ArticleJournal of proteomics2021
Deep learning for peptide identification from metaproteomics datasets.
Article in Journal of proteomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing peptide identification in metaproteomics through curriculum learning in deep learning.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Next-generation probiotics and engineered BEVs for precision therapeutics in osteoporosis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- SEMQuant: Extending Sipros-Ensemble with Match-Between-Runs for Comprehensive Quantitative Metaproteomics.Bioinformatics research and applications : ... international symposium, ISBRA ... proceedings. ISBRA (Conference) · 2024Article
- Microbial Proteins in Stomach Biopsies Associated with Gastritis, Ulcer, and Gastric Cancer.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Intestinal Microbiota May Be a Potential Theranostic Tool for Personalized Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Gut-Microbiome Interactions: Characterization, Therapeutic Implications and Machine Learning.Sage open pathologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Metaproteomics is becoming widely used in microbiome research for gaining insights into the functional state of the microbial community. Current metaproteomics studies are generally based on high-throughput tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) coupled with liquid chromatography. In this paper, we proposed a deep-learning-based algorithm, named DeepFilter, for improving peptide identifications from a collection of tandem mass spectra. The key advantage of the DeepFilter is that it does not need ad hoc training or fine-tuning as in existing filtering tools. DeepFilter is freely available under the GNU GPL license at https://github.com/Biocomputing-Research-Group/DeepFilter. SIGNIFICANCE: The identification of peptides and proteins from MS data involves the computational procedure of searching MS/MS spectra against a predefined protein sequence database and assigning top-scored peptides to spectra. Existing computational tools are still far from being able to extract all the information out of MS/MS data sets acquired from metaproteome samples. Systematical experiment results demonstrate that the DeepFilter identified up to 12% and 9% more peptide-spectrum-matches and proteins, respectively, compared with existing filtering algorithms, including Percolator, Q-ranker, PeptideProphet, and iProphet, on marine and soil microbial metaproteome samples with false discovery rate at 1%. The taxonomic analysis shows that DeepFilter found up to 7%, 10%, and 14% more species from marine, soil, and human gut samples compared with existing filtering algorithms. Therefore, DeepFilter was believed to generalize properly to new, previously unseen peptide-spectrum-matches and can be readily applied in peptide identification from metaproteomics data.
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.