Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 261

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Optimization and Use of Peptide Mass Measurement Accuracy in Shotgun Proteomics

Open access
Haas, Wilhelm, Faherty, Brendan K., Gerber, Scott A., Elias, Joshua E., Beausoleil, Sean A., Bakalarski, Corey E., Li, Xue, Villén, Judit, Gygi, Steven P.·2006·Molecular & Cellular Proteomics

Abstract

Mass spectrometers that provide high mass accuracy such as FT-ICR instruments are increasingly used in proteomic studies. Although the importance of accurately determined molecular masses for the identification of biomolecules is generally accepted, its role in the analysis of shotgun proteomic data has not been thoroughly studied. To gain insight into this role, we used a hybrid linear quadrupole ion trap/FT-ICR (LTQ FT) mass spectrometer for LC-MS/MS analysis of a highly complex peptide mixture derived from a fraction of the yeast proteome. We applied three data-dependent MS/MS acquisition methods. The FT-ICR part of the hybrid mass spectrometer was either not exploited, used only for survey MS scans, or also used for acquiring selected ion monitoring scans to optimize mass accuracy. MS/MS data were assigned with the SEQUEST algorithm, and peptide identifications were validated by estimating the number of incorrect assignments using the composite target/decoy database search strategy. We developed a simple mass calibration strategy exploiting polydimethylcyclosiloxane background ions as calibrant ions. This strategy allowed us to substantially improve mass accuracy without reducing the number of MS/MS spectra acquired in an LC-MS/MS run. The benefits of high mass accuracy were greatest for assigning MS/MS spectra with low signal-to-noise ratios and for assigning phosphopeptides. Confident peptide identification rates from these data sets could be doubled by the use of mass accuracy information. It was also shown that improving mass accuracy at a cost to the MS/MS acquisition rate substantially lowered the sensitivity of LC-MS/MS analyses. The use of FT-ICR selected ion monitoring scans to maximize mass accuracy reduced the number of protein identifications by 40%.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1074/mcp.m500339-mcp200

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 261

Metadata

Authors
Haas, W., Faherty, B. K., Gerber, S. A., Elias, J. E., Beausoleil, S. A., Bakalarski, C. E., Li, X., Villén, J., & Gygi, S. P.
Venue
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-07
Volume
5
Issue
7
Pages
1326-1337
ISSN
1535-9476 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170960877
Cited by
261
References
5
FWCI
13.46
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: Optimization and Use of Peptide Mass Measurement Accuracy in Shotgun Proteomics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1074/mcp.m500339-mcp200
The paper
Haas, W., Faherty, B. K., Gerber, S. A., Elias, J. E., Beausoleil, S. A., Bakalarski, C. E., Li, X., Villén, J., & Gygi, S. P. (2006). Optimization and Use of Peptide Mass Measurement Accuracy in Shotgun Proteomics. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.m500339-mcp200

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.