Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35797390›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Simplifying MS1 and MS2 spectra to achieve lower mass error, more dynamic range, and higher peptide identification confidence on the Bruker timsTOF Pro.

Daryl Wilding-McBride, Laura F Dagley, Sukhdeep K Spall, Giuseppe Infusini, Andrew I Webb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. 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

5 authors.

Daryl Wilding-McBrideThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3796-1297
Laura F DagleyThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4171-3712
Sukhdeep K SpallThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Giuseppe InfusiniThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5425-1698
Andrew I WebbThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5061-6995

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For bottom-up proteomic analysis, the goal of analytical pipelines that process the raw output of mass spectrometers is to detect, characterise, identify, and quantify peptides. The initial steps of detecting and characterising features in raw data must overcome some considerable challenges. The data presents as a sparse array, sometimes containing billions of intensity readings over time. These points represent both signal and chemical or electrical noise. Depending on the biological sample's complexity, tens to hundreds of thousands of peptides may be present in this vast data landscape. For ion mobility-based LC-MS analysis, each peptide is comprised of a grouping of hundreds of single intensity readings in three dimensions: mass-over-charge (m/z), mobility, and retention time. There is no inherent information about any associations between individual points; whether they represent a peptide or noise must be inferred from their structure. Peptides each have multiple isotopes, different charge states, and a dynamic range of intensity of over six orders of magnitude. Due to the high complexity of most biological samples, peptides often overlap in time and mobility, making it very difficult to tease apart isotopic peaks, to apportion the intensity of each and the contribution of each isotope to the determination of the peptide's monoisotopic mass, which is critical for the peptide's identification. Here we describe four algorithms for the Bruker timsTOF Pro that each play an important role in finding peptide features and determining their characteristics. These algorithms focus on separate characteristics that determine how candidate features are detected in the raw data. The first two algorithms deal with the complexity of the raw data, rapidly clustering raw data into spectra that allows isotopic peaks to be resolved. The third algorithm compensates for saturation of the instrument's detector thereby recovering lost dynamic range, and lastly, the fourth algorithm increases confidence of peptide identifications by simplification of the fragment spectra. These algorithms are effective in processing raw data to detect features and extracting the attributes required for peptide identification, and make an important contribution to an analytical pipeline by detecting features that are higher quality and better segmented from other peptides in close proximity. The software has been developed in Python using Numpy and Pandas and made freely available with an open-source MIT license to facilitate experimentation and further improvement (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.6513126). Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD030706.

Indexed as

PeptidesProteomicsAlgorithmsChromatography, LiquidIsotopesMass SpectrometrySoftwareIsotopesPeptides

Identifiers

PMID35797390
PMCPMC9262215

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.