Determination of Total Concentration of Chemically Labeled Metabolites as a Means of Metabolome Sample Normalization and Sample Loading Optimization in Mass Spectrometry-Based Metabolomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For mass spectrometry (MS)-based metabolomics, it is important to use the same amount of starting materials from each sample to compare the metabolome changes in two or more comparative samples. Unfortunately, for biological samples, the total amount or concentration of metabolites is difficult to determine. In this work, we report a general approach of determining the total concentration of metabolites based on the use of chemical labeling to attach a UV absorbent to the metabolites to be analyzed, followed by rapid step-gradient liquid chromatography (LC) UV detection of the labeled metabolites. It is shown that quantification of the total labeled analytes in a biological sample facilitates the preparation of an appropriate amount of starting materials for MS analysis as well as the optimization of the sample loading amount to a mass spectrometer for achieving optimal detectability. As an example, dansylation chemistry was used to label the amine- and phenol-containing metabolites in human urine samples. LC-UV quantification of the labeled metabolites could be optimally performed at the detection wavelength of 338 nm. A calibration curve established from the analysis of a mixture of 17 labeled amino acid standards was found to have the same slope as that from the analysis of the labeled urinary metabolites, suggesting that the labeled amino acid standard calibration curve could be used to determine the total concentration of the labeled urinary metabolites. A workflow incorporating this LC-UV metabolite quantification strategy was then developed in which all individual urine samples were first labeled with (12)C-dansylation and the concentration of each sample was determined by LC-UV. The volumes of urine samples taken for producing the pooled urine standard were adjusted to ensure an equal amount of labeled urine metabolites from each sample was used for the pooling. The pooled urine standard was then labeled with (13)C-dansylation. Equal amounts of the (12)C-labeled individual sample and the (13)C-labeled pooled urine standard were mixed for LC-MS analysis. This way of concentration normalization among different samples with varying concentrations of total metabolites was found to be critical for generating reliable metabolome profiles for comparison.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".