Quantitation and Validation of Fluoroquinolones in Eggs Using Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fluoroquinolone antibiotics are labeled for very limited veterinary use for treatment of some animals and pets, but they are not authorized for food animals in Canada, including egg-producing birds. Because they are approved for other animals, however, fluoroquinolones may appear in eggs through off-labeling or accidental use. This method is capable of quantitating and confirming the presence of 4 fluoroquinolones, ciprofloxacin, danofloxacin, enrofloxacin, and sarafloxacin, over the concentration range 1 to 60 microg/kg (ppb) using 2 internal standards, norfloxacin or lomefloxacin. The compounds are extracted with acidic acetonitrile, isolated using Oasis HLB solid-phase extraction, and quantitated by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry at 2 transitions. The limits of detection (microg/kg) were evaluated from between-day experiments as: ciprofloxacin, 0.22; danofloxacin (m/z 314), 0.32; enrofloxacin, 0.22; and sarafloxacin, 0.31. The values for the decision limit, CCalpha were 0.33, 0.36, 0.30, and 0.45 microg/kg, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".