| Title |
A comparison of sample preparation methods for extracting volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from equine faeces using HS-SPME
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Metabolomics, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11306-017-1315-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rachael Hough, Debra Archer, Christopher Probert |
| Abstract |
Disturbance to the hindgut microbiota can be detrimental to equine health. Metabolomics provides a robust approach to studying the functional aspect of hindgut microorganisms. Sample preparation is an important step towards achieving optimal results in the later stages of analysis. The preparation of samples is unique depending on the technique employed and the sample matrix to be analysed. Gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS) is one of the most widely used platforms for the study of metabolomics and until now an optimised method has not been developed for equine faeces. To compare a sample preparation method for extracting volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from equine faeces. Volatile organic compounds were determined by headspace solid phase microextraction gas chromatography mass spectrometry (HS-SPME-GCMS). Factors investigated were the mass of equine faeces, type of SPME fibre coating, vial volume and storage conditions. The resultant method was unique to those developed for other species. Aliquots of 1000 or 2000 mg in 10 ml or 20 ml SPME headspace were optimal. From those tested, the extraction of VOCs should ideally be performed using a divinylbenzene-carboxen-polydimethysiloxane (DVB-CAR-PDMS) SPME fibre. Storage of faeces for up to 12 months at - 80 °C shared a greater percentage of VOCs with a fresh sample than the equivalent stored at - 20 °C. An optimised method for extracting VOCs from equine faeces using HS-SPME-GCMS has been developed and will act as a standard to enable comparisons between studies. This work has also highlighted storage conditions as an important factor to consider in experimental design for faecal metabolomics studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| India | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 74 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 16% |
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 16 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 22% |
| Chemistry | 9 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 11% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 March 2018.
All research outputs
#13,595,794
of 24,093,053 outputs
Outputs from Metabolomics
#595
of 1,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,099
of 450,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Metabolomics
#16
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,093,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.