Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39594597›Full record

ArticleCells2024

Differences in Uniquely Identified Peptides Between ddaPASEF and diaPASEF.

Mio Iwasaki, Rika Nishimura, Tatsuya Yamakawa, Yousuke Miyamoto, Tsuyoshi Tabata, Megumi Narita

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cells, 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

6 authors.

Mio IwasakiCenter for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2085-732X
Rika NishimuraCenter for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.ORCID 0009-0006-2670-3494
Tatsuya YamakawaCenter for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.ORCID 0009-0004-3986-8613
Yousuke MiyamotoCenter for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Tsuyoshi TabataCenter for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Megumi NaritaCenter for iPS Cell Research and Application, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8198-4042

Funding

Core Center for Regenerative Medicine and Cell and Gene Therapy from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) JP23bm1323001Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (JSPS) 13J02403the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) 23gm6410003h0004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advancements in mass spectrometry-based proteomics have made it possible to conduct comprehensive protein analysis. In particular, the emergence of the data-independent acquisition (DIA) method powered by machine learning has significantly improved protein identification efficiency. However, compared with the conventional data-dependent acquisition (DDA) method, the degree to which peptides are uniquely identified by DIA and DDA has not been thoroughly examined. In this study, we identified over 10,000 proteins using the DDA and DIA methods and analyzed the characteristics of unique peptides identified by each method. Results showed that the number of peptides uniquely identified by DDA and DIA using the same column type was 19% and 32%, respectively, with shorter peptides preferentially detected by the DIA method. In addition, more DIA-specific peptides were identified, especially during the first 10% of elution time, and the overall 1/

Indexed as

PeptidesProteomicsHumansPhosphorylationProteomeUbiquitinationPeptidesProteomedata-dependent acquisitiondata-independent acquisitionDDADIAnanoLC-MS/MSphospho-proteomeubiquitin–proteome

Identifiers

PMID39594597
PMCPMC11592772

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.