Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31823228›Full record

ArticleNeurotoxicity research2021

A Single Laboratory Validation for the Analysis of Underivatized β-N-Methylamino-L-Alanine (BMAA).

Fiona J M Tymm, Stephanie L Bishop, Susan J Murch

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurotoxicity research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. BMAA, Neurodegeneration, and Neuroprotection.Neurotoxicity research · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fiona J M Tymm *Department of Chemistry, University of British Columbia, 3247 University Way, Kelowna, British Columbia, V1V 1V7, Canada.
Stephanie L Bishop *Department of Chemistry, University of British Columbia, 3247 University Way, Kelowna, British Columbia, V1V 1V7, Canada.
Susan J MurchDepartment of Chemistry, University of British Columbia, 3247 University Way, Kelowna, British Columbia, V1V 1V7, Canada. susan.murch@ubc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5803-9483

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada 03883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

β-N-Methylamino-L-alanine (BMAA) is a non-protein amino acid produced by cyanobacteria that can accumulate in ecosystems and food webs. Human exposure to cyanobacterial and algal blooms may be a risk factor for neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Analytical chemists have struggled to find reliable methods for BMAA analysis in complex sample matrices. Analysis of BMAA is complicated by at least 3 naturally occurring isomers: N-(2-aminoethyl)glycine (AEG), 2,4-diaminobutyric acid (DAB), and β-aminomethyl-L-alanine (BAMA). More than 350 publications have reported detection and quantification of BMAA and its isomers, but varying results have led to controversy in the literature. The objective of this study was to perform a single laboratory validation (SLV) of a frequently published method for BMAA analysis using a ZIC-HILIC column. We investigated the selectivity, linearity, accuracy, precision, and sensitivity of the method and our data show that this HILIC method fails many of the criteria for a validated method. The method fails the criterion for selectivity as the chromatography does not separate BMAA from its isomer BAMA. Sensitivity of the method greatly decreased over the experimental period and it demonstrated a higher limit of detection (LOD) (7.5 pg on column) and a higher lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) (30 pg on column) than other published validated methods. The method demonstrated poor precision of repeated injections of standards of BMAA with % relative standard deviation (%RSD) values that ranged from 37 to 107% while HorRat values for BMAA had a fail rate of 80% and BAMA had a fail rate of 73%. No HorRat values between 0.5 and 2 were found for repeated injections of standards of AEG and DAB. Recovery of

Indexed as

Amino Acids, DiaminoChemistry Techniques, AnalyticalChromatography, LiquidCyanobacteria ToxinsAmino Acids, Diaminobeta-N-methylamino-L-alanineCyanobacteria ToxinsAmino acid analysisAnalytical methodsCyanobacteriaHILICβ-N-Methylamino-L-alanine (BMAA)

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.