4.5 Article

ZoomQuant: An application for the quantitation of stable isotope labeled peptides

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jasms.2004.11.014

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL-02-04, N01 HV028182] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The main goal of comparative proteomics is the quantitation of the differences in abundance of many proteins between two different biological samples in a single experiment. By differentially labeling the peptides from the two samples and combining them in a single analysis, relative ratios of protein abundance can be accurately determined. Protease catalyzed O-18 exchange is a simple method to differentially label peptides, but the lack of robust software tools to analyze the data from mass spectra of O-18 labeled peptides generated by common ion trap mass spectrometers has been a limitation. ZoomQuant is a stand-alone computational tool that analyzes the mass spectra of O-18 labeled peptides from ion trap instruments and determines relative abundance ratios between two samples. Starting with a filtered list of candidate peptides that have been successfully identified by Sequest, ZoomQuant analyzes the isotopic forms of the peptides using high-resolution zoom scan spectrum data. The theoretical isotope distribution is determined from the peptide sequence and is used to deconvolute the peak areas associated with the unlabeled, partially labeled, and fully labeled species. The ratio between the labeled and unlabeled peptides is then calculated using several different methods. ZoomQuant's graphical user interface allows the user to view and adjust the parameters for peak calling and quantitation and select which peptides should contribute to the overall abundance ratio calculation. Finally, ZoomQuant generates a summary report of the relative abundance of the peptides identified in the two samples. (J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 2005, 16, 302-306) (C) 2004 American Society for Mass Spectrometry.

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

4.5
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