Fig. 1: Comparison of automated vs manual extraction of NIST human plasma standard reference material (SRM) and assessment of analysis reproducibility. | Nature Communications

Fig. 1: Comparison of automated vs manual extraction of NIST human plasma standard reference material (SRM) and assessment of analysis reproducibility.

From: Four-dimensional trapped ion mobility spectrometry lipidomics for high throughput clinical profiling of human blood samples

Fig. 1: Comparison of automated vs manual extraction of NIST human plasma standard reference material (SRM) and assessment of analysis reproducibility.The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

a Direct comparison of automated vs manual extraction. Depicted are analyte peak areas, normalized to respective internal standard (ISTD) peak areas, of representative lipids for each analyzed lipid class, whose extraction was either manual (light blue dots, empty bars) or automated (dark blue dots, blue bars) from NIST plasma SRM. Each dot represents an independent extraction (n = 8). Black numbers indicate the coefficient of variation (CV) values for manual extraction, whereas blue values indicate CV for automated extraction. Two-tailed multiple unpaired t-test with multiple comparison correction (Holm–Sidak method) was used (tPS 36:0(14) = 4.111, p = 0.012630; tCholesterol(14) = 4.424, p = 0.007482). Bars represent mean values ± standard deviation (SD). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. b Depicted are values from representative lipid species extracted from NIST plasma SRM, normalized to their corresponding ISTDs. Measurement was conducted in negative ion mode. The displayed numbers show the CV. Each dot represents an independent extraction (n = 32). Bars represent mean values ± (SD). Source data are provided as a Source data file and in Supplementary DataĀ 6.

Back to article page