ArticleScientific reports2015
A peptide identification-free, genome sequence-independent shotgun proteomics workflow for strain-level bacterial differentiation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Leveraging innovative diagnostics as a tool to contain superbugs.Antonie van Leeuwenhoek · 2025Review
- metaSpectraST: an unsupervised and database-independent analysis workflow for metaproteomic MS/MS data using spectrum clustering.Microbiome · 2023Article
- Identification of pathogens from native urine samples by MALDI-TOF/TOF tandem mass spectrometry.Clinical proteomics · 2020Article
- Pathogen proteotyping: A rapidly developing application of mass spectrometry to address clinical concerns.Clinical mass spectrometry (Del Mar, Calif.) · 2019Review
- Development of a Trypanosoma cruzi strain typing assay using MS2 peptide spectral libraries (Tc-STAMS2).PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2018Article
- Large scale analysis of amino acid substitutions in bacterial proteomics.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shotgun proteomics is an emerging tool for bacterial identification and differentiation. However, the identification of the mass spectra of peptides to genome-derived peptide sequences remains a key issue that limits the use of shotgun proteomics to bacteria with genome sequences available. In this proof-of-concept study, we report a novel bacterial fingerprinting method that enjoys the resolving power and accuracy of mass spectrometry without the burden of peptide identification (i.e. genome sequence-independent). This method uses a similarity-clustering algorithm to search for mass spectra that are derived from the same peptide and merge them into a unique consensus spectrum as the basis to generate proteomic fingerprints of bacterial isolates. In comparison to a traditional peptide identification-based shotgun proteomics workflow and a PCR-based DNA fingerprinting method targeting the repetitive extragenic palindromes elements in bacterial genomes, the novel method generated fingerprints that were richer in information and more discriminative in differentiating E. coli isolates by their animal sources. The novel method is readily deployable to any cultivable bacteria, and may be used for several fields of study such as environmental microbiology, applied microbiology, and clinical microbiology.
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.