4.5 Article

Interrogating Fractionation and Other Sources of Variability in Shotgun Proteomes Using Quality Metrics

Journal

PROTEOMICS
Volume 20, Issue 21-22, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pmic.201900382

Keywords

exosomes; fractionation; mycobacterium tuberculosis; myeloid-derived suppressor cells; quality control; QuaMeter; shotgun

Funding

  1. Strategic Health Innovation Partnership (SHIP) grant from the South African (SA) Department of Science and Technology (DST)
  2. SA Medical Research Council (SAMRC)
  3. National Research Foundation of South Africa [123237]
  4. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) [TP_04 _2018]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The increasing amount of publicly available proteomics data creates opportunities for data scientists to investigate quality metrics in novel ways. QuaMeter IDFree is used to generate quality metrics from 665 RAW files and 97 WIFF files representing publicly available shotgun mass spectrometry datasets. These experiments are selected to representMycobacterium tuberculosislysates, mouse MDSCs, and exosomes derived from human cell lines. Machine learning techniques are demonstrated to detect outliers within experiments and it is shown that quality metrics may be used to distinguish sources of variability among these experiments. In particular, the findings demonstrate that according to nested ANOVA performed on an SDS-PAGE shotgun principal component analysis, runs of fractions from the same gel regions cluster together rather than technical replicates, close temporal proximity, or even biological samples. This indicates that the individual fraction may have had a higher impact on the quality metrics than other factors. In addition, sample type, instrument type, mass analyzer, fragmentation technique, and digestion enzyme are identified as sources of variability. From a quality control perspective, the importance of study design and in particular, the run order, is illustrated in seeking ways to limit the impact of technical variability.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available