Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Mol Sci ; 25(10)2024 May 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38791181

RESUMO

The aim of this study was to compare filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) and protein aggregation capture (PAC) starting from a three-species protein mix (Human, Soybean and Pisum sativum) and two different starting amounts (1 and 10 µg). Peptide mixtures were analyzed by data-independent acquisition (DIA) and raw files were processed by three commonly used software: Spectronaut, MaxDIA and DIA-NN. Overall, the highest number of proteins (mean value of 5491) were identified by PAC (10 µg), while the lowest number (4855) was identified by FASP (1 µg). The latter experiment displayed the worst performance in terms of both specificity (0.73) and precision (0.24). Other tested conditions showed better diagnostic accuracy, with specificity values of 0.95-0.99 and precision values between 0.61 and 0.86. In order to provide guidance on the data analysis pipeline, the accuracy diagnostic of three software was investigated: (i) the highest sensitivity was obtained with Spectronaut (median of 0.67) highlighting the ability of Spectronaut to quantify low-abundance proteins, (ii) the best precision value was obtained by MaxDIA (median of 0.84), but with a reduced number of identifications compared to Spectronaut and DIA-NN data, and (iii) the specificity values were similar (between 0.93 and 0.99). The data are available on ProteomeXchange with the identifier PXD044349.


Assuntos
Proteômica , Software , Proteômica/métodos , Humanos , Glycine max/metabolismo , Glycine max/química , Pisum sativum/química , Pisum sativum/metabolismo , Proteínas de Plantas/análise , Proteoma/análise
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA