Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
We report a direct comparison of the mass measurement accuracies (MMAs) obtained on different mass spectrometry instrument types; a magnetic sector as the 'gold standard' and an electrospray ionization time-of-flight (ESI-TOF) instrument. Sixty samples, obtained from the Department of Chemistry at North Carolina State University, were analyzed on each instrument. Data are presented and compared between the different instruments. The average absolute MMAs achieved for the magnetic sector and Agilent ESI-TOF mass spectrometers were 3.0 and 1.1 ppm, respectively.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rcm.3544 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!