MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028580480 · doi:10.1002/elps.202000076

Dynamic pH barrage junction focusing of amino acids, peptides, and digested monoclonal antibodies in capillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometry

2020· article· en· W3028580480 on OpenAlexafffund
Lingyu Wang, Jianhui Cheng, Julie E. McNutt, Gregg B. Morin, David D. Y. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencySpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyCapillary electrophoresisMass spectrometryAnalyteTandem mass spectrometryElectropherogramMonoclonal antibodyTandemCapillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)AntibodyElectrospray ionizationMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic pH barrage junction focusing in CE enables effective signal enhancement, quantitative capture efficiencies, and straightforward optimization. The method is a technical variant of dynamic pH junction focusing. CE separation with dynamic pH barrage junction focusing is compatible with both optical and mass spectrometric detection. We developed a CE-MS/MS method using hydrophilic polyethyleneimine-coated capillaries and validated it for the qualitative analysis of amino acids, peptides, and tryptic peptides of digested monoclonal antibodies. The S/N of extracted ion electropherograms of zwitterionic analytes were enhanced by approximately two orders of magnitude with a tradeoff of a shortened separation window. Online focusing improved the MS signal intensity of a diluted antibody digest, enabling more precursor ions to be analyzed with subsequent tandem mass spectrometric identification. It also broadened the concentration range of protein digest samples for which adequate sequence coverage data can be obtained. With only 0.9 ng of digested infliximab sample loaded into the capillary, 76% and 100% sequence coverage was realized for antibody heavy and light chains, respectively, after online focusing. Full coverage was achieved with 9 ng of injected digest.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectrophoresisSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207