PreprintCited by 12Advanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multienzyme deep learning models improve peptide de novo sequencing by mass spectrometry proteomics

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010457 · Paper page

Abstract

Generating and analyzing overlapping peptides through multienzymatic digestion is an efficient procedure for de novo protein using from bottom-up mass spectrometry (MS). Despite improved instrumentation and software, de novo MS data analysis remains challenging. In recent years, deep learning models have represented a performance breakthrough. Incorporating that technology into de novo protein sequencing workflows require machine-learning models capable of handling highly diverse MS data. In this study, we analyzed the requirements for assembling such generalizable deep learning models by systematically varying the composition and size of the training set. We assessed the generated models’ performances using two test sets composed of peptides originating from the multienzyme digestion of samples from various species. The peptide recall values on the test sets showed that the deep learning models generated from a collection of highly N- and C-termini diverse peptides generalized 76% more over the termini-restricted ones. Moreover, expanding the training set’s size by adding peptides from the multienzymatic digestion with five proteases of several species samples led to a 2-3 fold generalizability gain. Furthermore, we tested the applicability of these multienzyme deep learning (MEM) models by fully de novo sequencing the heavy and light monomeric chains of five commercial antibodies (mAbs). MEM models extracted over 10000 matching and overlapped peptides across six different proteases mAb samples, achieving a 100% sequence coverage for 8 of the ten polypeptide chains. We foretell that the MEM models’ proven improvements to de novo analysis will positively impact several applications, such as analyzing samples of high complexity, unknown nature, or the peptidomics field.

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 · 10.1101/2022.08.03.502594

Cites

2 of 2 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. 10.1016/j.cbpa.2008.07.024 · DOI
  2. 10.1038/nature19949 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1002/pmic.201800361 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1128/IAI.00462-21 · DOI
  5. 10.1128/mSystems.00271-21 · DOI
  6. 10.1369/0022155420988661 · DOI
  7. 10.3389/fimmu.2021.808932 · DOI
  8. 10.3389/fgene.2020.612475 · DOI
  9. 10.1038/s41467-019-10583-5 · DOI
  10. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008169 · DOI
  11. 10.1007/s00430-020-00663-5 · DOI
  12. 10.1038/s41467-018-07986-1 · DOI
  13. 10.1074/mcp.M116.063966 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.joca.2021.09.006 · DOI
  15. 10.7554/eLife.64159 · DOI
  16. 10.1016/j.mcpro.2021.100113 · DOI
  17. 10.1021/acs.jproteome.7b00701 · DOI
  18. 10.1038/ncomms10261 · DOI
  19. 10.1074/mcp.T400003-MCP200 · DOI
  20. 10.1007/s00216-017-0772-1 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.03.031 · DOI
  22. 10.1038/nprot.2016.057 · DOI
  23. 10.1021/pr900863u · DOI
  24. 10.1074/mcp.TIR118.000918 · DOI
  25. 10.1074/mcp.TIR120.002129 · DOI
  26. 10.1080/14789450.2020.1831387 · DOI
  27. 10.1073/pnas.1705691114 · DOI
  28. 10.1002/rcm.1196 · DOI
  29. 10.1021/ac0508853 · DOI
  30. 10.1093/bib/bbx033 · DOI
  31. 10.1089/106652799318300 · DOI
  32. 10.1021/pr3006843 · DOI
  33. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz366 · DOI
  34. 10.1021/ac048788h · DOI
  35. 10.1002/pmic.201900335 · DOI
  36. 10.1038/nature14539 · DOI · Paper page
  37. 10.11477/mf.1416201215 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.cub.2019.02.034 · DOI
  39. 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2896880 · DOI
  40. 10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.48550/arxiv.1904.08514 · DOI
  42. 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00608 · DOI
  43. 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.12.013 · DOI
  44. 10.1021/ac4037679 · DOI
  45. 10.1007/s13361-013-0709-7 · DOI
  46. 10.1016/1044-0305(96)00019-0 · DOI
  47. 10.1021/ac0351163 · DOI
  48. 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9888(199610)31:10<1156::AID-JMS407>3.0.CO;2-T · DOI
  49. 10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141702 · DOI
  50. 10.1074/mcp.R112.026005 · DOI
  51. 10.1080/19420862.2015.1053683 · DOI
  52. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts480 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00860 · DOI
  54. 10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00799 · DOI
  55. 10.1038/ncomms6277 · DOI · Paper page
  56. 10.1021/pr500202e · DOI
  57. 10.1002/pmic.201200439 · DOI · Paper page
  58. 10.1007/s13361-015-1179-x · DOI
  59. 10.1021/acs.jproteome.9b00860 · DOI
  60. 10.1021/pr0499491 · DOI
  61. 10.1007/s13361-016-1460-7 · DOI · Paper page
  62. 10.1002/pmic.200800473 · DOI
  63. 10.1101/2021.08.15.456425 · DOI · Paper page
  64. 10.1038/nbt.3988 · DOI · Paper page
  65. 10.1038/s41592-020-0848-2 · DOI · Paper page
  66. 10.1093/nar/gkz403 · DOI
  67. 10.1002/jcc.20084 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Gueto-Tettay, C., Tang, D., Happonen, L., Heusel, M., Khakzad, H., Malmström, J., & Malmström, L.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Malmström, Lars
Venue
PLoS Computational Biology
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2022-08-05
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
e1010457-e1010457
ISSN
1553-734X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4317556129
Cited by
12
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse (2016.0023)
  • Vetenskapsrådet (2020-02419)
  • Alfred Österlunds Stiftelse
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Mass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
Keywords
de novo peptide sequencing, deep learning models, bottom-up mass spectrometry, training data size, model generalization, monoclonal antibodies, antibody heavy and light chains, overlapping peptides, peptidomics
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Peptide Hydrolases, Peptides, Sequence Analysis, Protein, Proteomics, Tandem Mass Spectrometry

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