Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 547

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

TagFinder for the quantitative analysis of gas chromatography—mass spectrometry (GC-MS)-based metabolite profiling experiments

Open access
Luedemann, Alexander, Strassburg, Katrin, Erban, Alexander, Kopka, Joachim·2008·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: Typical GC-MS-based metabolite profiling experiments may comprise hundreds of chromatogram files, which each contain up to 1000 mass spectral tags (MSTs). MSTs are the characteristic patterns of ∼25–250 fragment ions and respective isotopomers, which are generated after gas chromatography (GC) by electron impact ionization (EI) of the separated chemical molecules. These fragment ions are subsequently detected by time-of-flight (TOF) mass spectrometry (MS). MSTs of profiling experiments are typically reported as a list of ions, which are characterized by mass, chromatographic retention index (RI) or retention time (RT), and arbitrary abundance. The first two parameters allow the identification, the later the quantification of the represented chemical compounds. Many software tools have been reported for the pre-processing, the so-called curve resolution and deconvolution, of GC-(EI-TOF)-MS files. Pre-processing tools generate numerical data matrices, which contain all aligned MSTs and samples of an experiment. This process, however, is error prone mainly due to (i) the imprecise RI or RT alignment of MSTs and (ii) the high complexity of biological samples. This complexity causes co-elution of compounds and as a consequence non-selective, in other words impure MSTs. The selection and validation of optimal fragment ions for the specific and selective quantification of simultaneously eluting compounds is, therefore, mandatory. Currently validation is performed in most laboratories under human supervision. So far no software tool supports the non-targeted and user-independent quality assessment of the data matrices prior to statistical analysis. TagFinder may fill this gap. Strategy: TagFinder facilitates the analysis of all fragment ions, which are observed in GC-(EI-TOF)-MS profiling experiments. The non-targeted approach allows the discovery of novel and unexpected compounds. In addition, mass isotopomer resolution is maintained by TagFinder processing. This feature is essential for metabolic flux analyses and highly useful, but not required for metabolite profiling. Whenever possible, TagFinder gives precedence to chemical means of standardization, for example, the use of internal reference compounds for retention time calibration or quantitative standardization. In addition, external standardization is supported for both compound identification and calibration. The workflow of TagFinder comprises, (i) the import of fragment ion data, namely mass, time and arbitrary abundance (intensity), from a chromatography file interchange format or from peak lists provided by other chromatogram pre-processing software, (ii) the annotation of sample information and grouping of samples into classes, (iii) the RI calculation, (iv) the binning of observed fragment ions of equal mass from different chromatograms into RI windows, (v) the combination of these bins, so-called mass tags, into time groups of co-eluting fragment ions, (vi) the test of time groups for intensity correlated mass tags, (vii) the data matrix generation and (viii) the extraction of selective mass tags supported by compound identification. Thus, TagFinder supports both non-targeted fingerprinting analyses and metabolite targeted profiling. Availability: Exemplary TagFinder workspaces and test data sets are made available upon request to the contact authors. TagFinder is made freely available for academic use from http://www-en.mpimp-golm.mpg.de/03-research/researchGroups/01-dept1/Root_Metabolism/smp/TagFinder/index.html Contact: Kopka@mpimp-golm.mpg.de Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online and within the TagFinder download from the above URL.

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 · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn023

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 547

Metadata

Authors
Luedemann, A., Strassburg, K., Erban, A., & Kopka, J.
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2008-01-19
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
732-737
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2168617775
Cited by
547
References
5
FWCI
13.28
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: TagFinder for the quantitative analysis of gas chromatography—mass spectrometry (GC-MS)-based metabolite profiling experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bioinformatics/btn023
The paper
Luedemann, A., Strassburg, K., Erban, A., & Kopka, J. (2008). TagFinder for the quantitative analysis of gas chromatography—mass spectrometry (GC-MS)-based metabolite profiling experiments. Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btn023

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.