Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31073892›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2019

Top or Middle? Up or Down? Toward a Standard Lexicon for Protein Top-Down and Allied Mass Spectrometry Approaches.

Frederik Lermyte, Yury O Tsybin, Peter B O'Connor, Joseph A Loo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing 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

61 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Uncovering the covalent inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 MJournal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Top-down proteomics.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

1 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

4 authors.

Frederik LermyteSchool of Engineering, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. f.lermyte@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7371-4475
Yury O TsybinSpectroswiss, EPFL Innovation Park, 1015, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Peter B O'ConnorDepartment of Chemistry, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Joseph A LooDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Department of Biological Chemistry, David Geffen School of Medicine, and UCLA/DOE Institute of Genomics and Proteomics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

UV Laser for Photodissociation-Mass Spectrometry of Proteins and Protein ComplexesR01GM103479 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI LOO, JOSEPH A · 2012 to 2021
$3.2M
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/N033191/1National Institutes of Health R01GM103479NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM103479
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, there has been increasing interest in top-down mass spectrometry (TDMS) approaches for protein analysis, driven both by technological advancements and efforts such as those by the multinational Consortium for Top-Down Proteomics (CTDP). Today, diverse sample preparation and ionization methods are employed to facilitate TDMS analysis of denatured and native proteins and their complexes. The goals of these studies vary, ranging from protein and proteoform identification, to determination of the binding site of a (non)covalently-bound ligand, and in some cases even with the aim to study the higher order structure of proteins and complexes. Currently, however, no widely accepted terminology exists to precisely and unambiguously distinguish between the different types of TDMS experiments that can be performed. Instead, ad hoc developed terminology is often used, which potentially complicates communication of top-down and allied methods and their results. In this communication, we consider the different types of top-down (or top-down-related) MS experiments that have been performed and reported, and define distinct categories based on the protocol used and type(s) of information that can be obtained. We also consider the different possible conventions for distinguishing between middle- and top-down MS, based on both sample preparation and precursor ion mass. We believe that the proposed framework presented here will prove helpful for researchers to communicate about TDMS and will be an important step toward harmonizing and standardizing this growing field. Graphical Abstract.

Indexed as

Amino Acid SequenceAnimalsBinding SitesHumansMass SpectrometryModels, MolecularProtein DenaturationProteinsProteomicsProteinsNative mass spectrometryProteoformTop-down mass spectrometryTop-down proteomics

Identifiers

PMID31073892
PMCPMC6591204

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.