MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7096182983

Comparison of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry with electron ionization and negative-ion chemical ionization for analyses of pesticides at trace levels in atmospheric samples. Anal Chem Insights

2016· article· en· W7096182983 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemical ionizationMass spectrometryElectron ionizationPesticideDirect electron ionization liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry interfaceIonizationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Atmospheric-pressure chemical ionizationGas chromatography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: A comparison of detection limits of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in selected ion monitoring (SIM) with gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (GC-MS/MS) in selected reaction monitoring (SRM) mode with both electron ionization (EI) and negative-ion chemical ionization (NCI) are presented for over 50 pesticides ranging from organochlorines (OCs), organophosphorus pesticides (OPs) and pre-emergent herbicides used in the Canadian prairies (tri-allate, trifl uralin, ethalfl uralin). The developed GC-EI/SIM, GC-NCI/SIM, and GC-NCI/SRM are suitable for the determina-tion of pesticides in air sample extracts at concentrations 100 pg µL−1 (100 pg m−3 in air). No one method could be used to analyze the range of pre-emergent herbicides, OPs, and OCs investigated. In general GC-NCI/SIM provided the lowest method detection limits (MDLs commonly 2.5–10 pg µL−1) along with best confi rmation (25 % RSD of ion ratio), while GC-NCI/SRM is recommended for use where added selectivity or confi rmation is required (such as parathion-ethyl, toku-thion, carbofenothion). GC-EI/SRM at concentration 100 pg µL−1 was not suitable for most pesticides. GC-EI/SIM was

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCell Image Analysis Techniques→French-language works237,207→