Headspace Solid-Phase Micro-Extraction Method Optimization and Evaluation for the Volatile Compound Extraction of Bronchoalveolar Lung Lavage Fluid Samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Headspace solid-phase micro-extraction (HS-SPME) is a prevalent technique in metabolomics and volatolomics research. However, the performance of HS-SPME can vary considerably depending on the sample matrix. As a result, fine-tuning the parameters for each specific sample matrix is crucial to maximize extraction efficacy. In this context, we conducted comprehensive HS-SPME optimization for bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) samples using two-dimensional gas chromatography with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC×GC-ToFMS). Our exploration spanned several HS-SPME parameters, including vial size, dilution factor, extraction time, extraction temperature, and ionic strength. The 10 mL vial size, no sample dilution, extraction time of 50 min, extraction temperature of 45 °C, and 40% salt were identified as the optimized parameters. The optimized method was then evaluated by a pair-wise comparison of ten sets of samples. The results revealed that the optimized method yielded an increase of 340% in total peak area and an increase of 80% in total peak number. Moreover, enhancements were observed across nine major chemical classes in both peak area and number. Notably, the optimized method also doubled the number of volatile compounds consistently detected across BALF samples, from 52 to 108.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".