CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 64

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Applications and challenges of forensic proteomics

Merkley, Eric D., Wunschel, David S., Wahl, Karen L., Jarman, Kristin H.·2019·Forensic Science International
DOI 10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.022
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Mass spectrometry-based proteomics has been a useful tool for addressing numerous questions in basic biology research for many years. This success, combined with the maturity of mass spectrometric instrumentation, the ever-increasing availability of protein sequence databases derived from genome sequencing, and the growing sophistication of data analysis methods, places proteomics in a position to have an important role in biological forensics. Because proteins contain information about genotype (sequence) and phenotype (expression levels), proteomics methods can both identify biological samples and characterize the conditions that produced them. In addition to serving as a valuable orthogonal method to genomic analyses, proteomics can be used in cases where nucleic acids are absent, degraded, or uninformative. Mass spectrometry provides both broad applicability and exquisite specificity, often without customized detection reagents like primers or antibodies. This review briefly introduces proteomics methods, and surveys a variety of forensic applications (including criminal justice, historical, archaeological, and national security areas). Finally, challenges and crucial areas for further research are addressed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.022

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Research works printed but not linked: 159

  1. Saks, 2005, Expert evidence after daubert, Ann. Rev. Law Soc. Sci., 1, 105, 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.1.041604.115907 · DOI
  2. Karlsson, 2012, Strain-level typing and identification of bacteria using mass spectrometry-based proteomics, J. Proteome Res., 11, 2710, 10.1021/pr2010633 · DOI
  3. Boulund, 2017, TCUP: typing and characterization of bacteria using bottom-up tandem mass spectrometry proteomics, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 16, 1052, 10.1074/mcp.M116.061721 · DOI
  4. Clowers, 2013, Characterization of residual medium peptides from Yersinia pestis cultures, Anal. Chem., 85, 3933, 10.1021/ac3034272 · DOI
  5. Laatsch, 2014, Human hair shaft proteomic profiling: individual differences, site specificity and cuticle analysis, Peer J., 2, 10.7717/peerj.506 · DOI
  6. Parker, 2016, Demonstration of protein-based human identification using the hair shaft proteome, PLoS One, 11, 10.1371/journal.pone.0160653 · DOI
  7. Legg, 2014, Discovery of highly specific protein markers for the identification of biological stains, Electrophoresis, 35, 3069, 10.1002/elps.201400125 · DOI
  8. Legg, 2017, Verification of protein biomarker specificity for the identification of biological stains by quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry, Electrophoresis, 38, 833, 10.1002/elps.201600352 · DOI
  9. Van Steendam, 2013, Mass spectrometry-based proteomics as a tool to identify biological matrices in forensic science, Int. J. Legal Med., 127, 287, 10.1007/s00414-012-0747-x · DOI
  10. Ohana, 2016, Identification of meat products by shotgun spectral matching, Food Chem., 203, 28, 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.01.138 · DOI
  11. Wulff, 2013, Authentication of fish products by large-scale comparison of tandem mass spectra, J. Proteome Res., 12, 5253, 10.1021/pr4006525 · DOI
