MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161228014 · doi:10.1101/2020.11.07.372276

Library-free BoxCarDIA solves the missing value problem in label-free quantitative proteomics

2020· preprint· en· W3161228014 on OpenAlexaff
Devang Mehta, Sabine Scandola, R. Glen Uhrig

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantitative proteomicsProteomicsLabel-free quantificationComputer scienceWorkflowInteractomeComputational biologyReplicateData acquisitionInstrumentation (computer programming)Data miningBiologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The last decade has seen significant advances in the application of quantitative mass spectrometry-based proteomics technologies to tackle important questions in plant biology. The current standard for quantitative proteomics in plants is the use of data-dependent acquisition (DDA) analysis with or without the use of chemical labels. However, the DDA approach preferentially measures higher abundant proteins, and often requires data imputation due to quantification inconsistency between samples. In this study we systematically benchmarked a recently developed library-free data-independent acquisition (directDIA) method against a state-of-the-art DDA label-free quantitative proteomics workflow for plants. We next developed a novel acquisition approach combining MS 1 -level BoxCar acquisition with MS 2 -level directDIA analysis that we call BoxCarDIA. DirectDIA achieves a 33% increase in protein quantification over traditional DDA, and BoxCarDIA a further 8%, without any changes in instrumentation, offline fractionation, or increases in mass-spectrometer acquisition time. BoxCarDIA, especially, offers wholly reproducible quantification of proteins between replicate injections, thereby addressing the long-standing missing-value problem in label-free quantitative proteomics. Further, we find that the gains in dynamic range sampling by directDIA and BoxCarDIA translate to deeper quantification of key, low abundant, functional protein classes (e.g., protein kinases and transcription factors) that are underrepresented in data acquired using DDA. We applied these methods to perform a quantitative proteomic comparison of dark and light grown Arabidopsis cell cultures, providing a critical resource for future plant interactome studies. Our results establish BoxCarDIA as the new method of choice in quantitative proteomics using Orbitrap-type mass-spectrometers, particularly for proteomes with large dynamic range such as that of plants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207