Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27613306›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2016

Distinguishing Aspartic and Isoaspartic Acids in Peptides by Several Mass Spectrometric Fragmentation Methods.

Nick DeGraan-Weber, Jun Zhang, James P Reilly

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nick DeGraan-WeberDepartment of Chemistry, Indiana University, 800 East Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA.
Jun ZhangPre-Pivotal Drug Product Technologies, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, 91320, USA.
James P ReillyDepartment of Chemistry, Indiana University, 800 East Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA. reilly@indiana.edu.
Indiana University Bloomington · USAmgen (United States) · US

Funding

Computational approaches to protein identification and quantification using MS/MSR01GM103725 · NIGMS · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI RADIVOJAC, PREDRAG · 2012 to 2015
$1.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM103725
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Six ion fragmentation techniques that can distinguish aspartic acid from its isomer, isoaspartic acid, were compared. MALDI post-source decay (PSD), MALDI 157 nm photodissociation, tris(2,4,6-trimethoxyphenyl)phosphonium bromide (TMPP) charge tagging in PSD and photodissociation, ESI collision-induced dissociation (CID), electron transfer dissociation (ETD), and free-radical initiated peptide sequencing (FRIPS) with CID were applied to peptides containing either aspartic or isoaspartic acid. Diagnostic ions, such as the y-46 and b+H

Indexed as

Mass SpectrometryAmino Acid SequenceIonsIsoaspartic AcidPeptidesIonsIsoaspartic AcidPeptidesCharge taggingCIDETDFRIPSIsoaspartic acidPeptide fragmentationPhotodissociationPSD

Identifiers

PMID27613306
PMCPMC5748252
OpenAlexW2511238618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.