Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 549

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ElemCor: accurate data analysis and enrichment calculation for high-resolution LC-MS stable isotope labeling experiments

Open access
Du, Di, Tan, Lin, Wang, Yumeng, Peng, Bo, Weinstein, John N., Wondisford, Fredric E., Su, Xiaoyang, Lorenzi, Philip L.·2019·BMC Bioinformatics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The investigation of intracellular metabolism is the mainstay in the biotechnology and physiology settings. Intracellular metabolic rates are commonly evaluated using labeling pattern of the identified metabolites obtained from stable isotope labeling experiments. The labeling pattern or mass distribution vector describes the fractional abundances of all isotopologs with different masses as a result of isotopic labeling, which are typically resolved using mass spectrometry. Because naturally occurring isotopes and isotopic impurity also contribute to measured signals, the measured patterns must be corrected to obtain the labeling patterns. Since contaminant isotopologs with the same nominal mass can be resolved using modern mass spectrometers with high mass resolution, the correction process should be resolution dependent. RESULTS: Here we present a software tool, ElemCor, to perform correction of such data in a resolution-dependent manner. The tool is based on mass difference theory (MDT) and information from unlabeled samples (ULS) to account for resolution effects. MDT is a mathematical theory and only requires chemical formulae to perform correction. ULS is semi-empirical and requires additional measurement of isotopologs from unlabeled samples. We validate both methods and show their improvement in accuracy and comprehensiveness over existing methods using simulated data and experimental data from Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The tool is available at https://github.com/4dsoftware/elemcor . CONCLUSIONS: We present a software tool based on two methods, MDT and ULS, to correct LC-MS data from isotopic labeling experiments for natural abundance and isotopic impurity. We recommend MDT for low-mass compounds for cost efficiency in experiments, and ULS for high-mass compounds with relatively large spectral inaccuracy that can be tracked by unlabeled standards.

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/s12859-019-2669-9

Cites

17 of 17 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 17 references

Cited by

See all 549

Metadata

Authors
Du, D., Tan, L., Wang, Y., Peng, B., Weinstein, J. N., Wondisford, F. E., Su, X., & Lorenzi, P. L.
Venue
BMC Bioinformatics
Published
2019-02-19
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
89-89
ISSN
1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2919831875
Cited by
549
References
17
FWCI
15.61
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: ElemCor: accurate data analysis and enrichment calculation for high-resolution LC-MS stable isotope labeling experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12859-019-2669-9
The paper
Du, D., Tan, L., Wang, Y., Peng, B., Weinstein, J. N., Wondisford, F. E., Su, X., & Lorenzi, P. L. (2019). ElemCor: accurate data analysis and enrichment calculation for high-resolution LC-MS stable isotope labeling experiments. BMC Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-019-2669-9

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.