows promise as a unique and powerful tool for structural characterization.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations62
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lipid ResearchSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207