PreprintCited by 29Advanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksAdvanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of Different Label-free Techniques for the Semi-absolute Quantification of Protein Abundance

Open access
Millán-Oropeza, Aarón, Blein-Nicolas, Mélisande, Monnet, Véronique, Zivy, Michel, Henry, Céline·2021·Proteomes

Preprint — published as 10.3390/proteomes10010002 · Paper page

Abstract

In proteomics, it is essential to quantify proteins in absolute terms if we wish compare results among studies and integrate high-throughput biological data into genome-scale metabolic models. While labeling target peptides with stable isotopes allows protein abundance to be accurately quantified, the utility of this technique is constrained by the low number of quantifiable proteins that it yields. Recently, label-free shotgun proteomics has become the “gold standard” for carrying out global assessments of biological samples containing thousands of proteins. However, this tool must be further improved if we wish to accurately quantify absolute levels of proteins. Here, we used different label-free quantification techniques to estimate absolute protein abundance in the model yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. More specifically, we evaluated the performance of seven different quantification methods, based either on spectral counting (SC) or extracted-ion chromatogram (XIC), which were applied to samples from five different proteome backgrounds. We also compared the accuracy and reproducibility of two strategies for transforming relative abundance into absolute abundance: a UPS2-based strategy and the total protein approach (TPA). This study mentions technical challenges related to UPS2 use and proposes ways of addressing them, including utilizing a smaller, more highly optimized amount of UPS2. Overall, three SC-based methods (PAI, SAF, and NSAF) yielded the best results because they struck a good balance between experimental performance and protein quantification.

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 · 10.20944/preprints202112.0212.v1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 (A) Sample preparation and (B) the bioinformatic approaches used to determine absolute protein abundances.
Figure 1 (A) Sample preparation and (B) the bioinformatic approaches used to determine absolute protein abundances.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Coefficient of variation (CV) among replicates of the quantification methods (median values; n = 6 samples). Median values are indicated above each boxplot.
Figure 2 Coefficient of variation (CV) among replicates of the quantification methods (median values; n = 6 samples). Median values are indicated above each boxplot.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Absolute error among samples for the different quantification methods as obtained by bootstrapping the data for the spiked UPS2 proteins. Results for the two transformation strategies: the UPS2-based approach (A) and TPA (B). The points are displayed as a function of the different UPS2 protein concentrations (fmol). The inner marks indicate median absolute error (n = 144).
Figure 3 Absolute error among samples for the different quantification methods as obtained by bootstrapping the data for the spiked UPS2 proteins. Results for the two transformation strategies: the UPS2-based approach (A) and TPA (B). The points are displayed as a function of the different UPS2 protein concentrations (fmol). The inner marks indicate median absolute error (n = 144).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 (A) Workflows used for validation. For TPA and the UPS2-based strategy, i refers to a given protein from a given LC-MS/MS sample k. For the standard of reference obtained using the UPS2-based strategy, m represents the slope and a represents the y-intercept. (B) Comparison of the different semi-absolute quantification techniques using the absolute error of the estimated abundance of purified proteins at known concentrations. Results of the t-test comparing the NSAF (UPS2) and PAI (UPS2) methods. The UPS2-based strategy is indicated in the pink boxes. TPA is indicated in the blue boxes.
Figure 4 (A) Workflows used for validation. For TPA and the UPS2-based strategy, i refers to a given protein from a given LC-MS/MS sample k. For the standard of reference obtained using the UPS2-based strategy, m represents the slope and a represents the y-intercept. (B) Comparison of the different semi-absolute quantification techniques using the absolute error of the estimated abundance of purified proteins at known concentrations. Results of the t-test comparing the NSAF (UPS2) and PAI (UPS2) methods. The UPS2-based strategy is indicated in the pink boxes. TPA is indicated in the blue boxes.CC BY · PubMed Central

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 1 references

Metadata

Authors
Millán-Oropeza, A., Blein-Nicolas, M., Monnet, V., Zivy, M., & Henry, C.
Affiliations
  • AgroParisTech (FR)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Millán-Oropeza, Aarón
Venue
Proteomes
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-12-13
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
2-2
ISSN
2227-7382 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4226251097
Cited by
29
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2
FWCI
2.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proteomes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Preprints.org (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)
Funders
  • Infrastructures en Biologie Santé et Agronomie
  • European Commission (720824, HORIZON2020)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  • Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Advanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications
Keywords
absolute protein quantification, label-free quantification, spectral counting, extracted ion chromatograms, protein abundance, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, proteomics, genome-scale metabolic models

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: Comparison of Different Label-free Techniques for the Semi-absolute Quantification of Protein Abundance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.20944/preprints202112.0212.v1
The paper
Millán-Oropeza, A., Blein-Nicolas, M., Monnet, V., Zivy, M., & Henry, C. (2021). Comparison of Different Label-free Techniques for the Semi-absolute Quantification of Protein Abundance. Proteomes. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202112.0212.v1