ArticleMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2011
Published and perished? The influence of the searched protein database on the long-term storage of proteomics data.
Article in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Properties, Origin, and Consistency of Truncated Proteoforms Across Top-Down Proteomic Studies.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2025Pooled it
- Quantitative Proteomic Profiling of Pinctada fucata Shell Nacre Defines a Solubility-Based Type Classification of Shell Matrix Proteins.Marine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Beyond blast: enabling microbiologists to better extract literature, taxonomic distributions and gene neighbourhood information for protein families.Microbial genomics · 2024Article
- Beyond Blast: Enabling Microbiologists to Better Extract Literature, Taxonomic Distributions and Gene Neighborhood Information for Protein Families.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- An effective approach for annotation of protein families with low sequence similarity and conserved motifs: identifying GDSL hydrolases across the plant kingdom.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
- 2016 update of the PRIDE database and its related tools.Nucleic acids research · 2016Article
- Exploring the potential of public proteomics data.Proteomics · 2016Review
- Identifying novel biomarkers through data mining-a realistic scenario?Proteomics. Clinical applications · 2015Review
- Making proteomics data accessible and reusable: current state of proteomics databases and repositories.Proteomics · 2015Review
- ProteomeScout: a repository and analysis resource for post-translational modifications and proteins.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
- The PRoteomics IDEntifications (PRIDE) database and associated tools: status in 2013.Nucleic acids research · 2013Article
- Improvements in the Protein Identifier Cross-Reference service.Nucleic acids research · 2012Article
- Analysis of high accuracy, quantitative proteomics data in the MaxQB database.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2012Article
- Consequences of the discontinuation of the International Protein Index (IPI) database and its substitution by the UniProtKB "complete proteome" sets.Proteomics · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In proteomics, protein identifications are reported and stored using an unstable reference system: protein identifiers. These proprietary identifiers are created individually by every protein database and can change or may even be deleted over time. To estimate the effect of the searched protein sequence database on the long-term storage of proteomics data we analyzed the changes of reported protein identifiers from all public experiments in the Proteomics Identifications (PRIDE) database by November 2010. To map the submitted protein identifier to a currently active entry, two distinct approaches were used. The first approach used the Protein Identifier Cross Referencing (PICR) service at the EBI, which maps protein identifiers based on 100% sequence identity. The second one (called logical mapping algorithm) accessed the source databases and retrieved the current status of the reported identifier. Our analysis showed the differences between the main protein databases (International Protein Index (IPI), UniProt Knowledgebase (UniProtKB), National Center for Biotechnological Information nr database (NCBI nr), and Ensembl) in respect to identifier stability. For example, whereas 20% of submitted IPI entries were deleted after two years, virtually all UniProtKB entries remained either active or replaced. Furthermore, the two mapping algorithms produced markedly different results. For example, the PICR service reported 10% more IPI entries deleted compared with the logical mapping algorithm. We found several cases where experiments contained more than 10% deleted identifiers already at the time of publication. We also assessed the proportion of peptide identifications in these data sets that still fitted the originally identified protein sequences. Finally, we performed the same overall analysis on all records from IPI, Ensembl, and UniProtKB: two releases per year were used, from 2005. This analysis showed for the first time the true effect of changing protein identifiers on proteomics data. Based on these findings, UniProtKB seems the best database for applications that rely on the long-term storage of proteomics data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.