  12. Procopio, 2017, Minimizing laboratory-induced decay in bone proteomics, J. Proteome Res., 16, 447, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00564 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Buckley, 2009, Species identification by analysis of bone collagen using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight mass spectrometry, Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom., 23, 3843, 10.1002/rcm.4316 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Roux-Dalvai, 2017, Towards a new diagnostic tool for urinary tract infection using LC–MSMS in data independent acquisition mode and bacterial specific spectral libraries, Twelfth International Symposium on on Mass Spectrometry in the Health and Life Sciences, San Francisco, California, U.S.A., 2017. Mol. Cell. Proteom., 16, S67
  15. Lluveras-Tenorio, 2017, GC/MS and proteomics to unravel the painting history of the lost Giant Buddhas of Bāmiyān (Afghanistan), PLoS One, 12, 10.1371/journal.pone.0172990 · DOI
  16. Brandt, 2014, Species identification of archaeological skin objects from Danish bogs: comparison between mass spectrometry-based peptide sequencing and microscopy-based methods, PLoS One, 9, 10.1371/journal.pone.0106875 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Yang, 2014, Proteomics evidence for kefir dairy in Early Bronze Age China, J. Archaeol. Sci., 45, 178, 10.1016/j.jas.2014.02.005 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Fredriksson, 2005, Forensic identification of neat ricin and of ricin from crude castor bean extracts by mass spectrometry, Anal. Chem., 77, 1545, 10.1021/ac048756u · DOI
  19. Schieltz, 2011, Analysis of active ricin and castor bean proteins in a ricin preparation, castor bean extract, and surface swabs from a public health investigation, Forensic Sci. Int., 209, 70, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.12.013 · DOI
  20. Brinkworth, 2009, Detection of intact ricin in crude and purified extracts from castor beans using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization mass spectrometry, Anal. Chem., 81, 1529, 10.1021/ac802240f · DOI
  21. Kalb, 2009, Mass spectrometric detection of ricin and its activity in food and clinical samples, Anal. Chem., 81, 2037, 10.1021/ac802769s · DOI
  22. Schieltz, 2015, Quantification of ricin, RCA and comparison of enzymatic activity in 18 Ricinus communis cultivars by isotope dilution mass spectrometry, Toxicon, 95, 72, 10.1016/j.toxicon.2015.01.003 · DOI
  23. Dupré, 2015, Multiplex quantification of protein toxins in human biofluids and food matrices using immunoextraction and high-resolution targeted mass spectrometry, Anal. Chem., 87, 8473, 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b01900 · DOI
  24. Boyer, 2005, From the mouse to the mass spectrometer: detection and differentiation of the endoproteinase activities of botulinum neurotoxins A–G by mass spectrometry, Anal. Chem., 77, 3916, 10.1021/ac050485f · DOI
  25. Kalb, 2005, Detection of botulinum neurotoxin A in a spiked milk sample with subtype identification through toxin proteomics, Anal. Chem., 77, 6140, 10.1021/ac0511748 · DOI
  26. Kalb, 2013, Mass spectrometric identification and differentiation of botulinum neurotoxins through toxin proteomics, Rev. Anal. Chem., 32, 189, 10.1515/revac-2013-0013 · DOI
  27. Gilquin, 2017, A proteomics assay to detect eight CBRN-relevant toxins in food, Proteomics, 17
  28. Fredriksson, 2015, Identification of RIP-II toxins by affinity enrichment, enzymatic digestion and LC–MS, Anal. Chem., 87, 967, 10.1021/ac5032918 · DOI
  29. Oldrati, 2016, Advances in venomics, Mol. Biosyst., 12, 3530, 10.1039/C6MB00516K · DOI
  30. Saks, 2008, Failed forensics: how forensic science lost its way and how it might yet find it, Ann. Rev. Law Soc. Sci., 4, 149, 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172303 · DOI
  31. Aebersold, 2003, Mass spectrometry-based proteomics, Nature, 422, 198, 10.1038/nature01511 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Altelaar, 2013, Next-generation proteomics: towards an integrative view of proteome dynamics, Nat. Rev. Genet., 14, 35, 10.1038/nrg3356 · DOI
