MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7138996595 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.202533313

Discovering Overlooked Biogeochemical Processes through Direct-Infusion Ultrahigh-Resolution Mass Spectrometry

2025· article· en· W7138996595 on OpenAlexaff
Zhe Xuan Zhang, Julian P. Sachs, Zhao Liang Chen, Ming Yuan, Zekun Zhang, Chen Zhao, Yuanbi Yi, Jiying Li, Ding He

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiogeochemical cycleWorkflowSample (material)Aquatic ecosystemBiogeochemistrySediment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A new workflow using DI ESI FT-ICR MS was developed to screen for organic-solvent-extractable molecular signatures in aquatic ecosystems. The method overcomes the limitations of traditional approaches by requiring only a small sample size and providing a comprehensive view of both known and unknown compounds. By analyzing sediment from various environments, our study identified over 17,000 unique compounds, with 84% being previously uncharacterized. The findings revealed distinct molecular signatures across different environments, showing that estuaries, for example, have unique, less bioavailable signatures that could contribute to carbon burial. The study also highlighted the importance of phosphorus-containing compounds (CHOP), which appear to be influenced by deterministic processes, suggesting their connection to specific metabolic pathways. This untargeted approach offers a powerful initial screening tool for understanding biogeochemical processes in both modern and ancient environments.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine and coastal ecosystems→French-language works237,207→