ArticleJournal of proteome research2025
Evaluation of a Prototype Orbitrap Astral Zoom Mass Spectrometer for Quantitative Proteomics─Beyond Identification Lists.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Revisiting resonance-excitation collision-induced dissociation for data-independent acquisition.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- What Does Next-Generation Mass Spectrometry Offer for Proteomics? A Comprehensive Platform Comparison.Journal of proteome research · 2026Article
- Low-resolution FAIMS for increased peptide coverage in low-load and single-cell proteomics.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development of Highly Multiplex Targeted Proteomics Assays in Biofluids Using a Nominal Mass Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2026Article
- Atlas of lysine acetylation in the mouse.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- QTOF and Orbitrap Technologies in Modern Pesticide Analysis: Applications in Residue Detection and Degradation Pathway Elucidation.Journal of analytical methods in chemistry · 2026Review
- The $10 proteome: low-cost, deep and quantitative proteome profiling of limited sample amounts using the Orbitrap Astral and timsTOF Ultra 2 mass spectrometers.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Blood proteomics for quantitative biomarkers of cellular therapies.Biomarker research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mass spectrometry instrumentation continues to evolve rapidly, yet quantifying these advances beyond conventional peptide and protein detections remains challenging. Here, we evaluate a modified Orbitrap Astral Zoom mass spectrometer (MS) prototype and compare its performance to the standard Orbitrap Astral MS. Across a range of acquisition methods and sample inputs, the prototype instrument outperformed the standard Orbitrap Astral MS in precursor and protein identifications, ion beam utilization, and quantitative precision. To enable meaningful cross-platform comparisons, we implemented an ion calibration framework that converts signal intensity from arbitrary units to ions per second. This benchmarking strategy showed that the prototype sampled 23.1% more ions per peptide than the original Orbitrap Astral MS. This increase in the ion beam utilization resulted in improved sensitivity and quantitative precision. To make these metrics broadly accessible, we added new metrics to the Skyline document grid to report the number of ions measured in a spectrum at the apex of the elution peak or the sum of ions between the peak integration boundaries. Taken together, our results demonstrate the Orbitrap Astral Zoom prototype as a high-performance platform for data-independent acquisition proteomics and establish a generalizable framework for evaluation of MS performance based on the number of ions detected for each analyte. Data are available on Panorama Public and ProteomeXchange under the identifier PXD064536.
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.