MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377693808 · doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.2c05371

Dual UHPLC-HRMS Metabolomics and Lipidomics and Automated Data Processing Workflow for Comprehensive High-Throughput Gut Phenotyping

2023· article· en· W4377693808 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pablo Vangeenderhuysen, Jasmien Van Arnhem, Beata Pomian, Marilyn De Graeve, Lindsey De Commer, Gwen Falony, Jeroen Raes, Alexandra Zhernakova, Jingyuan Fu, Lieselot Hemeryck, Lynn Vanhaecke

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFP7 HealthDirectorate for Biological SciencesKoning BoudewijnstichtingBijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGentVlaams Instituut voor BiotechnologieVlaamse regeringQueen's UniversityUniversiteit GentKU LeuvenFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekRijksuniversiteit Groningen
KeywordsChemistryMetabolomicsLipidomicsWorkflowThroughputComputational biologyMetabolomeBiochemical engineeringChromatographyBiochemistryComputer scienceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, feces has surfaced as the matrix of choice for investigating the gut microbiome-health axis because of its non-invasive sampling and the unique reflection it offers of an individual’s lifestyle. In cohort studies where the number of samples required is large, but availability is scarce, a clear need exists for high-throughput analyses. Such analyses should combine a wide physicochemical range of molecules with a minimal amount of sample and resources and downstream data processing workflows that are as automated and time efficient as possible. We present a dual fecal extraction and ultra high performance liquid chromatography-high resolution-quadrupole-orbitrap-mass spectrometry (UHPLC-HR-Q-Orbitrap-MS)-based workflow that enables widely targeted and untargeted metabolome and lipidome analysis. A total of 836 in-house standards were analyzed, of which 360 metabolites and 132 lipids were consequently detected in feces. Their targeted profiling was validated successfully with respect to repeatability (78% CV < 20%), reproducibility (82% CV < 20%), and linearity (81% R 2 > 0.9), while also enabling holistic untargeted fingerprinting (15,319 features, CV < 30%). To automate targeted processing, we optimized an R-based targeted peak extraction (TaPEx) algorithm relying on a database comprising retention time and mass-to-charge ratio (360 metabolites and 132 lipids), with batch-specific quality control curation. The latter was benchmarked toward vendor-specific targeted and untargeted software and our isotopologue parameter optimization/XCMS-based untargeted pipeline in LifeLines Deep cohort samples ( n = 97). TaPEx clearly outperformed the untargeted approaches (81.3 vs 56.7–66.0% compounds detected). Finally, our novel dual fecal metabolomics–lipidomics–TaPEx method was successfully applied to Flemish Gut Flora Project cohort ( n = 292) samples, leading to a sample-to-result time reduction of 60%.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207