  33. Yates, 2009, Proteomics by mass spectrometry: approaches, advances, and applications, Ann. Rev. Biomed. Eng., 11, 49, 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-061008-124934 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Nesvizhskii, 2010, A survey of computational methods and error rate estimation procedures for peptide and protein identification in shotgun proteomics, J. Proteomics, 73, 2092, 10.1016/j.jprot.2010.08.009 · DOI
  35. Lange, 2008, Selected reaction monitoring for quantitative proteomics, Mol. Syst. Biol., 4, 10.1038/msb.2008.61 · DOI
  36. Zubarev, 2013, Orbitrap mass spectrometry, Anal. Chem., 85, 5288, 10.1021/ac4001223 · DOI
  37. Chapman, 2014, Multiplexed and data-independent tandem mass spectrometry for global proteome profiling, Mass Spectrom. Rev., 33, 452, 10.1002/mas.21400 · DOI
  38. Ahmed, 2009, Sample preparation and fractionation for proteome analysis and cancer biomarker discovery by mass spectrometry, J. Sep. Sci., 32, 771, 10.1002/jssc.200800622 · DOI
  39. Bodzon-Kulakowska, 2007, Methods for samples preparation in proteomic research, J. Chromatogr. B, 849, 1, 10.1016/j.jchromb.2006.10.040 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Burkhart, 2012, Systematic and quantitative comparison of digest efficiency and specificity reveals the impact of trypsin quality on MS-based proteomics, J. Proteomics, 75, 1454, 10.1016/j.jprot.2011.11.016 · DOI
  41. Girelli, 2005, Application of immobilized enzyme reactor in on-line high performance liquid chromatography: a review, J. Chromatogr. B, 819, 3, 10.1016/j.jchromb.2005.01.031 · DOI
  42. Anderson, 2004, Mass spectrometric quantitation of peptides and proteins using stable isotope standards and capture by anti-peptide antibodies (SISCAPA), J. Proteome Res., 3, 235, 10.1021/pr034086h · DOI
  43. Eng, 2011, A face in the crowd: recognizing peptides through database search, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 10, 10.1074/mcp.R111.009522 · DOI
  44. Eng, 1994, An approach to correlate tandem mass spectral data of peptides with amino acid sequences in a protein database, J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom., 5, 976, 10.1016/1044-0305(94)80016-2 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Eng, 2013, Comet: An open-source MS/MS sequence database search tool, Proteomics, 13, 22, 10.1002/pmic.201200439 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Perkins, 1999, Probability-based protein identification by searching sequence databases using mass spectrometry data, Electrophoresis, 20, 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2683(19991201)20:18<3551::AID-ELPS3551>3.0.CO;2-2 · DOI
  47. Craig, 2004, TANDEM: matching proteins with tandem mass spectra, Bioinformatics, 20, 1466, 10.1093/bioinformatics/bth092 · DOI
  48. Tabb, 2007, MyriMatch: highly accurate tandem mass spectral peptide identification by multivariate hypergeometric analysis, J. Proteome Res., 6, 654, 10.1021/pr0604054 · DOI
  49. Storey, 2002, A direct approach to false discovery rates, J. R. Stat. Soc. Series B Stat. Methodol., 64, 479, 10.1111/1467-9868.00346 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Storey, 2003, Statistical significance for genomewide studies, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 100, 9440, 10.1073/pnas.1530509100 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Käll, 2008, Posterior error probabilities and false discovery rates: two sides of the same coin, J. Proteome Res., 7, 10.1021/pr700739d · DOI
  52. Griss, 2016, Spectral library searching in proteomics, Proteomics, 16, 729, 10.1002/pmic.201500296 · DOI
  53. Zhang, 2011, Understanding the improved sensitivity of spectral library searching over sequence database searching in proteomics data analysis, Proteomics, 11, 1075, 10.1002/pmic.201000492 · DOI
