The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Hypergeometric Probability Model for Protein Identification and Validation Using Tandem Mass Spectral Data and Protein Sequence Databases
Abstract
We present a new probability-based method for protein identification using tandem mass spectra and protein databases. The method employs a hypergeometric distribution to model frequencies of matches between fragment ions predicted for peptide sequences with a specific (M + H)+ value (at some mass tolerance) in a protein sequence database and an experimental tandem mass spectrum. The hypergeometric distribution constitutes null hypothesis-all peptide matches to a tandem mass spectrum are random. It is used to generate a score characterizing the randomness of a database sequence match to an experimental tandem mass spectrum and to determine the level of significance of the null hypothesis. For each tandem mass spectrum and database search, a peptide is identified that has the least probability of being a random match to the spectrum and the corresponding level of significance of the null hypothesis is determined. To check the validity of the hypergeometric model in describing fragment ion matches, we used chi2 test. The distribution of frequencies and corresponding hypergeometric probabilities are generated for each tandem mass spectrum. No proteolytic cleavage specificity is used to create the peptide sequences from the database. We do not use any empirical probabilities in this method. The scores generated by the hypergeometric model do not have a significant molecular weight bias and are reasonably independent of database size. The approach has been implemented in a database search algorithm, PEP_PROBE. By using a large set of tandem mass spectra derived from a set of peptides created by digestion of a collection of known proteins using four different proteases, a false positive rate of 5% is demonstrated.
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
Elias, J. E., & Gygi, S. P. (2007) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth1019 · Cited by 3,925
Proteomics by Mass Spectrometry: Approaches, Advances, and Applications
Yates, J. R., Ruse, C. I., & Nakorchevsky, A. (2009) · Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-bioeng-061008-124934 · Cited by 1,078
Self-citationInterpretation of Shotgun Proteomic Data
Nesvizhskii, A. I., & Aebersold, R. (2005) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.r500012-mcp200 · Cited by 1,025
Omenn, G. S., States, D. J., Adamski, M., Blackwell, T. W., Menon, R., Hermjakob, H., Apweiler, R., Haab, B. B., Simpson, R. J., Eddes, J. S., et al. (2005) · PROTEOMICS · doi:10.1002/pmic.200500358 · Cited by 787
Assigning Significance to Peptides Identified by Tandem Mass Spectrometry Using Decoy Databases
Käll, L., Storey, J. D., MacCoss, M. J., & Noble, W. S. (2008) · Journal of Proteome Research · doi:10.1021/pr700600n · Cited by 607
InsPecT: Identification of Posttranslationally Modified Peptides from Tandem Mass Spectra
Tanner, S., Shu, H., Frank, A., Wang, L.-C., Zandi, E., Mumby, M., Pevzner, P. A., & Bafna, V. (2005) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac050102d · Cited by 567
ProLuCID: An improved SEQUEST-like algorithm with enhanced sensitivity and specificity
Xu, T., Park, S. K., Venable, J. D., Wohlschlegel, J. A., Diedrich, J. K., Cociorva, D., Lu, B., Liao, L., Hewel, J., Han, X., et al. (2015) · Journal of Proteomics · doi:10.1016/j.jprot.2015.07.001 · Cited by 511
Self-citationGlobal Analysis of Protein Sumoylation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Wohlschlegel, J. A., Johnson, E. S., Reed, S. I., & Yates, J. R. (2004) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1074/jbc.m409203200 · Cited by 317
Self-citationJUMP: a tag-based database search tool for peptide identification with high sensitivity and accuracy
Wang, X., Li, Y., Wu, Z., Wang, H., Tan, H., & Peng, J. (2014) · Molecular & Cellular Proteomics · doi:10.1074/mcp.o114.039586 · Cited by 194
Metadata
- Authors
- Sadygov, R. G., & Yates, J. R.
- Venue
- Analytical Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2003-06-21
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 3792-3798
- ISSN
- 0003-2700 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6882
- OpenAlex
- W1996600592
- Cited by
- 206
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.17
- 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
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.