ZoomQuant: An application for the quantitation of stable isotope labeled peptides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main goal of comparative proteomics is the quantitation of the differences in abundance of many proteins between two different biological samples in a single experiment. By differentially labeling the peptides from the two samples and combining them in a single analysis, relative ratios of protein abundance can be accurately determined. Protease catalyzed (18)O exchange is a simple method to differentially label peptides, but the lack of robust software tools to analyze the data from mass spectra of (18)O labeled peptides generated by common ion trap mass spectrometers has been a limitation. ZoomQuant is a stand-alone computational tool that analyzes the mass spectra of (18)O labeled peptides from ion trap instruments and determines relative abundance ratios between two samples. Starting with a filtered list of candidate peptides that have been successfully identified by Sequest, ZoomQuant analyzes the isotopic forms of the peptides using high-resolution zoom scan spectrum data. The theoretical isotope distribution is determined from the peptide sequence and is used to deconvolute the peak areas associated with the unlabeled, partially labeled, and fully labeled species. The ratio between the labeled and unlabeled peptides is then calculated using several different methods. ZoomQuant's graphical user interface allows the user to view and adjust the parameters for peak calling and quantitation and select which peptides should contribute to the overall abundance ratio calculation. Finally, ZoomQuant generates a summary report of the relative abundance of the peptides identified in the two samples.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.012 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".