4.7 Article

A predictive model for vertebrate bone identification from collagen using proteomic mass spectrometry

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-90231-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, United States Department of Justice [2010-DN-BX-K192, 2014-DN-BX-K014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Proteogenomics is a method for species identification by analyzing the proteome of an unknown organism, even when it is partially degraded. The identification is based on detecting species-specific peptides, which can be challenging due to current limitations in mass spectrometry and algorithm interpretation errors.
Proteogenomics is an increasingly common method for species identification as it allows for rapid and inexpensive interrogation of an unknown organism's proteome-even when the proteome is partially degraded. The proteomic method typically uses tandem mass spectrometry to survey all peptides detectable in a sample that frequently contains hundreds or thousands of proteins. Species identification is based on detection of a small numbers of species-specific peptides. Genetic analysis of proteins by mass spectrometry, however, is a developing field, and the bone proteome, typically consisting of only two proteins, pushes the limits of this technology. Nearly 20% of highly confident spectra from modern human bone samples identify non-human species when searched against a vertebrate database-as would be necessary with a fragment of unknown bone. These non-human peptides are often the result of current limitations in mass spectrometry or algorithm interpretation errors. Consequently, it is difficult to know if a species-specific peptide used to identify a sample is actually present in that sample. Here we evaluate the causes of peptide sequence errors and propose an unbiased, probabilistic approach to determine the likelihood that a species is correctly identified from bone without relying on species-specific peptides.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据