Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Peptides in Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Peptides are essential components of all living organisms, widely present in the environment, and play important roles in diverse environmental processes. Some peptides are a cause of concern for ecosystems and for environmental health, including drinking water safety. Peptides may impact the environment through their involvement in nitrogen cycles, cloud formation, and many other biogeochemistry processes. Some environmental peptides (e.g. microcystins, MCs) originating from microorganisms are highly toxic, and thus their distribution and transformation in the environment are of great health concern. Many analytical tools have been developed to characterize environmental peptides. The analysis of peptides in environmental samples is challenging, however, owing to their high chemical and structural diversities, low abundance, and complex sample matrices. Mass spectrometry (MS) has become one of the most attractive techniques for environmental peptide analysis, because of its high sensitivity and selectivity. In this article, we summarize the recent advances in MS methods for the analysis of peptides in environmental samples. Particularly, we discuss the analytical developments for the analysis of peptides in water, atmospheric aerosols, and soils, as each sample type represents a distinct analytical challenge.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".