Multidimensional protein identification technology (MudPIT): Technical overview of a profiling method optimized for the comprehensive proteomic investigation of normal and diseased heart tissue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An optimized analytical expression profiling strategy based on gel-free multidimensional protein identification technology (MudPIT) is reported for the systematic investigation of biochemical (mal)-adaptations associated with healthy and diseased heart tissue. Enhanced shotgun proteomic detection coverage and improved biological inference is achieved by pre-fractionation of excised mouse cardiac muscle into subcellular components, with each organellar fraction investigated exhaustively using multiple repeat MudPIT analyses. Functional-enrichment, high-confidence identification, and relative quantification of hundreds of organelle- and tissue-specific proteins are achieved readily, including detection of low abundance transcriptional regulators, signaling factors, and proteins linked to cardiac disease. Important technical issues relating to data validation, including minimization of artifacts stemming from biased under-sampling and spurious false discovery, together with suggestions for further fine-tuning of sample preparation, are discussed. A framework for follow-up bioinformatic examination, pattern recognition, and data mining is also presented in the context of a stringent application of MudPIT for probing fundamental aspects of heart muscle physiology as well as the discovery of perturbations associated with heart failure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
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".