ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2013
Investigation of scrambled ions in tandem mass spectra, part 2. On the influence of the ions on peptide identification.
Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Non-direct sequence ions in the tandem mass spectrometry of protonated peptide amides--an energy-resolved study.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A comprehensive investigation was performed to understand the influence of sequence scrambling in peptide ions on peptide identification results. To achieve this, four tandem mass spectrometry datasets with scrambled ions included and with them excluded were analyzed by Crux, X!Tandem, SpectraST, Lutefisk, and PepNovo. While the different algorithms differed in their performance, an increase in the number of correctly identified peptides was generally observed when removing scrambled ions, with the exception of the SpectraST algorithm. However, the variation of the match scores upon removal was unpredictable. Following these investigations, an interpretation was given on how the scrambled ions affect peptide identification. Lastly, a simulated theoretical mass spectral library derived from the NIST peptide Libraries was constructed and searched by SpectraST to study whether scrambled ions in predicted mass spectra could affect peptide identification. Consistent with the peptide library search results, no significant variations for dot product scores as well as peptide identification results were observed when these ions were included in the theoretical MS/MS spectra. From the five adopted algorithms, the SpectraST and Crux provided the most robust results, whereas X!Tandem, PepNovo, and Lutefisk were sensitive to the existence of the scrambled ions, especially the latter two de novo sequencing algorithms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23504644What 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.