MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389791671 · doi:10.1080/10256016.2023.2291460

Using <sup>13</sup> C enriched acetate in isotope labelling incubation experiments: a note of caution

2023· article· en· W4389791671 on OpenAlexafffund
Frédéric Leone, Anic Imfeld, Yeganeh Mirzaei, Yves Gélinas

Bibliographic record

VenueIsotopes in Environmental and Health Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryEnvironmental chemistryFumigationVolatilisationCarbonateSodium acetateMass spectrometryRadiochemistryInorganic chemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vapour-phase fumigation with HCl is routinely used to remove inorganic carbon in preparation for the measurement of the concentration and δ13C value of organic carbon in a sample using elemental analysis coupled to an isotope ratio mass spectrometer. Acidification of the sample to be analyzed can lead to the loss of low molecular weight conjugate bases as volatile organic acids during the acidification and/or the drying steps following fumigation, through protonation of the conjugate base and volatilization. Such loss could lead to a severe bias in incubation experiments where 13C-enriched compounds such as acetate are used to trace reaction pathways or metabolites in a cultivation medium or a mesocosm for example. In this work, we enriched a carbonate-free freshwater sediment with 1-13C sodium acetate by 5, 10 and 20 ‰ relative to the δ13C value of the natural organic carbon of the sediment, and then tested the effects of HCl fumigation, drying at 50 °C and drying at room temperature, alone or in combination, on the measured δ13C values. We found that fumigation and drying at 50 °C, alone or in combination, both lead to the loss of the majority of the 13C-enriched acetate spike.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsotopes in Environmental and Health StudiesSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207