MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000334426 · doi:10.1159/000504391

Screening for More than 1,000 Pesticides and Environmental Contaminants in Cannabis by GC/Q-TOF

2020· article· en· W3000334426 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip Wylie, Jessica Westland, Mei Wang, Mohamed M. Radwan, Chandrani G. Majumdar, Mahmoud A. ElSohly

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Cannabis and Cannabinoids · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMass spectrometryMass spectrumChemistryMassChromatographyPesticideGas chromatography–mass spectrometryTime-of-flight mass spectrometryExtraction (chemistry)Pesticide residueMonoisotopic massGas chromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)IonIonization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method has been developed to screen cannabis extracts for more than 1,000 pesticides and environmental pollutants using a gas chromatograph coupled to a high-resolution accurate mass quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometer (GC/Q-TOF). An extraction procedure was developed using acetonitrile with solid phase extraction cleanup. Before analysis, extracts were diluted 125:1 with solvent. Two data mining approaches were used together with a retention-time-locked Personal Compound Database and Library (PCDL) containing high-resolution accurate mass spectra for pesticides and other environmental pollutants. (1) A Find-by-Fragments (FbF) software tool extracts several characteristic exact mass ions within a small retention time window where the compound elutes. For each compound in the PCDL, the software evaluates the peak shape and retention time of each ion as well as the monoisotopic exact mass, ion ratios, and other factors to decide if the compound is present or not. (2) A separate approach used Unknowns Analysis (UA) software with a peak-finding algorithm called SureMass to deconvolute peaks in the chromatogram. The accurate mass spectra were searched against the PCDL using spectral matching and retention time as filters. A subset PCDL was generated containing only pesticides that are most likely to be found on foods in the US. With about 250 compounds in the smaller PCDL, there were fewer hits for non-pesticides, and data review was much faster. Organically grown cannabis was used for method development. Twenty-one confiscated cannabis samples were analyzed and ten were found to have no detectable pesticides. The remaining 11 samples had at least one pesticide and one sample had seven detectable residues. Quantitative analysis was run on the confiscated samples for a subset of the pesticides found by screening. Two cannabis samples had residues of carbaryl and malathion that were estimated to be about 10 times greater than the highest US Environmental Protection Agency tolerance set for food and about 4,000 times greater than the Canadian maximum residue limits for dried cannabis flower.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Cannabis and CannabinoidsSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207