Metabolomics for Phytochemical Discovery: Development of Statistical Approaches Using a Cranberry Model System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolomics is the qualitative and quantitative analysis of all of the small molecules in a biological sample at a specific time and influence. Technologies for metabolomics analysis have developed rapidly as new analytical tools for chemical separations, mass spectrometry, and NMR spectroscopy have emerged. Plants have one of the largest metabolomes, and it is estimated that the average plant leaf can contain upward of 30 000 phytochemicals. In the past decade, over 1200 papers on plant metabolomics have been published. A standard metabolomics data set contains vast amounts of information and can either investigate or generate hypotheses. The key factors in using plant metabolomics data most effectively are the experimental design, authentic standard availability, extract standardization, and statistical analysis. Using cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon) as a model system, this review will discuss and demonstrate strategies and tools for analysis and interpretation of metabolomics data sets including eliminating false discoveries and determining significance, metabolite clustering, and logical algorithms for discovery of new metabolites and pathways. Together these metabolomics tools represent an entirely new pipeline for phytochemical discovery.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".