An analytical method for shipboard extraction of the odour compounds, 2-methylisoborneol and geosmin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extractions for the analysis of geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol (MIB) were carried out on board a research vessel by extracting water samples in the collection bottles with dichloromethane. The extracts are stable and can be stored for up to two months with no apparent loss of analytes. Workup and analysis could be done at the rate 15-20 samples per week. Approximately 150 samples from Lake Ontario were analyzed in 2000 and 120 samples in 2001. Concentrations as low as 1 ng/L could be detected, but reliable determination was only attained above 5 ng/L (> 80% qualifier ion match within +/- 50%). Reproducibility between duplicates was generally better than 10%, and recovery of surrogate standards from reagent water averaged ca. 80% and from lake water ca. 60%. In early September, 2000, geosmin concentrations in Lake Ontario ranged from 1-13 ng/L and MIB from 1-31 ng/L. In 2001, the ranges were 1-47 and 1-56 ng/L for geosmin and MIB, respectively. Lowest concentrations occurred in the western and central regions and highest concentrations in the eastern region and St Lawrence River.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".