UPS1 and UPS2 TMT Benchmarking Experiment
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
INSTRUMENT(S):
ORGANISM(S): Homo Sapiens (human) Escherichia Coli
SUBMITTER: 
James Wright
LAB HEAD: Jyoti Choudhary
PROVIDER: PXD070151 | Pride | 2026-05-15
REPOSITORIES: Pride
Dataset's files
Items per page: 5 1 - 5 of 10 |
Similar Datasets
Project description:Data independent acquisition (DIA) has become a well-established method in LC-MS driven proteomics. Nonetheless, there are still a lot of possibilities at the data analysis level. By benchmarking different DIA analysis workflows through a ground truth sample mimicking real differential abundance samples, consisting of a differential spike-in of UPS2 in a constant yeast background, we provide a roadmap for DIA data analysis of shotgun samples based on whether sensitivity, precision or accuracy is of the essence. Three different commonly used DIA software tools (DIA-NN, EncyclopeDIA and SpectronautTM) were tested in both spectral library mode and spectral library free mode. In spectral library mode we used the independent spectral library prediction tools Prosit and MS2PIP together with DeepLC, next to the classical DDA-based spectral libraries. In total we benchmarked 12 DIA workflows. DIA-NN in library free mode or using in silico predicted libraries shows the highest sensitivity maintaining a high reproducibility and accuracy.
2024-05-06 | PXD044981 | Pride
Project description:In this study, label free peptide intensities from a well quantitatively characterised yeast cell lysate were acquired on two orbitrap mass spectrometers (LTQ-Velos and Q Exactive HF). Additionally, samples containing Universal Proteomics Standard and the Proteomics Dynamic range Standard (http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/life-science/proteomics/mass-spectrometry/ups1-and-ups2-proteomic.html) in a yeast background were also acquired. The absolute abundances of over 340 proteins present in that yeast lysate (determined in a parallel SRM-based study) were then used in order to determine the flyability (or detectability) of thousands of peptides. The flyability scores, termed the ‘F-factors’, reflect how well a peptide ionises in a complex chromatographically separated sample. Specifically, F-factors are calculated by normalising peptide precursor ion intensity by the absolute abundance of its parent protein. Based on the analysis of the six datasets deposited here (reflecting different gradients and instrument platforms) the study found that physicochemical properties including peptide length, charge and hydrophobicity are predictors of peptide detectability. Furthermore, it was established that hydrophobicity has a non-linear relationship with detectability and that coelution with competing ions significantly affects peptide detectability. The analysis based on the data deposited here suggests that F-factors have great utility for understanding peptide detectability and gas-phase ion chemistry in complex chromatographically-separated peptide mixtures. The concept of F-factors will also undoubtedly assist in better surrogate selection in targeted mass spectrometry studies and allow more accurate calibration of peptide ion signal in label-free workflows.
2017-08-09 | PXD003472 | Pride
Project description:Proteomic workflows based on nanoLC-MS/MS data-dependent-acquisition analysis have progressed tremendously in recent years due to the technical improvement of mass spectrometers, and now allow to extensively characterize complex protein mixtures. High-resolution and fast sequencing instruments have enabled the use of label-free quantitative methods, which appear as an attractive way to analyze differential protein expression in complex biological samples. Classical label-free quantitative workflows are based either on spectral counting of MS/MS sequencing scans for each protein, or on the extraction of peptide ion peak area values in the LC-MS map composed of all the survey MS scans acquired during the chromatographic gradient. However, the computational processing of the data for label-free quantification still remains a challenge. Here, we provide a dual proteomic standard composed of an equimolar mixture of 48 human proteins (Sigma UPS1) spiked at different concentrations into a background of yeast cell lysate, that was used to benchmark several label-free quantitative workflows, involving different software packages developed in recent years. This experimental design allowed to finely assess their performances in terms of sensitivity and false discovery rate, by measuring the number of true and false-positive (respectively UPS1 or yeast background proteins found as differential). This dataset can also be used to benchmark other label-free workflows, adjust software parameter settings, improve algorithms for extraction of the quantitative metrics from raw MS data, or evaluate downstream statistical methods
2015-12-01 | PXD001819 | Pride
Project description:Missed identifications of peptides in data-dependent acquisition (DDA) proteomics experiments is an obstacle n the precise determination of which proteins are present in a sample and their relative abundance. Efforts pular analysis workfl raw data to transfer a pehtiraw identifiher. Another approach ipeptide identifictatioimpute peptide idich they were missing.Wen which they were missing.We propoted xtractio called targeted extractio called targeted extractio called targeted extxactio c called targeted eractio called targeted extractio called targeted extraugh which prees t t in a run. The modeeiseetween obdentifieference library o pep from muliseetween obdentifieference library o pep from mulise the risk of drawing nimise the risk of drawing nimise the risk of dra drg nim nimihe the risk of drawing niminimise the risk of drawiies, oate of false discs Verechgtperforms the poe (FDR)tios of decoys as targtperforms the poe (FDR)tios of decoys as targtperforms the poe (FDR)tios of decoys as targtperforms the poe (FDR)tios of decoys as targtperforms the popular anand MSFraggt will be a vaprabeomics ribution to the proteomics ribution to the proteomics ribution to the proteomics ribution to the proteomics ribution to the proteomics ribution to the proteomics ribution to the proteomics toolbox for protein quantification.
2022-03-07 | PXD030706 | Pride
Project description:Label-free quantification of various concentrations of Universal Proteomic Standard (UPS1, Sigma-Aldrich) spiked in yeast extract.
