Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27073351›Full record

ArticleMetabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society

Improved batch correction in untargeted MS-based metabolomics.

Ron Wehrens, Jos A Hageman, Fred van Eeuwijk, Rik Kooke, Pádraic J Flood, Erik Wijnker, Joost J B Keurentjes, Arjen Lommen, Henriëtte D L M van Eekelen, Robert D Hall and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 120 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
120citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

120 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Design, processing, and modeling for longitudinal multiomics microbiome data.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

60 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Ron WehrensBiometris, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands ; Bioscience, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8798-5599
Jos A HagemanBiometris, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Fred van EeuwijkBiometris, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Rik KookeLaboratory of Genetics, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands ; Laboratory of Plant Physiology, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Pádraic J FloodLaboratory of Genetics, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands ; Horticulture and Production Physiology, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands ; Max Planck Institute For Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany.
Erik WijnkerLaboratory of Genetics, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands ; Developmental Biology, Hamburg University, Hamburg, Germany.
Joost J B KeurentjesLaboratory of Genetics, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Arjen LommenRIKILT, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Henriëtte D L M van EekelenBioscience, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Robert D HallBioscience, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands ; Laboratory of Plant Physiology, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Roland MummBioscience, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Ric C H de VosBioscience, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBatch effects in large untargeted metabolomics experiments are almost unavoidable, especially when sensitive detection techniques like mass spectrometry (MS) are employed. In order to obtain peak intensities that are comparable across all batches, corrections need to be performed. Since non-detects, i.e., signals with an intensity too low to be detected with certainty, are common in metabolomics studies, the batch correction methods need to take these into account.

objectivesThis paper aims to compare several batch correction methods, and investigates the effect of different strategies for handling non-detects.

methodsBatch correction methods usually consist of regression models, possibly also accounting for trends within batches. To fit these models quality control samples (QCs), injected at regular intervals, can be used. Also study samples can be used, provided that the injection order is properly randomized. Normalization methods, not using information on batch labels or injection order, can correct for batch effects as well. Introducing two easy-to-use quality criteria, we assess the merits of these batch correction strategies using three large LC-MS and GC-MS data sets of samples from

resultsThe three data sets have very different characteristics, leading to clearly distinct behaviour of the batch correction strategies studied. Explicit inclusion of information on batch and injection order in general leads to very good corrections; when enough QCs are available, also general normalization approaches perform well. Several approaches are shown to be able to handle non-detects-replacing them with very small numbers such as zero seems the worst of the approaches considered.

conclusionThe use of quality control samples for batch correction leads to good results when enough QCs are available. If an experiment is properly set up, batch correction using the study samples usually leads to a similar high-quality correction, but has the advantage that more metabolites are corrected. The strategy for handling non-detects is important: choosing small values like zero can lead to suboptimal batch corrections.

Indexed as

Arabidopsis thalianaBatch correctionMass spectrometryNon-detectsUntargeted metabolomics

Identifiers

PMID27073351
PMCPMC4796354

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.