Comparative Proteome Signatures of Trace Samples by Multiplexed Data-Independent Acquisition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single-cell transcriptomics has revolutionized our understanding of basic biology and disease. Since transcript levels often do not correlate with protein expression, it is crucial to complement transcriptomics approaches with proteome analyses at single-cell resolution. Despite continuous technological improvements in sensitivity, mass-spectrometry-based single-cell proteomics ultimately faces the challenge of reproducibly comparing the protein expression profiles of thousands of individual cells. Here, we combine two hitherto opposing analytical strategies, DIA and Tandem-Mass-Tag (TMT)-multiplexing, to generate highly reproducible, quantitative proteome signatures from ultralow input samples. We developed a novel, identification-independent proteomics data-analysis pipeline that allows to quantitatively compare DIA-TMT proteome signatures across hundreds of samples independent of their biological origin to identify cell types and single protein knockouts. These proteome signatures overcome the need to impute quantitative data due to accumulating detrimental amounts of missing data in standard multibatch TMT experiments. We validate our approach using integrative data analysis of different human cell lines and standard database searches for knockouts of defined proteins. Our data establish a novel and reproducible approach to markedly expand the numbers of proteins one detects from ultralow input 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".