ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2023
Mistle: bringing spectral library predictions to metaproteomics with an efficient search index.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2023. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative performance of Scribe and database search engines in metaproteomic profiling of a ground-truth microbiome dataset.Journal of proteomics · 2026Article
- Koina: Democratizing machine learning for proteomics research.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Assessment of false discovery rate control in tandem mass spectrometry analysis using entrapment.Nature methods · 2025Article
- The microbiologist's guide to metaproteomics.iMeta · 2025Review
- FIORA: Local neighborhood-based prediction of compound mass spectra from single fragmentation events.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Rescoring Peptide Spectrum Matches: Boosting Proteomics Performance by Integrating Peptide Property Predictors Into Peptide Identification.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationDeep learning has moved to the forefront of tandem mass spectrometry-driven proteomics and authentic prediction for peptide fragmentation is more feasible than ever. Still, at this point spectral prediction is mainly used to validate database search results or for confined search spaces. Fully predicted spectral libraries have not yet been efficiently adapted to large search space problems that often occur in metaproteomics or proteogenomics.
resultsIn this study, we showcase a workflow that uses Prosit for spectral library predictions on two common metaproteomes and implement an indexing and search algorithm, Mistle, to efficiently identify experimental mass spectra within the library. Hence, the workflow emulates a classic protein sequence database search with protein digestion but builds a searchable index from spectral predictions as an in-between step. We compare Mistle to popular search engines, both on a spectral and database search level, and provide evidence that this approach is more accurate than a database search using MSFragger. Mistle outperforms other spectral library search engines in terms of run time and proves to be extremely memory efficient with a 4- to 22-fold decrease in RAM usage. This makes Mistle universally applicable to large search spaces, e.g. covering comprehensive sequence databases of diverse microbiomes. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Mistle is freely available on GitHub at https://github.com/BAMeScience/Mistle.
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.