2015-11-27 | PXD002370 | Pride
Project description:This project aims at providing a quantitative dataset from LC-MS/MS injections of a calibrated UPS1 mixture spiked in an Arabidopsis thaliana background.
2022-07-31 | PXD027800 | Pride
Project description:Transcriptional profiling of E.coli SE15 comparing wild type E.coli SE15 with Autoindecur 2 synthesis gene LuxS mutnat E.coli SE15. E.coli SE15 is isolated from indwelling catheter of urinary tract infected patient. Examine change of quorum sensing related gene by deleting autoinducer 2 synthesis gene LuxS in E.coli One array: Wild type E.coli SE15 vs. LuxS mutant E.coli SE15
2013-08-02 | E-GEOD-49474 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:We quantified proteins in the model cyanobacterium Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 given the general importance of cyanobacteria for global photosynthesis, for synthetic biology and biotechnology research, and their ancestral relationship to the chloroplasts of plants. Four mass spectrometry methods were used to quantify 97 cellular components involved in the biosynthesis of chlorophyll, carotenoid and bilin pigments, membrane assembly, the light reactions of photosynthesis, fixation of carbon dioxide and nitrogen, and hydrogen and sulfur metabolism. One quantification method was calibrated with artificial 15N-labelled proteins comprising concatenated proteotypic tryptic peptides and the other three methods were label-free (DDA-iBAQ, DDA-Top3, DIA-Top3) calibrated with the Sigma UPS2 standard protein mixture. As expected, the quantification methods gave individual distributions of abundance levels for each target protein that, for statistical validity, were not combined into single central tendency and variation metrics. Instead, overlapping distributions were merged to provide consensus abundance ranges. Quantification, expressed as copy numbers per cell (cpc), spanned four orders of magnitude, representing the complete abundance range from <1000 to >100,000 cpc of the proteins representing the complexes and pathways that were the focus of this study.
2023-01-04 | PXD035632 | Pride
Project description:We developed a set of algorithms for label-free quantification, termed MaxLFQ, embedded into MaxQuant. This contains two datasets to benchmark MaxLFQ: The proteome benchmark dataset consists of of HeLa and E. coli lysates mixed at defined ratios. The dynamic range benchmark dataset consists of UPS1/UPS2 standards (Sigma) spiked into E. coli lysates and quantified against each other.
2014-09-17 | PXD000279 | Pride
Project description:This dataset derives from experiments testing quantitation using label-free methods. We used the Sigma-Aldrich UPS1 and UPS2 protein standard sets, containing proteins of 6-83 kD; the UPS1 set includes 49 human proteins at a single molar concentration, while the UPS2 set includes six groups of eight human proteins spanning a six orders of magnitude in concentration. In both cases, dilutions of UPS1 or UPS2 proteins were made into an E. coli extract, which allows these experiments to mimic detection of low abundance proteins in a complex protein mixture. The UPS1/E. coli and UPS2/E. coli mixtures were run on three mass spectrometers, an Orbitrap Velos Elite and two ion-trap instruments (Velos and LTQ). Proteins were quantified using MS1 peak volume (Orbitrap) or MS2 intensities and spectral counts (Orbitrap, Velos, LTQ). The analyzed results show that the ion-trap instruments perform nearly as well for label-free quantitation as does the Orbitrap. In addition, the \"Top 3\" method for quantitation—measuring only the three most abundant peptides—performed no better than the \"iBAQ\" quantitation method. Data analysis: MS1 data were analyzed using MaxQuant. MaxQuant version 1.2.2.5 software was used for protein identification and quantitation. Using the search engine Andromeda, mass spectrometry data were searched against the database containing UPS and E. coli proteins. MaxQuant reports summed intensity for each protein, as well as its iBAQ value. In the iBAQ algorithm, the intensities of the precursor peptides that map to each protein are summed together and divided by the number of theoretically observable peptides, which is considered to be all tryptic peptides between 6 and 30 amino acids in length. This operation converts a measure that is expected to be proportional to mass (intensity) into one that is proportional to molar amount (iBAQ). To determine relative molar abundances for each E. coli and human protein using MS1 data, two methods were used. In the first, we determined each proteins relative iBAQ (riBAQ), a normalized measure of molar abundance. We removed from the analysis all contaminant proteins that entered our sample-preparation workflow, for example keratins and trypsin, and then divided each remaining proteins iBAQ value by the sum of all non-contaminant iBAQ values. We also measured the average intensity of the three (or fewer, if fewer peptides were detected) peptides with the highest intensity, Top3, for each protein detected9. Peptides were chosen separately for each experiment, so the same peptides were not necessarily used across the four experiments. We generated a normalized \"top three\" abundance factor by dividing the average intensity for the three most abundant peptides of an individual protein and by the sum of all Top3 values in an experiment. Peptide intensities were summed for all charge states and variable modifications. For MS2 label-free analysis with MS2 spectra, MS2 data were searched against the database described above using SEQUEST. Setting to 1% the peptide false-discovery rate, estimated using a decoy (reversed) database, proteins were identified using the PAW pipeline. Normalized molar intensity (im) was calculated by dividing i, the summed intensity for an individual protein, by its molecular mass; the i/mr value for each protein was divided by the sum of all i/mr values. Normalized molar counts (cm) were calculated similarly, except the summed spectral counts for a protein (c) was used instead.
2013-12-05 | PXD000602 | Pride