MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205392784 · doi:10.3390/toxins14010056

Simplified Synthesis and Stability Assessment of Aflatoxin B1-Lysine and Aflatoxin G1-Lysine

2022· article· en· W4205392784 on OpenAlexafffund
Justin B. Renaud, Jacob P. Walsh, Mark W. Sumarah

Bibliographic record

VenueToxins · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsAflatoxinMycotoxinLysineChemistryCarcinogenFood scienceProteolysisAlbuminChromatographyBiotechnologyBiochemistryBiologyAmino acidEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aflatoxins B1 (AFB1) and G1 (AFG1) are carcinogenic mycotoxins that contaminate crops such as maize and groundnuts worldwide. The broadly accepted method to assess chronic human aflatoxin exposure is by quantifying the amount of aflatoxin adducted to human serum albumin. This has been reported using ELISA, HPLC, or LC-MS/MS to measure the amount of AFB1-lysine released after proteolysis of serum albumin. LC-MS/MS is the most accurate method but requires both isotopically labelled and unlabelled AFB1-lysine standards, which are not commercially available. In this work, we report a simplified synthetic route to produce unlabelled, deuterated and 13C6 15N2 labelled aflatoxin B1-lysine and for the first-time aflatoxin G1-lysine. Additionally, we report on the stability of these compounds during storage. This simplified synthetic approach will make the production of these important standards more feasible for laboratories performing aflatoxin exposure 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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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