The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Similarity among Tandem Mass Spectra from Proteomic Experiments: Detection, Significance, and Utility
Abstract
Liquid chromatography paired with tandem mass spectrometry is a standard technique for identifying peptides from complex protein mixtures. Most fragment ion spectra acquired by this technique are unique, but some are repeated. Similarities among the spectra from 1D and 2D liquid chromatography experiments were calculated by the dot product algorithm. Similar spectra were grouped, and the degree of duplication was calculated for each sample. In 1D liquid chromatography data from 1D gel bands, 18% of the fragment ion spectra were duplicates. A six-cycle 2D liquid chromatographic separation of more than 200 proteins produced 28% duplicate spectra. A rat hippocampal homogenate analyzed by a 12-cycle 2D liquid chromatographic separation contained 25% duplicate spectra. Removal of these duplicate spectra, however, resulted in fewer peptides being successfully identified by SEQUEST. We propose a modification for peptide identification algorithms that would improve their performance and accuracy by explicitly recognizing and making use of spectral similarity.
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
Cited by
The Skyline ecosystem: Informatics for quantitative mass spectrometry proteomics
Pino, L. K., Searle, B. C., Bollinger, J. G., Nunn, B., MacLean, B., & MacCoss, M. J. (2020) · Mass Spectrometry Reviews · doi:10.1002/mas.21540 · Cited by 800
Self-citationTabb, D. L., Vega-Montoto, L., Rudnick, P. A., Variyath, A. M., Ham, A.-J. L., Bunk, D. M., Kilpatrick, L. E., Billheimer, D. D., Blackman, R. K., Cardasis, H. L., et al. (2010) · Journal of Proteome Research · doi:10.1021/pr9006365 · Cited by 551
Self-citationSadygov, R. G., Cociorva, D., & Yates, J. R. (2004) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth725 · Cited by 408
Self-citationKapp, E. A., Schütz, F., Connolly, L. M., Chakel, J. A., Meza, J. E., Miller, C. A., Fenyo, D., Eng, J. K., Adkins, J. N., Omenn, G. S., et al. (2005) · PROTEOMICS · doi:10.1002/pmic.200500126 · Cited by 344
Zhang, Z., Wu, S., Stenoien, D. L., & Paša-Tolić, L. (2014) · Annual Review of Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1146/annurev-anchem-071213-020216 · Cited by 323
Metadata
- Authors
- Tabb, D. L., MacCoss, M. J., Wu, C. C., Anderson, S. D., & Yates, J. R.
- Venue
- Analytical Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2003-04-12
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2470-2477
- ISSN
- 0003-2700 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6882
- OpenAlex
- W2013255353
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Similarity among Tandem Mass Spectra from Proteomic Experiments: Detection, Significance, and Utility. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/ac026424o
- The paper
- Tabb, D. L., MacCoss, M. J., Wu, C. C., Anderson, S. D., & Yates, J. R. (2003). Similarity among Tandem Mass Spectra from Proteomic Experiments: Detection, Significance, and Utility. Analytical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac026424o
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.