Nonocclusive Sweat Collection Combined with Chemical Isotope Labeling LC–MS for Human Sweat Metabolomics and Mapping the Sweat Metabolomes at Different Skin Locations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human sweat is an excellent biofluid candidate for metabolomics due to its noninvasive sample collection and relatively simple matrix. We report a simple and inexpensive method for sweat collection over a defined period (e.g., 24 h) based on the use of a nonocclusive style sweat patch adhered to a skin. This method was combined with differential chemical isotope labeling (CIL) LC-MS for mapping the metabolome profiles of sweat samples collected from skins of the left forearm, lower back, and neck of 20 healthy volunteers. Three 24-h sweat samples were collected at three different days from each subject for examining day-to-day metabolome variations. A total of 342 LC-MS runs were carried out (two runs were discarded due to instrumental issue), resulting in the detection and relative quantification of 3140 sweat metabolites with 84 metabolites identified and 2716 metabolites mass-matched to metabolome databases. Multivariate and univariate analyses of the metabolome data revealed a location-dependence characteristic of the sweat metabolome, offering a possibility of mapping the sweat metabolic differences according to skin locations. Significant differences in male and female sweat metabolomes could be detected, demonstrating the possibility of using the sweat metabolome to reveal biological variations among different comparative groups. Thus, the combination of noninvasive sweat collection and CIL LC-MS is a robust analytical tool for sweat metabolomics with potential applications including daily monitoring of the sweat metabolome as health indicators, discovering sweat-based disease biomarkers, and metabolomic mapping of sweat collected from different areas of skin with and without injuries or diseases.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".