  54. Zhang, 2018, Reverse and random decoy methods for false discovery rate estimation in high mass accuracy peptide spectral library searches, J. Proteome Res., 17, 846, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.7b00614 · DOI
  55. Cheng, 2013, Spectrum-based method to generate good decoy libraries for spectral library searching in peptide identifications, J. Proteome Res., 12, 2305, 10.1021/pr301039b · DOI
  56. Wang, 2013, Spectral library generating function for assessing spectrum-spectrum match significance, J. Proteome Res., 12, 3944, 10.1021/pr400230p · DOI
  57. Ma, 2012, De novo sequencing and homology searching, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 11, 10.1074/mcp.O111.014902 · DOI
  58. Devabhaktuni, 2018, Measuring proteomes with long strings: a new, unconstrained paradigm in mass spectrum interpretation, bioRxiv
  59. Matzke, 2013, A comparative analysis of computational approaches to relative protein quantification using peptide peak intensities in label-free LC–MS proteomics experiments, Proteomics, 13, 493, 10.1002/pmic.201200269 · DOI
  60. Lundgren, 2010, Role of spectral counting in quantitative proteomics, Expert Rev. Proteomics, 7, 39, 10.1586/epr.09.69 · DOI
  61. Nahnsen, 2013, Tools for label-free peptide quantification, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 12, 549, 10.1074/mcp.R112.025163 · DOI
  62. Neilson, 2011, Less label, more free: approaches in label-free quantitative mass spectrometry, Proteomics, 11, 535, 10.1002/pmic.201000553 · DOI
  63. Cox, 2008, MaxQuant enables high peptide identification rates, individualized p.p.b.-range mass accuracies and proteome-wide protein quantification, Nat. Biotechnol., 26, 1367, 10.1038/nbt.1511 · DOI · Paper page
  64. Schilling, 2012, Platform independent and label-free quantitation of proteomic data using MS1 extracted ion chromatograms in skyline. Application to protein acetylation and phosphorylation, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 11, 202, 10.1074/mcp.M112.017707 · DOI
  65. Boersema, 2009, Multiplex peptide stable isotope dimethyl labeling for quantitative proteomics, Nat. Protoc., 4, 484, 10.1038/nprot.2009.21 · DOI
  66. Ong, 2002, Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture, SILAC, as a simple and accurate approach to expression proteomics, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 1, 376, 10.1074/mcp.M200025-MCP200 · DOI · Paper page
  67. Mani, 2012, Statistical characterization of multiple-reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (MRM-MS) assays for quantitative proteomics, BMC Bioinformatics, 13, S9, 10.1186/1471-2105-13-S16-S9 · DOI
  68. Schwenk, 2017, The human plasma proteome draft of 2017: building on the human plasma peptide atlas from mass spectrometry and complementary assays, J. Proteome Res., 16, 4299, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.7b00467 · DOI
  69. Yang, 2012, Proteomic analysis of menstrual blood, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 11, 1024, 10.1074/mcp.M112.018390 · DOI
  70. Adeola, 2018, Emerging diagnostic and therapeutic potentials of human hair proteomics, Proteomics Clin. Appl., 12, 10.1002/prca.201700048 · DOI
  71. Rice, 2011, Proteomic analysis of hair shaft and nail plate, J. Cosmet. Sci., 62, 229
  72. Jodar, 2017, Semen proteomics and male infertility, J. Proteomics, 162, 125, 10.1016/j.jprot.2016.08.018 · DOI
  73. Zhang, 2010, Proteomics in bone research, Expert Rev. Proteomics, 7, 103, 10.1586/epr.09.90 · DOI
  74. Kushner, 2018, Payne, individual variability of protein expression in human tissues, J. Proteome Res., 17, 3914, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00580 · DOI
  75. Dammeier, 2016, Mass-spectrometry-based proteomics reveals organ-specific expression patterns to be used as forensic evidence, J. Proteome Res., 15, 182, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00704 · DOI
