ArticleNature communications2026
Systematic evaluation of PASEF acquisition strategies in complex metaproteomes.
Article in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Systematic evaluation of PASEF acquisition strategies in complex metaproteomes.Nature communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Metaproteomics measures functional expression in complex microbial communities, but extreme sample complexity and dynamic range challenge acquisition strategies. Trapped ion mobility spectrometry with parallel accumulation-serial fragmentation (PASEF) has expanded into multiple acquisition modes, yet systematic evaluations in high-complexity metaproteomes remain limited. Here, we benchmark five PASEF modes-DDA-, DIA-, Slice-, Synchro-, and midia-PASEF-using a complex fecal peptide background spiked with defined bacterial references. Across three gradients and input levels, 540 LC-MS acquisitions are analyzed under matched conditions. Based on data-derived performance scores, DIA-based strategies outperform DDA-PASEF in peptide and protein coverage, particularly for low-abundance microbial features. DIA- and Slice-PASEF show strong quantitative reproducibility, reduced ratio compression, and consistent species-abundance scaling, while functional profiling reveals expanded annotation depth. When tested in a murine colonic injury model, the two highest-scoring methods, DIA- and Slice-PASEF, capture concordant host and microbial responses.
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.