Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34181432›Full record

ArticleJournal of proteome research2021

Automated Assignment of Proteoform Classification Levels.

Zach Rolfs, Lloyd M Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of proteome research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Zach RolfsDepartment of Chemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4372-7133
Lloyd M SmithDepartment of Chemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6652-8639

Funding

Revealing Proteoforms: The Primary Effectors of Biological FunctionR35GM126914 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Lloyd M Smith · 2018 to 2026
$6.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM126914
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proteoform identification is required to fully understand the biological diversity present in a sample. However, these identifications are often ambiguous because of the challenges in analyzing full length proteins by mass spectrometry. A five-level proteoform classification system was recently developed to delineate the ambiguity of proteoform identifications and to allow for comparisons across software platforms and acquisition methods. Widespread adoption of this system requires software tools to provide classification of the proteoform identifications. We describe here an implementation of the five-level classification system in the software program MetaMorpheus, which provides both bottom-up and top-down identifications. Additionally, we developed a stand-alone program called ProteoformClassifier that allows users to classify proteoform results from any search program, provided that the program writes output that includes the information necessary to evaluate proteoform ambiguity. This stand-alone program includes a small test file and database to evaluate if a given program provides sufficient information to evaluate ambiguity. If the program does not, then ProteoformClassifier provides meaningful feedback to assist developers with implementing the classification system. We tested currently available top-down software programs and found that none of them (other than MetaMorpheus) provided sufficient information regarding identification ambiguity to permit classification.

Indexed as

ProteomeProteomicsProtein Processing, Post-TranslationalSoftwareTandem Mass SpectrometryProteomeclassificationpost-translational modificationproteoformssoftwaretop-down proteomics

Identifiers

PMID34181432
PMCPMC8764746

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.