4.6 Article

Comparative analysis of mass spectral matching-based compound identification in gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1298, Issue -, Pages 132-138

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2013.05.021

Keywords

GC-MS; Spectral matching; Compound identification; Weight factor

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health (NIH) through the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) [1RO1GM087735]
  2. National Institute of Health (NIH) through the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) [R21ES021311]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Compound identification in gas chromatography-Mass spectrometry (GC-MS) is usually achieved by matching query spectra to spectra present in a reference library. Although several spectral similarity measures have been developed and compared using a small reference library, it still remains unknown how the relationship between the spectral similarity measure and the size of reference library affects on the identification accuracy as well as the optimal weight factor. We used three reference libraries to investigate the dependency of the optimal weight factor, spectral similarity measure and the size of reference library. Our study demonstrated that the optimal weight factor depends on not only spectral similarity measure but also the size of reference library. The mixture semi-partial correlation measure outperforms all existing spectral similarity measures in all tested reference libraries, in spite of the computational expense. Furthermore, the accuracy of compound identification using a larger reference library in future is estimated by varying the size of reference library. Simulation study indicates that the mixture semi-partial correlation measure will have the best performance with the increase of reference library in future. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available