The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A survey of computational methods and error rate estimation procedures for peptide and protein identification in shotgun proteomics
Open accessAbstract
This manuscript provides a comprehensive review of the peptide and protein identification process using tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) data generated in shotgun proteomic experiments. The commonly used methods for assigning peptide sequences to MS/MS spectra are critically discussed and compared, from basic strategies to advanced multi-stage approaches. A particular attention is paid to the problem of false-positive identifications. Existing statistical approaches for assessing the significance of peptide to spectrum matches are surveyed, ranging from single-spectrum approaches such as expectation values to global error rate estimation procedures such as false discovery rates and posterior probabilities. The importance of using auxiliary discriminant information (mass accuracy, peptide separation coordinates, digestion properties, and etc.) is discussed, and advanced computational approaches for joint modeling of multiple sources of information are presented. This review also includes a detailed analysis of the issues affecting the interpretation of data at the protein level, including the amplification of error rates when going from peptide to protein level, and the ambiguities in inferring the identifies of sample proteins in the presence of shared peptides. Commonly used methods for computing protein-level confidence scores are discussed in detail. The review concludes with a discussion of several outstanding computational issues.
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
Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x · Cited by 109,482
Cox, J., & Mann, M. (2008) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.1511 · Cited by 14,855
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
Elias, J. E., & Gygi, S. P. (2007) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth1019 · Cited by 3,925
Semi-supervised learning for peptide identification from shotgun proteomics datasets
Käll, L., Canterbury, J. D., Weston, J., Noble, W. S., & MacCoss, M. J. (2007) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth1113 · Cited by 2,424
Beausoleil, S. A., Villén, J., Gerber, S. A., Rush, J., & Gygi, S. P. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1240 · Cited by 1,577
Addona, T. A., Abbatiello, S. E., Schilling, B., Skates, S. J., Mani, D. R., Bunk, D. M., Spiegelman, C. H., Zimmerman, L. J., Ham, A.-J. L., Keshishian, H., et al. (2009) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.1546 · Cited by 1,037
Interpretation of Shotgun Proteomic Data
Nesvizhskii, A. I., & Aebersold, R. (2005) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.r500012-mcp200 · Cited by 1,025
Self-citationOptimization and testing of mass spectral library search algorithms for compound identification
Stein, S. E., & Scott, D. R. (1994) · Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · doi:10.1016/1044-0305(94)87009-8 · Cited by 882
Cited by
Comet: An open‐source MS / MS sequence database search tool
Eng, J. K., Jahan, T. A., & Hoopmann, M. R. (2013) · PROTEOMICS · doi:10.1002/pmic.201200439 · Cited by 1,474
Collins, B. C., Hunter, C. L., Liu, Y., Schilling, B., Rosenberger, G., Bader, S. L., Chan, D. W., Gibson, B. W., Gingras, A.-C., Held, J. M., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00249-5 · Cited by 576
Extracellular matrix-based biomaterial scaffolds and the host response
Aamodt, J. M., & Grainger, D. W. (2016) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.02.003 · Cited by 509
Mass spectrometry-based proteomics: existing capabilities and future directions
Angel, T. E., Aryal, U. K., Hengel, S. M., Baker, E. S., Kelly, R. T., Robinson, E. W., & Smith, R. D. (2012) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c2cs15331a · Cited by 441
Deutsch, E. W., Mendoza, L., Shteynberg, D., Slagel, J., Sun, Z., & Moritz, R. L. (2015) · PROTEOMICS – Clinical Applications · doi:10.1002/prca.201400164 · Cited by 342
Metadata
- Authors
- Nesvizhskii, A. I.
- Venue
- Journal of Proteomics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-10
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2092-2123
- ISSN
- 1874-3919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1999751815
- Cited by
- 536
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 15.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: A survey of computational methods and error rate estimation procedures for peptide and protein identification in shotgun proteomics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jprot.2010.08.009
- The paper
- Nesvizhskii, A. I. (2010). A survey of computational methods and error rate estimation procedures for peptide and protein identification in shotgun proteomics. Journal of Proteomics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2010.08.009
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.
