MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303649186 · doi:10.1016/j.jpha.2022.09.002

Solid-phase microextraction of endogenous metabolites from intact tissue validated using a Biocrates standard reference method kit

2022· article· en· W4303649186 on OpenAlex
Runshan Will Jiang, Karol Jaroch, Janusz Pawliszyn

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Analysis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSolid-phase microextractionHomogenization (climate)MetabolomeChemistryMetabolomicsChromatographySample preparationMetaboliteTissue sampleGas chromatography–mass spectrometryMass spectrometryBiochemistryBiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improved analytical methods for the metabolomic profiling of tissue samples are constantly needed. Currently, conventional sample preparation methods often involve tissue biopsy and/or homogenization, which disrupts the endogenous metabolome. In this study, solid-phase microextraction (SPME) fibers were used to monitor changes in endogenous compounds in homogenized and intact ovine lung tissue. Following SPME, a Biocrates AbsoluteIDQ assay was applied to make a downstream targeted metabolomics analysis and confirm the advantages of in vivo SPME metabolomics. The AbsoluteIDQ kit enabled the targeted analysis of over 100 metabolites via solid-liquid extraction and SPME. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between conventional liquid extractions from homogenized tissue and SPME results for both homogenized and intact tissue samples. In addition, principal component analysis revealed separated clustering among all the three sample groups, indicating changes in the metabolome due to tissue homogenization and the chosen sample preparation method. Furthermore, clear differences in free metabolites were observed when extractions were performed on the intact and homogenized tissue using identical SPME procedures. Specifically, a direct comparison showed that 47 statistically distinct metabolites were detected between the homogenized and intact lung tissue samples (P < 0.05) using mixed-mode SPME fibers. These changes were probably due to the disruptive homogenization of the tissue. This study's findings highlight both the importance of sample preparation in tissue-based metabolomics studies and SPME's unique ability to perform minimally invasive extractions without tissue biopsy or homogenization while providing broad metabolite coverage.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.379 · 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