  76. Bengtsson, 2012, DNA from keratinous tissue. Part I: hair and nail, Ann. Anat., 194, 17, 10.1016/j.aanat.2011.03.013 · DOI
  77. McNevin, 2005, Short tandem repeat (STR) genotyping of keratinised hair: Part 1. Review of current status and knowledge gaps, Forensic Sci. Int., 153, 237, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.05.006 · DOI
  78. Handt, 2015, The end of bad hair days, Forensic Sci. Int. Genet. Suppl. Ser., 5, e146, 10.1016/j.fsigss.2015.09.059 · DOI
  79. Lee, 2006, Proteome analysis of human hair shaft: from protein identification to posttranslational modification, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 5, 789, 10.1074/mcp.M500278-MCP200 · DOI
  80. Carlson, 2018, Protein extraction from human anagen head hairs 1-millimeter or less in total length, BioTechniques, 64, 170, 10.2144/btn-2018-2004 · DOI
  81. Wadsworth, 2014, Proteome degradation in fossils: investigating the longevity of protein survival in ancient bone, Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom., 28, 605, 10.1002/rcm.6821 · DOI
  82. Buckley, 2010, Distinguishing between archaeological sheep and goat bones using a single collagen peptide, J. Archaeol. Sci., 37, 13, 10.1016/j.jas.2009.08.020 · DOI · Paper page
  83. Buckley, 2015, Ancient collagen reveals evolutionary history of the endemic South American ‘ungulates’, Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., 282, 9
  84. Buckley, 2016, Species identification of bovine, ovine and porcine type 1 collagen; comparing peptide mass fingerprinting and LC-based proteomics methods, Int. J. Mol. Sci., 17, 17, 10.3390/ijms17040445 · DOI
  85. Procopio, 2018, Forensic proteomics for the evaluation of the post-mortem decay in bones, J. Proteomics, 177, 21, 10.1016/j.jprot.2018.01.016 · DOI
  86. Procopio, 2017, Intra- and interskeletal proteome variations in fresh and buried bones, J. Proteome Res., 16, 2016, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b01070 · DOI
  87. Mason, 2018, Protein-based forensic identification using genetically variant peptides in human bone, Forensic Sci. Int., 288, 89, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.04.016 · DOI
  88. van den Broek, 2015, Current trends in mass spectrometry of peptides and proteins: application to veterinary and sports-doping control, Mass Spectrom. Rev., 34, 571, 10.1002/mas.21419 · DOI
  89. Nedelkov, 2018, Top-down mass spectrometric immunoassay for human insulin and its therapeutic analogs, J. Proteomics, 175, 27, 10.1016/j.jprot.2017.08.001 · DOI
  90. Goebel, 2005, Methodologies for detection of hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers, J. Chromatogr. Sci., 43, 39, 10.1093/chromsci/43.1.39 · DOI
  91. Walpurgis, 2016, Testing for the erythropoiesis-stimulating agent Sotatercept/ACE-011 (ActRIIA-Fc) in serum by means of Western blotting and LC-HRMS, Drug Test. Anal., 8, 1152, 10.1002/dta.2093 · DOI
  92. Thevis, 2014, Mass spectrometric characterization of a biotechnologically produced full-length mechano growth factor (MGF) relevant for doping controls, Growth Horm. IGF Res., 24, 276, 10.1016/j.ghir.2014.10.004 · DOI
  93. Thevis, 2007, Recommended criteria for the mass spectrometric identification of target peptides and proteins (<8 kDa) in sports drug testing, Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom., 21, 297, 10.1002/rcm.2848 · DOI
  94. Botrè, 2008, Mass spectrometry and illicit drug testing: analytical challenges of the anti-doping laboratories, Expert Rev. Proteomics, 5, 535, 10.1586/14789450.5.4.535 · DOI
  95. Heyer, 2017, Challenges and perspectives of metaproteomic data analysis, J. Biotechnol., 261, 24, 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2017.06.1201 · DOI
  96. Gonzalez, 2016, Avoiding pandemic fears in the subway and conquering the platypus, mSystems, 1, 10.1128/mSystems.00050-16 · DOI
