Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 162

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

MathDAMP: a package for differential analysis of metabolite profiles

Open access
Baran, Richard, Kochi, Hayataro, Saito, Natsumi, Suematsu, Makoto, Soga, Tomoyoshi, Nishioka, Takaaki, Robert, Martin, Tomita, Masaru·2006·BMC Bioinformatics

Abstract

Background: With the advent of metabolomics as a powerful tool for both functional and biomarker discovery, the identification of specific differences between complex metabolite profiles is becoming a major challenge in the data analysis pipeline. The task remains difficult, given the datasets' size, complexity, and common shifts in migration (elution/retention) times between samples analyzed by hyphenated mass spectrometry methods. Results: We present a Mathematica (Wolfram Research, Inc.) package MathDAMP (Mathematica package for Differential Analysis of Metabolite Profiles), which highlights differences between raw datasets acquired by hyphenated mass spectrometry methods by applying arithmetic operations to all corresponding signal intensities on a datapoint-by-datapoint basis. Peak identification and integration is thus bypassed and the results are displayed graphically. To facilitate direct comparisons, the raw datasets are automatically preprocessed and normalized in terms of both migration times and signal intensities. A combination of dynamic programming and global optimization is used for the alignment of the datasets along the migration time dimension. The processed datasets and the results of direct comparisons between them are visualized using density plots (axes represent migration time and m/z values while peaks appear as color-coded spots) providing an intuitive overall view. Various forms of comparisons and statistical tests can be applied to highlight subtle differences. Overlaid electropherograms (chromatograms) corresponding to the vicinities of the candidate differences from any result may be generated in a descending order of significance for visual confirmation. Additionally, a standard library table (a list of m/z values and migration times for known compounds) may be aligned and overlaid on the plots to allow easier identification of metabolites. Conclusion: Our tool facilitates the visualization and identification of differences between complex metabolite profiles according to various criteria in an automated fashion and is useful for data-driven discovery of biomarkers and functional genomics.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2105-7-530

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.

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

Cited by

See all 162

Metadata

Authors
Baran, R., Kochi, H., Saito, N., Suematsu, M., Soga, T., Nishioka, T., Robert, M., & Tomita, M.
Venue
BMC Bioinformatics
Published
2006-12
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
530-530
ISSN
1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1827263636
Cited by
162
References
0
FWCI
3.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: MathDAMP: a package for differential analysis of metabolite profiles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2105-7-530
The paper
Baran, R., Kochi, H., Saito, N., Suematsu, M., Soga, T., Nishioka, T., Robert, M., & Tomita, M. (2006). MathDAMP: a package for differential analysis of metabolite profiles. BMC Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-7-530

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.