ArticleOmics : a journal of integrative biology2012
A probabilistic framework for peptide and protein quantification from data-dependent and data-independent LC-MS proteomics experiments.
Article in Omics : a journal of integrative biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A comprehensive LFQ benchmark dataset on modern day acquisition strategies in proteomics.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Specificity of the osmotic stress response in Candida albicans highlighted by quantitative proteomics.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Scanning Quadrupole Data-Independent Acquisition, Part A: Qualitative and Quantitative Characterization.Journal of proteome research · 2018Article
- OLFM4, KNG1 and Sec24C identified by proteomics and immunohistochemistry as potential markers of early colorectal cancer stages.Clinical proteomics · 2017Article
- Bioinformatics challenges and solutions in proteomics as quantitative methods mature.Omics : a journal of integrative biology · 2012Article
- Quantitative neuroproteomics: classical and novel tools for studying neural differentiation and function.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A probability-based quantification framework is presented for the calculation of relative peptide and protein abundance in label-free and label-dependent LC-MS proteomics data. The results are accompanied by credible intervals and regulation probabilities. The algorithm takes into account data uncertainties via Poisson statistics modified by a noise contribution that is determined automatically during an initial normalization stage. Protein quantification relies on assignments of component peptides to the acquired data. These assignments are generally of variable reliability and may not be present across all of the experiments comprising an analysis. It is also possible for a peptide to be identified to more than one protein in a given mixture. For these reasons the algorithm accepts a prior probability of peptide assignment for each intensity measurement. The model is constructed in such a way that outliers of any type can be automatically reweighted. Two discrete normalization methods can be employed. The first method is based on a user-defined subset of peptides, while the second method relies on the presence of a dominant background of endogenous peptides for which the concentration is assumed to be unaffected. Normalization is performed using the same computational and statistical procedures employed by the main quantification algorithm. The performance of the algorithm will be illustrated on example data sets, and its utility demonstrated for typical proteomics applications. The quantification algorithm supports relative protein quantification based on precursor and product ion intensities acquired by means of data-dependent methods, originating from all common isotopically-labeled approaches, as well as label-free ion intensity-based data-independent methods.
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.