Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38968291›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2024

Estimating error rates for single molecule protein sequencing experiments.

Matthew Beauregard Smith, Kent VanderVelden, Thomas Blom, Heather D Stout, James H Mapes, Tucker M Folsom, Christopher Martin, Angela M Bardo, Edward M Marcotte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Principles ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Matthew Beauregard SmithOden Institute, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3145-1782
Kent VanderVeldenErisyon Inc., Austin Texas, United States of America.
Thomas BlomErisyon Inc., Austin Texas, United States of America.
Heather D StoutDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
James H MapesErisyon Inc., Austin Texas, United States of America.
Tucker M FolsomErisyon Inc., Austin Texas, United States of America.
Christopher MartinErisyon Inc., Austin Texas, United States of America.
Angela M BardoDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.
Edward M MarcotteOden Institute, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8808-180X

Funding

Mapping the CPLANE interactome, an extensive protein interaction network underlying human ciliopathiesR01HD085901 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI EDWARD M MARCOTTE, John B Wallingford · 2016 to 2026
$6.2M
Proteomics and model organism humanization to decode human geneticsR35GM122480 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI EDWARD M MARCOTTE · 2017 to 2026
$5.4M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD085901NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM122480
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The practical application of new single molecule protein sequencing (SMPS) technologies requires accurate estimates of their associated sequencing error rates. Here, we describe the development and application of two distinct parameter estimation methods for analyzing SMPS reads produced by fluorosequencing. A Hidden Markov Model (HMM) based approach, extends whatprot, where we previously used HMMs for SMPS peptide-read matching. This extension offers a principled approach for estimating key parameters for fluorosequencing experiments, including missed amino acid cleavages, dye loss, and peptide detachment. Specifically, we adapted the Baum-Welch algorithm, a standard technique to estimate transition probabilities for an HMM using expectation maximization, but modified here to estimate a small number of parameter values directly rather than estimating every transition probability independently. We demonstrate a high degree of accuracy on simulated data, but on experimental datasets, we observed that the model needed to be augmented with an additional error type, N-terminal blocking. This, in combination with data pre-processing, results in reasonable parameterizations of experimental datasets that agree with controlled experimental perturbations. A second independent implementation using a hybrid of DIRECT and Powell's method to reduce the root mean squared error (RMSE) between simulations and the real dataset was also developed. We compare these methods on both simulated and real data, finding that our Baum-Welch based approach outperforms DIRECT and Powell's method by most, but not all, criteria. Although some discrepancies between the results exist, we also find that both approaches provide similar error rate estimates from experimental single molecule fluorosequencing datasets.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMarkov ChainsSequence Analysis, ProteinComputational BiologyComputer SimulationProteinsSingle Molecule ImagingProteins

Identifiers

PMID38968291
PMCPMC11253918

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.