MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561647549 · doi:10.5740/jaoacint.16-0220

Determination of Mitragynine in <i>Mitragyna speciosa</i> Raw Materials and Finished Products by Liquid Chromatography with UV Detection: Single-Laboratory Validation

2016· article· en· W2561647549 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Mudge, Paula N. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of AOAC International · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicAlkaloids: synthesis and pharmacology
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepeatabilityChromatographyChemistryExtraction (chemistry)High-performance liquid chromatographyDetection limitRaw materialOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mitragyna speciosa (kratom) is a tree indigenous to Southeast Asia, and its leaves are used in herbal formulations because they contain indole alkaloids mitragynine and 7-hydroxy (7-OH) mitragynine. An HPLC method was developed, optimized, and validated using single-laboratory validation guidelines to quantify mitragynine in kratom raw materials and finished products. The method optimization evaluated several extraction parameters including solvent type, solvent volume, time, and extraction method. The separation of the mitragynine alkaloids was achieved in 18 min with a fused-core C18 EVO column using gradient separation with ammonium bicarbonate (pH 9.5) and acetonitrile. The calibration range for mitragynine was 1.0-500 μg/mL with correlation coefficients of ≥99.9% throughout method development and validation. The method detection limit and LOQ were 0.2 and 0.6 μg/mL, respectively for mitragynine. Eight test samples were obtained to evaluate method repeatability. RSDr ranged from 0.4 to 1.0%, whereas intermediate precision ranged from 3.7 to 7.3%, with HorRat values from 0.68 to 1.96. 7-OH mitragynine was below the LOQ for all samples, therefore, spikes repeatability sample RSD values were <1%. The validation data presented meet the Standard Method Performance Requirements as specified by the AOAC INTERNATIONAL Kratom Working Group.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations36
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AOAC InternationalSame topicAlkaloids: synthesis and pharmacologyFrench-language works237,207