  97. Wieser, 2012, MALDI-TOF MS in microbiological diagnostics—identification of microorganisms and beyond (mini review), Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 93, 965, 10.1007/s00253-011-3783-4 · DOI
  98. Deshpande, 2011, ABOid: a Software for automated identification and phyloproteomics classification of tandem mass spectrometric data, J. Chromatogr. Sep. Tech., 5, 001
  99. Jabbour, 2010, Double-blind characterization of non-genome-sequenced bacteria by mass spectrometry-based proteomics, Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 76, 3637, 10.1128/AEM.00055-10 · DOI
  100. Page, 2011, Uniqueness in the forensic identification sciences—fact or fiction?, Forensic Sci. Int., 206, 12, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.08.004 · DOI
  101. Jarman, 2018, Proteomics goes to court: a statistical foundation for forensic toxin/organism identification using bottom-up proteomics, J. Proteome Res., 17, 3075, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00212 · DOI
  102. Vinciguerra, 2016, Proteomic strategies for cultural heritage: from bones to paintings, Microchem. J., 126, 341, 10.1016/j.microc.2015.12.024 · DOI
  103. Tokarski, 2006, Identification of proteins in renaissance paintings by proteomics, Anal. Chem., 78, 1494, 10.1021/ac051181w · DOI
  104. Hong, 2012, Identification of milk component in ancient food residue by proteomics, PLoS One, 7, 10.1371/journal.pone.0037053 · DOI · Paper page
  105. Garrett, 2018, ISO 17025 validation of method-based mass spectrometry techniques for the identification of Ricin in bioforensic samples, 256th Annual American Chemical Society National Meeting & Exposition
  106. Wunschel, 2013, Forensic proteomics of poxvirus production, Analyst, 138, 6385, 10.1039/c3an00711a · DOI
  107. Leiser, 2015, Investigation of Yersinia pestis laboratory adaptation through a combined genomics and proteomics approach, PLoS One, 10, 10.1371/journal.pone.0142997 · DOI
  108. Merkley, 2017, Ricin-like proteins from the castor plant do not influence liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry detection of ricin in forensically relevant samples, Toxicon, 140, 18, 10.1016/j.toxicon.2017.10.004 · DOI
  109. Mann, 1994, Error-tolerant identification of peptides in sequence databases by peptide sequence tags, Anal. Chem., 66, 4390, 10.1021/ac00096a002 · DOI
  110. Worbs, 2015, Characterization of Ricin and R. communis agglutinin reference materials, Toxins, 7, 4906, 10.3390/toxins7124856 · DOI
  111. Frank, 2007, De novo peptide sequencing and identification with precision mass spectrometry, J. Proteome Res., 6, 114, 10.1021/pr060271u · DOI
  112. Gupta, 2011, Target-decoy approach and false discovery rate: when things may go wrong, J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom., 22, 1111, 10.1007/s13361-011-0139-3 · DOI
  113. Keich, 2017, Progressive calibration and averaging for tandem mass spectrometry statistical confidence estimation: why settle for a single decoy?, Res. Comput. Mol. Biol., 10229, 99, 10.1007/978-3-319-56970-3_7 · DOI
  114. Jeong, 2012, False discovery rates in spectral identification, BMC Bioinformatics, 13, S2, 10.1186/1471-2105-13-S16-S2 · DOI
  115. Tabb, 2006, Verification of automated peptide identifications from proteomic tandem mass spectra, Nat. Protoc., 1, 2213, 10.1038/nprot.2006.330 · DOI
  116. Medzihradszky, 2015, Lessons in de novo peptide sequencing by tandem mass spectrometry, Mass Spectrom. Rev., 34, 43, 10.1002/mas.21406 · DOI
  117. Neuhauser, 2012, Expert system for computer-assisted annotation of MS/MS spectra, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 11, 1500, 10.1074/mcp.M112.020271 · DOI
  118. Deutsch, 2016, Human proteome project mass spectrometry data interpretation guidelines 2.1, J. Proteome Res., 15, 3961, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00392 · DOI
  119. Asara, 2007, Protein sequences from mastodon and Tyrannosaurus Rex revealed by mass spectrometry, Science, 316, 280, 10.1126/science.1137614 · DOI · Paper page
