MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401729021 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.4c05165

Nontargeted Analysis of Reactive Nitrogenous Compounds in Suwannee River Standard Reference Materials and Authentic River Water Samples

2024· article· en· W4401729021 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Qiming Shen, Tingting Zhao, Nicholas J. P. Wawryk, K.N.Minh Chau, Di Zhang, Kristin Carroll, Wenhai Chu, Tao Huan, Xing‐Fang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta InnovatesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Concerns over toxic nitrogenous disinfection byproducts (N-DBPs) necessitate identifying their precursors in source water. Natural organic amino compounds are known precursors to N-DBPs. Three Suwannee River (SR) standard reference materials (SRMs), humic acids (HA), fulvic acids (FA), and natural organic matter (NOM), are commonly used to study DBP formation, but the chemical makeup of amino compounds in SRSRMs remains largely unknown. To address this, we combined stable hydrogen/deuterium isotope labeling, HDPairFinder bioinformatics, and nontargeted high-performance liquid chromatography–high-resolution mass spectrometry (HPLC-HRMS) to characterize these compounds in SRSRMs. This method classifies reactive amines, provides accurate masses and MS/MS spectra, and quantifies intensities. We identified 2707 high-quality features with primary and/or secondary amines in SRSRMs and 75% of them having an m / z < 300. Across all three SRSRMs, 327 amino features were detected, while 856, 794, and 200 unique features were found in SRNOM, SRHA, and SRFA, respectively. In North Saskatchewan River (NSR) samples, a total of 6449 amino features were detected, 818 of them matched those in SRSRMs, and 87% of them were different between the two rivers. Using chemical standards, we confirmed 10 compounds and tentatively identified 5 more. This study highlights similarities and differences in reactive N-precursors in SRSRMs and local river water, enhancing the understanding of geo-differences in reactive N-precursors in different source waters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207