Abstract
Mass spectrometry is extremely efficient for sequencing small peptides generated by, for example, a trypsin digestion of a complex mixture. Current instruments have the capacity to generate 50–100 K MSMS spectra from a single run. Of these ~30–50% is typically assigned to peptide matches on a 1% FDR threshold. The remaining spectra need more research to explain. We address here whether the 30–50% matched spectra provide consensus matches when using different database-dependent search pipelines. Although the majority of the spectra peptide assignments concur across search engines, our conclusion is that database-dependent search engines still require improvements.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Keller A, Eng J, Zhang N, Li XJ, Aebersold R (2005) A uniform proteomics MS/MS analysis platform utilizing open XML file formats. Mol Syst Biol 1:2005.0017. https://doi.org/10.1038/msb4100024
Shteynberg D, Nesvizhskii AI, Moritz RL, Deutsch EW (2013) Combining results of multiple search engines in proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics 12(9):2383–2393. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.R113.027797
Paulo JA (2013) Practical and efficient searching in proteomics: a cross engine comparison. WebmedCentral 4(10). https://doi.org/10.9754/journal.wplus.2013.0052
Kapp EA, Schutz F, Connolly LM, Chakel JA, Meza JE, Miller CA, Fenyo D, Eng JK, Adkins JN, Omenn GS, Simpson RJ (2005) An evaluation, comparison, and accurate benchmarking of several publicly available MS/MS search algorithms: sensitivity and specificity analysis. Proteomics 5(13):3475–3490. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.200500126
Balgley BM, Laudeman T, Yang L, Song T, Lee CS (2007) Comparative evaluation of tandem MS search algorithms using a target-decoy search strategy. Mol Cell Proteomics 6(9):1599–1608. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M600469-MCP200
Alves G, Wu WW, Wang G, Shen RF, Yu YK (2008) Enhancing peptide identification confidence by combining search methods. J Proteome Res 7(8):3102–3113. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr700798h
Kwon T, Choi H, Vogel C, Nesvizhskii AI, Marcotte EM (2011) MSblender: a probabilistic approach for integrating peptide identifications from multiple database search engines. J Proteome Res 10(7):2949–2958. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr2002116
Searle BC, Turner M, Nesvizhskii AI (2008) Improving sensitivity by probabilistically combining results from multiple MS/MS search methodologies. J Proteome Res 7(1):245–253. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr070540w
Shteynberg D, Deutsch EW, Lam H, Eng JK, Sun Z, Tasman N, Mendoza L, Moritz RL, Aebersold R, Nesvizhskii AI (2011) iProphet: multi-level integrative analysis of shotgun proteomic data improves peptide and protein identification rates and error estimates. Mol Cell Proteomics 10(12):M111.007690. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M111.007690
Sultana T, Jordan R, Lyons-Weiler J (2009) Optimization of the use of consensus methods for the detection and putative identification of peptides via mass spectrometry using protein standard mixtures. J Proteomics Bioinform 2(6):262–273. https://doi.org/10.4172/jpb.1000085
Dagda RK, Sultana T, Lyons-Weiler J (2010) Evaluation of the consensus of four peptide identification algorithms for tandem mass spectrometry based proteomics. J Proteomics Bioinform 3:39–47. https://doi.org/10.4172/jpb.1000119
Nahnsen S, Bertsch A, Rahnenfuhrer J, Nordheim A, Kohlbacher O (2011) Probabilistic consensus scoring improves tandem mass spectrometry peptide identification. J Proteome Res 10(8):3332–3343. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr2002879
Serang O, Noble W (2012) A review of statistical methods for protein identification using tandem mass spectrometry. Stat Interface 5(1):3–20
He L, Diedrich J, Chu YY, Yates JR 3rd (2015) Extracting accurate precursor information for tandem mass spectra by RawConverter. Anal Chem 87(22):11361–11367. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b02721
The M, MacCoss MJ, Noble WS, Kall L (2016) Fast and accurate protein false discovery rates on large-scale proteomics data sets with percolator 3.0. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 27(11):1719–1727. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-016-1460-7
Vaudel M, Burkhart JM, Zahedi RP, Oveland E, Berven FS, Sickmann A, Martens L, Barsnes H (2015) PeptideShaker enables reanalysis of MS-derived proteomics data sets. Nat Biotechnol 33(1):22–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3109
Quandta A, Espona L, Balasko A, Weissera H, Brusniak M, Kunsztb P, Aebersold R, Malmström L (2015) Using synthetic peptides to benchmark peptide identification software and search parameters for MS/MS data analysis. EuPA Open Proteom 5:21–31
Perkins DN, Pappin DJ, Creasy DM, Cottrell JS (1999) Probability-based protein identification by searching sequence databases using mass spectrometry data. Electrophoresis 20(18):3551–3567. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-2683(19991201)20:18<3551::AID-ELPS3551>3.0.CO;2-2
Eng JK, McCormack AL, Yates JR (1994) An approach to correlate tandem mass spectral data of peptides with amino acid sequences in a protein database. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 5(11):976–989. https://doi.org/10.1016/1044-0305(94)80016-2
Craig R, Beavis RC (2004) TANDEM: matching proteins with tandem mass spectra. Bioinformatics 20(9):1466–1467. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bth092
Geer LY, Markey SP, Kowalak JA, Wagner L, Xu M, Maynard DM, Yang X, Shi W, Bryant SH (2004) Open mass spectrometry search algorithm. J Proteome Res 3(5):958–964. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr0499491
Tabb DL, Fernando CG, Chambers MC (2007) MyriMatch: highly accurate tandem mass spectral peptide identification by multivariate hypergeometric analysis. J Proteome Res 6(2):654–661. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr0604054
Ternent T, Csordas A, Qi D, Gomez-Baena G, Beynon RJ, Jones AR, Hermjakob H, Vizcaino JA (2014) How to submit MS proteomics data to ProteomeXchange via the PRIDE database. Proteomics 14(20):2233–2241. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201400120
Aggarwal S, Yadav AK (2016) False discovery rate estimation in proteomics. Methods Mol Biol 1362:119–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3106-4_7
Acknowledgments
R.M. is supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT investigator program 2012), iNOVA4Health—UID/Multi/04462/2013, a program financially supported by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia/Ministério da Educação e Ciência, through national funds and is cofunded by FEDER under the PT2020 Partnership Agreement. This work is also funded by FEDER funds through the COMPETE 2020 Programme and National Funds through FCT – Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology under the projects number PTDC/BTM-TEC/30087/2017 and PTDC/BTM-TEC/30088/2017.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Matthiesen, R., Prieto, G., Beck, H.C. (2020). Comparing Peptide Spectra Matches Across Search Engines. In: Matthiesen, R. (eds) Mass Spectrometry Data Analysis in Proteomics. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 2051. Humana, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-9744-2_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-9744-2_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-9743-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-9744-2
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols