MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335770517 · doi:10.1021/pr400738a

Dual LC–MS Platform for High-Throughput Proteome Analysis

2013· article· en· W2335770517 on OpenAlexafffund
Dennis J. Orton, Mark J. Wall, Alan A. Doucette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Proteome Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChromatographyProteomeThroughputChemistryColumn (typography)Retention timeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Computer scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a dual-column interface for parallel chromatography to improve throughput during LC-MS experimentation. The system employs a high-voltage switch to operate two capillary column/nanospray emitters fixed at the MS orifice. Sequentially loading one column while operating the second nearly doubles the LC-MS duty cycle. Given the innate run-to-run variation of a nanospray LC-MS (12% RSD peak area; 2% retention time), the intercolumn variability of the platform showed no meaningful difference for proteome analysis, with equal numbers of proteins and peptides identified per column. Applied to GeLC analysis of an E. coli extract, throughput was increased using one of three methods: doubling the number of replicates, increasing the LC gradient length, or sectioning the gel into twice as many fractions. Each method increased the total number of identifications as well as detection throughput (number of peptides/proteins identified per hour). The greatest improvement was achieved by doubling the number of gel slices (10 vs 5). Analysis on the dual column platform provided a 26% increase in peptides identified per hour (24% proteins). This translates into ~50% more total proteins and peptides identified in the experiment using the dual LC-MS platform.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations32
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Proteome ResearchSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207