4.4 Article

Comparison of sequential derivatization with concurrent methods for GC/MS-based metabolomics

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOSCIENCE AND BIOENGINEERING
卷 127, 期 2, 页码 160-168

出版社

SOC BIOSCIENCE BIOENGINEERING JAPAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2018.07.015

关键词

Metabolomics; Metabolome; Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry; Derivatization; Trimethylsilylation; Methoximation

资金

  1. AMED-CREST Programs from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [16gm0910010h0001, JPMJCR1395]
  2. ALCA Program of the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
  3. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan (MEXT) [17H06299]
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17H06299] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)-based metabolomics requires a two-step derivatization procedure consisting of oximation and silylation. However, due to the incomplete derivatization and degeneration of the metabolites, good repeatability is difficult to obtain during the batch derivatization, as the time between completing the derivatization process and GC analysis differs from sample to sample. In this research, we successfully obtained good repeatability for the peak areas of 52 selected metabolites by sequential derivatization and interval injection, in which the oximation and silylation times were maintained at constant values. In addition, the derivatization times and amount of reagents employed were varied to confirm that the optimal derivatization conditions differed for the various metabolites. In conventional batch derivatization, six metabolites, viz. glutamine, glutamic acid, histidine, alanine, asparagine, and tryptophan, exhibited fluctuations in their peak areas. Indeed, we found that for all six metabolites these differences originated from the silylation process, while the variations for glutamine and glutamic acid were related to the oximation process. (C) 2018, The Society for Biotechnology, Japan. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据