  120. Colangelo, 2013, Review of software tools for design and analysis of large scale MRM proteomic datasets, Methods, 61, 287, 10.1016/j.ymeth.2013.05.004 · DOI
  121. Reiter, 2011, mProphet: automated data processing and statistical validation for large scale SRM experiments, Nat. Methods, 8, 430, 10.1038/nmeth.1584 · DOI · Paper page
  122. Sherman, 2009, How specific is my SRM?: the issue of precursor and product ion redundancy, Proteomics, 9, 1120, 10.1002/pmic.200800577 · DOI
  123. Brusniak, 2011, ATAQS: a computational software tool for high throughput transition optimization and validation for selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry, BMC Bioinformatics, 12, 78, 10.1186/1471-2105-12-78 · DOI
  124. Sahl, 2016, The effects of signal erosion and core genome reduction on the identification of diagnostic markers, mBio, 7, 10.1128/mBio.00846-16 · DOI
  125. Pfrunder, 2016, Bacillus cereus group-type strain-specific diagnostic peptides, J. Proteome Res., 15, 3098, 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00216 · DOI
  126. Nesvizhskii, 2003, A statistical model for identifying proteins by tandem mass spectrometry, Anal. Chem., 75, 4646, 10.1021/ac0341261 · DOI
  127. Ma, 2009, IDPicker 2.0: improved protein assembly with high discrimination peptide identification filtering, J. Proteome Res., 8, 3872, 10.1021/pr900360j · DOI
  128. Tabb, 2015, The SEQUEST family tree, J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom., 26, 1814, 10.1007/s13361-015-1201-3 · DOI
  129. McIlwain, 2014, Crux: rapid open source protein tandem mass spectrometry analysis, J. Proteome Res., 13, 4488, 10.1021/pr500741y · DOI
  130. Cox, 2011, Andromeda: a peptide search engine integrated into the maxquant environment, J. Proteome Res., 10, 1794, 10.1021/pr101065j · DOI
  131. Shteynberg, 2013, Combining results of multiple search engines in proteomics, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 12, 2383, 10.1074/mcp.R113.027797 · DOI
  132. Shteynberg, 2011, iProphet: multi-level integrative analysis of shotgun proteomic data improves peptide and protein identification rates and error estimates, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 10, 10.1074/mcp.M111.007690 · DOI
  133. Keller, 2002, Empirical statistical model to estimate the accuracy of peptide identifications made by MS/MS and database search, Anal. Chem., 74, 5383, 10.1021/ac025747h · DOI
  134. Spivak, 2009, Improvements to the percolator algorithm for peptide identification from shotgun proteomics data sets, J. Proteome Res., 8, 3737, 10.1021/pr801109k · DOI
  135. Kim, 2008, Spectral probabilities and generating functions of tandem mass spectra: a strike against decoy databases, J. Proteome Res., 7, 3354, 10.1021/pr8001244 · DOI
  136. Howbert, 2014, Computing exact p-values for a cross-correlation shotgun proteomics score function, Mol. Cell. Proteomics, 13, 2467, 10.1074/mcp.O113.036327 · DOI
  137. Muth, 2013, Searching for a needle in a stack of needles: challenges in metaproteomics data analysis, Mol. Biosyst., 9, 578, 10.1039/C2MB25415H · DOI
  138. Timmins-Schiffman, 2017, Critical decisions in metaproteomics: achieving high confidence protein annotations in a sea of unknowns, ISME J., 11, 309, 10.1038/ismej.2016.132 · DOI
  139. Oulas, 2015, Metagenomics: tools and insights for analyzing next-generation sequencing data derived from biodiversity studies, Bioinform. Biol. Insights, 9, 75, 10.4137/BBI.S12462 · DOI
  140. Sticker, 2017, Mass spectrometrists should search for all peptides, but assess only the ones they care about, Nat Methods, 14, 643, 10.1038/nmeth.4338 · DOI
  141. Noble, 2015, Mass spectrometrists should search only for peptides they care about, Nat. Methods, 12, 605, 10.1038/nmeth.3450 · DOI
