Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28664598›Full record

ArticleProteomics2017

Comparison of fractionation proteomics for local SWATH library building.

Elisabeth Govaert, Katleen Van Steendam, Sander Willems, Liesbeth Vossaert, Maarten Dhaenens, Dieter Deforce

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proteomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Proteomics techniques in protein biomarker discovery.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

6 authors.

Elisabeth GovaertLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7410-6834
Katleen Van SteendamLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Sander WillemsLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Liesbeth VossaertLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Maarten DhaenensLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Dieter DeforceLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For data-independent acquisition by means of sequential window acquisition of all theoretical fragment ion spectra (SWATH), a reference library of data-dependent acquisition (DDA) runs is typically used to correlate the quantitative data from the fragment ion spectra with peptide identifications. The quality and coverage of such a reference library is therefore essential when processing SWATH data. In general, library sizes can be increased by reducing the impact of DDA precursor selection with replicate runs or fractionation. However, these strategies can affect the match between the library and SWATH measurement, and thus larger library sizes do not necessarily correspond to improved SWATH quantification. Here, three fractionation strategies to increase local library size were compared to standard library building using replicate DDA injection: protein SDS-PAGE fractionation, peptide high-pH RP-HPLC fractionation and MS-acquisition gas phase fractionation. The impact of these libraries on SWATH performance was evaluated in terms of the number of extracted peptides and proteins, the match quality of the peptides and the extraction reproducibility of the transitions. These analyses were conducted using the hydrophilic proteome of differentiating human embryonic stem cells. Our results show that SWATH quantitative results and interpretations are affected by choice of fractionation technique. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD006190.

Indexed as

Peptide LibrarySoftwareChemical FractionationChromatography, High Pressure LiquidElectrophoresis, Polyacrylamide GelEmbryonic Stem CellsHumansMass SpectrometryProteomeProteomicsReproducibility of ResultsPeptide LibraryProteomeComparative studyFractionation proteomicshESCLibrary buildingSWATH-MS

Identifiers

PMID28664598
PMCPMC5601298

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.