MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963325355 · doi:10.3390/toxins11080433

Characterization of Phase I and Glucuronide Phase II Metabolites of 17 Mycotoxins Using Liquid Chromatography—High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry

2019· article· en· W2963325355 on OpenAlexafffund
Irina Slobodchikova, Reajean Sivakumar, Md Samiur Rahman, Dajana Vuckovic

Bibliographic record

VenueToxins · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéConcordia University
KeywordsMycotoxinBiomonitoringChromatographyChemistryMass spectrometryOchratoxinEnvironmental chemistryOchratoxin AFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Routine mycotoxin biomonitoring methods do not include many mycotoxin phase I and phase II metabolites, which may significantly underestimate mycotoxin exposure especially for heavily metabolized mycotoxins. Additional research efforts are also needed to measure metabolites in vivo after exposure and to establish which mycotoxin metabolites should be prioritized for the inclusion during large-scale biomonitoring efforts. The objective of this study was to perform human in vitro microsomal incubations of 17 mycotoxins and systematically characterize all resulting metabolites using liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS). The results obtained were then used to build a comprehensive LC-MS library and expand a validated 17-mycotoxin method for exposure monitoring to screening of additional 188 metabolites, including 100 metabolites reported for the first time. The final method represents one of the most comprehensive LC-HRMS methods for mycotoxin biomonitoring or metabolism/fate studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxinsSame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207