  142. Dworzanski, 2010, Discrimination and phylogenomic classification of bacillus anthracis-cereus-thuringiensis strains based on LC–MS/MS analysis of whole cell protein digests, Anal. Chem., 82, 145, 10.1021/ac9015648 · DOI
  143. Kertesz-Farkas, 2015, Tandem mass spectrum identification via cascaded search, J. Proteome Res., 14, 3027, 10.1021/pr501173s · DOI
  144. Tang, 2014, Likelihood ratio estimation in forensic identification using similarity and rarity, Pattern Recognit., 47, 945, 10.1016/j.patcog.2013.07.014 · DOI
  145. Saks, 2010, Forensic identification: from a faith-based “Science” to a scientific science, Forensic Sci. Int., 201, 14, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.03.014 · DOI
  146. Nordgaard, 2012, Comments on “The database search problem” with respect to a recent publication in Forensic Science International, Forensic Sci. Int., 217, e32, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.11.023 · DOI
  147. Jayaprakash, 2014, Forensic Sci. Int., 239, e10, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.03.025 · DOI
  148. Jayaprakash, 2013, Practical relevance of pattern uniqueness in forensic science, Forensic Sci. Int., 231
  149. Hicks, 2015, The importance of distinguishing information from evidence/observations when formulating propositions, Sci. Justice, 55, 520, 10.1016/j.scijus.2015.06.008 · DOI
  150. Evett, 2011, Expressing evaluative opinions: a position statement, Sci. Justice, 51, 1, 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.01.002 · DOI
  151. Biedermann, 2007, Equal prior probabilities: can one do any better?, Forensic Sci. Int., 172, 85, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.12.008 · DOI
  152. Biedermann, 2011, Recent misconceptions about the ‘database search problem’: a probabilistic analysis using Bayesian networks, Forensic Sci. Int., 212, 51, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.05.013 · DOI
  153. Biedermann, 2008, Decision theoretic properties of forensic identification: underlying logic and argumentative implications, Forensic Sci. Int., 177, 120, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.11.008 · DOI
  154. Biedermann, 2014, Drawbacks in the scientification of forensic science, Forensic Sci. Int., 245, e38, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.10.012 · DOI
  155. Berger, 2011, Evidence evaluation: a response to the court of appeal judgment in R v T, Sci. Justice, 51, 43, 10.1016/j.scijus.2011.03.005 · DOI
  156. Aitken, 2004, Evaluation of trace evidence in the form of multivariate data, J. R. Stat. Soc. Series C Appl. Stat., 53, 109, 10.1046/j.0035-9254.2003.05271.x · DOI
  157. Ali, 2015, Sampling variability in forensic likelihood-ratio computation: a simulation study, Sci. Justice, 55, 499, 10.1016/j.scijus.2015.05.003 · DOI
  158. Lindley, 1977, A problem in forensic science, Biometrika, 64, 207, 10.1093/biomet/64.2.207 · DOI
  159. Lindley, 1991, Subjective probability, decision analysis and their legal consequences, J. R. Stat. Soc. Series A Stat. Soc., 154, 83, 10.2307/2982697 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 64

Metadata

Authors
Merkley, E. D., Wunschel, D. S., Wahl, K. L., & Jarman, K. H.
ORCID
Merkley, Eric D.
Venue
Forensic Science International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
297
Pages
350-363
ISSN
0379-0738
DOI
10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.022
Cited by
64
References
10
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • Science and Technology Directorate (70RSAT18KPM000006)
  • U.S. Department of Homeland Security

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: Applications and challenges of forensic proteomics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.022
The paper
Merkley, E. D., Wunschel, D. S., Wahl, K. L., & Jarman, K. H. (2019). Applications and challenges of forensic proteomics. Forensic Science International. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.022