The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: a critical review
Open accessAbstract
The quantification of differences between two or more physiological states of a biological system is among the most important but also most challenging technical tasks in proteomics. In addition to the classical methods of differential protein gel or blot staining by dyes and fluorophores, mass-spectrometry-based quantification methods have gained increasing popularity over the past five years. Most of these methods employ differential stable isotope labeling to create a specific mass tag that can be recognized by a mass spectrometer and at the same time provide the basis for quantification. These mass tags can be introduced into proteins or peptides (i) metabolically, (ii) by chemical means, (iii) enzymatically, or (iv) provided by spiked synthetic peptide standards. In contrast, label-free quantification approaches aim to correlate the mass spectrometric signal of intact proteolytic peptides or the number of peptide sequencing events with the relative or absolute protein quantity directly. In this review, we critically examine the more commonly used quantitative mass spectrometry methods for their individual merits and discuss challenges in arriving at meaningful interpretations of quantitative proteomic data. Common quantitative mass spectrometry workflows. Boxes in blue and yellow represent two experimental conditions. Horizontal lines indicate when samples are combined. Dashed lines indicate points at which experimental variation and thus quantification errors can occur. (adapted with permission from [ 11 ])
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical significance for genomewide studies
Storey, J. D., & Tibshirani, R. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1530509100 · Cited by 9,692
Mass spectrometry-based proteomics
Aebersold, R., & Mann, M. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01511 · Cited by 6,955
Ong, S.-E., Blagoev, B., Kratchmarova, I., Kristensen, D. B., Steen, H., Pandey, A., & Mann, M. (2002) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m200025-mcp200 · Cited by 5,574
Quantitative analysis of complex protein mixtures using isotope-coded affinity tags
Gygi, S. P., Rist, B., Gerber, S. A., Turecek, F., Gelb, M. H., & Aebersold, R. (1999) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/13690 · Cited by 4,683
Ross, P. L., Huang, Y. N., Marchese, J. N., Williamson, B., Parker, K., Hattan, S., Khainovski, N., Pillai, S., Dey, S., Daniels, S., et al. (2004) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m400129-mcp200 · Cited by 4,401
Model-based analysis of oligonucleotide arrays: Expression index computation and outlier detection.
Li, C., & Wong, W. H. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.98.1.31 · Cited by 3,133
Absolute quantification of proteins and phosphoproteins from cell lysates by tandem MS
Gerber, S. A., Rush, J., Stemman, O., Kirschner, M. W., & Gygi, S. P. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0832254100 · Cited by 1,733
Mass spectrometry–based proteomics turns quantitative
Ong, S.-E., & Mann, M. (2005) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/nchembio736 · Cited by 1,572
Lu, P., Vogel, C., Wang, R., Yao, X., & Marcotte, E. M. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1270 · Cited by 1,139
Metabolic Labeling of Mammalian Organisms with Stable Isotopes for Quantitative Proteomic Analysis
Wu, C. C., MacCoss, M. J., Howell, K. E., Matthews, D. E., & Yates, J. R. (2004) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac049208j · Cited by 386
Cited by
Cox, J., & Mann, M. (2008) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.1511 · Cited by 14,855
Cox, J., Hein, M. Y., Luber, C. A., Paron, I., Nagaraj, N., & Mann, M. (2014) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.m113.031591 · Cited by 5,180
Insights into the regulation of protein abundance from proteomic and transcriptomic analyses
Vogel, C., & Marcotte, E. M. (2012) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3185 · Cited by 4,195
Protein Analysis by Shotgun/Bottom-up Proteomics
Zhang, Y., Fonslow, B. R., Shan, B., Baek, M.-C., & Yates, J. R. (2013) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr3003533 · Cited by 1,491
Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: critical review update from 2007 to the present
Bantscheff, M., Lemeer, S., Savitski, M. M., & Kuster, B. (2012) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-012-6203-4 · Cited by 801
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bantscheff, M., Schirle, M., Sweetman, G., Rick, J., & Kuster, B.
- Venue
- Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
- Published
- 2007-08-01
- Volume
- 389
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1017-1031
- ISSN
- 1618-2642 (ISSN-L)
- 1618-2650
- OpenAlex
- W2117327695
- Cited by
- 1,669
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 45.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: a critical review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00216-007-1486-6
- The paper
- Bantscheff, M., Schirle, M., Sweetman, G., Rick, J., & Kuster, B. (2007). Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: a critical review. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-007-1486-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
