ArticleJournal of proteome research2019
Evaluating Chromatographic Approaches for the Quantitative Analysis of a Human Proteome on Orbitrap-Based Mass Spectrometry Systems.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- In silico spectral libraries by deep learning facilitate data-independent acquisition proteomics.Nature communications · 2020Article
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
Abstract
The Orbitrap is now a core component of several different instruments. However, evaluating the capabilities of each system is lacking in the field. Here, we compared the performance of multidimensional protein identification (MudPIT) on Velos Pro Orbitrap and Velos Orbitrap Elite mass spectrometers to reversed phase liquid chromatography (RPLC) on a Q-Exactive Plus and an Orbitrap Fusion Lumos. Using HeLa cell protein digests, we carried out triplicate analyses of 16 different chromatography conditions on four different instrumentation platforms. We first optimized RPLC conditions by varying column lengths, inner diameters, and particle sizes. We found that smaller particle sizes improve results but only with smaller inner diameter microcapillary columns. We then selected one chromatography condition on each system and varied gradient lengths. We used distributed normalized spectral abundance factor (dNSAF) values to determine quantitative reproducibility. With Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient r values routinely above 0.96, single RPLC on both the QE+ and Orbitrap Lumos outperformed MudPIT on the Orbitrap Elite mass spectrometer. In addition, when comparing dNSAF values measured for the same proteins across the different platforms, RPLC on the Orbitrap Lumos had greater sensitivity than MudPIT, as demonstrated by the detection and quantification of histone deacetylase complex components. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier 10.6019/PXD009875.
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.