4.7 Article

Metrics for the Human Proteome Project 2015: Progress on the Human Proteome and Guidelines for High-Confidence Protein Identification

Journal

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
Volume 14, Issue 9, Pages 3452-3460

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00499

Keywords

Human Proteome Project; HPP metrics; guidelines; high-confidence protein identifications; neXtProt; PeptideAtlas; Human Protein Atlas; Global Proteome Machine database (GPMDB); missing proteins; novel proteins

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [U54ES017885]
  2. NIH [RO1GM087221, 2P50GM076547, U54EB020406]
  3. EU FP7 ProteomeXchange grant [260558]
  4. Swiss Federation Commission for Technology and Innovation grant [CTI 10214]
  5. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  6. EU

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Remarkable progress continues on the annotation of the proteins identified in the Human Proteome and on finding credible proteomic evidence for the expression of missing proteins. Missing proteins are those with no previous protein-level evidence or insufficient evidence to make a confident identification upon reanalysis in PeptideAtlas and curation in neXtProt. Enhanced with several major new data sets published in 2014, the human proteome presented as neXtProt, version 2014-09-19, has 16 491 unique confident proteins (PE level I), up from 13 664 at 2012-12 and 15 646 at 2013-09. That leaves 2948 missing proteins from genes classified having protein existence level PE 2, 3, or 4, as well as 616 dubious proteins at PE 5. Here, we document the progress of the HPP and discuss the importance of assessing the quality of evidence, confirming automated findings and considering alternative protein matches for spectra and peptides. We provide guidelines for proteomics investigators to apply in reporting newly identified proteins.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available