Improvement of Quantitative Measurements in Multiplex Proteomics Using High-Field Asymmetric Waveform Spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative proteomics using isobaric reagent tandem mass tags (TMT) or isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation (iTRAQ) provides a convenient approach to compare changes in protein abundance across multiple samples. However, the analysis of complex protein digests by isobaric labeling can be undermined by the relative large proportion of co-selected peptide ions that lead to distorted reporter ion ratios and affect the accuracy and precision of quantitative measurements. Here, we investigated the use of high-field asymmetric waveform ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS) in proteomic experiments to reduce sample complexity and improve protein quantification using TMT isobaric labeling. LC-FAIMS-MS/MS analyses of human and yeast protein digests led to significant reductions in interfering ions, which increased the number of quantifiable peptides by up to 68% while significantly improving the accuracy of abundance measurements compared to that with conventional LC-MS/MS. The improvement in quantitative measurements using FAIMS is further demonstrated for the temporal profiling of protein abundance of HEK293 cells following heat shock treatment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".