Computing, School of

 

School of Computing: Faculty Publications

Accessibility Remediation

If you are unable to use this item in its current form due to accessibility barriers, you may request remediation through our remediation request form.

Document Type

Article

Date of this Version

7-2011

Citation

Published in Journal of Chromatography A, 1218 (2011) 6792– 6798; doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2011.07.052

Comments

Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. Used by permission.

Abstract

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.

Share

COinS