Comparative analysis of peak-detection techniques for comprehensive two-dimensional chromatography

Comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC) is a powerful technology for separating complex samples. The typical goal of GC×GC peak detection is to aggregate data points of analyte peaks based on their retention times and intensities. Two techniques commonly used for two-dimensional pea...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:Journal of Chromatography A Ročník 1218; číslo 38; s. 6792 - 6798
Hlavní autori: Latha, Indu, Reichenbach, Stephen E., Tao, Qingping
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 23.09.2011
Elsevier
Predmet:
Aggregates
Algorithms
Analytical chemistry
Chemistry
Chemometrics
Chromatographic methods and physical methods associated with chromatography
Chromatography
Chromatography, Gas - instrumentation
Chromatography, Gas - methods
comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography
Comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC)
Computer simulation
Data points
Exact sciences and technology
Gas chromatographic methods
Peak detection
probability
Splitting
Two dimensional
Two-dimensional chromatography
Two-step peak detection
Watershed algorithm
Watersheds
Peak detection
Comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC)
Two-dimensional chromatography
Watershed algorithm
Two-step peak detection
Chemometrics
Peak resolution
Two dimensional chromatography
Theoretical study
chromatography (GC×GC)
Gas chromatography
Comprehensive two-dimensional gas
Numerical simulation
Comparative study
ISSN:0021-9673, 1873-3778, 1873-3778
On-line prístup:Získať plný text
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Popis
Shrnutí:Comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC) is a powerful technology for separating complex samples. The typical goal of GC×GC peak detection is to aggregate data points of analyte peaks based on their retention times and intensities. Two techniques commonly used for two-dimensional peak detection are the two-step algorithm and the watershed algorithm. A recent study [4] compared the performance of the two-step and watershed algorithms for GC×GC data with retention-time shifts in the second-column separations. In that analysis, the peak retention-time shifts were corrected while applying the two-step algorithm but the watershed algorithm was applied without shift correction. The results indicated that the watershed algorithm has a higher probability of erroneously splitting a single two-dimensional peak than the two-step approach. This paper reconsiders the analysis by comparing peak-detection performance for resolved peaks after correcting retention-time shifts for both the two-step and watershed algorithms. Simulations with wide-ranging conditions indicate that when shift correction is employed with both algorithms, the watershed algorithm detects resolved peaks with greater accuracy than the two-step method.
Bibliografia:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2011.07.052
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
ISSN:0021-9673
1873-3778
1873-3778
DOI:10.1016/j.chroma.2011.07.052