: The aim of this study was to compare filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) and protein aggregation capture (PAC) starting from a three-species protein mix (Human, Soybean and Pisum sativum) and two different starting amounts (1 and 10 µg). Peptide mixtures were analyzed by data-independent acquisition (DIA) and raw files were processed by three commonly used software: Spectronaut, MaxDIA and DIA-NN. Overall, the highest number of proteins (mean value of 5491) were identified by PAC (10 µg), while the lowest number (4855) was identified by FASP (1 µg). The latter experiment displayed the worst performance in terms of both specificity (0.73) and precision (0.24). Other tested conditions showed better diagnostic accuracy, with specificity values of 0.95-0.99 and precision values between 0.61 and 0.86. In order to provide guidance on the data analysis pipeline, the accuracy diagnostic of three software was investigated: (i) the highest sensitivity was obtained with Spectronaut (median of 0.67) highlighting the ability of Spectronaut to quantify low-abundance proteins, (ii) the best precision value was obtained by MaxDIA (median of 0.84), but with a reduced number of identifications compared to Spectronaut and DIA-NN data, and (iii) the specificity values were similar (between 0.93 and 0.99). The data are available on ProteomeXchange with the identifier PXD044349.

Evaluation of PAC and FASP Performance: DIA-Based Quantitative Proteomic Analysis

Murfuni, Maria Stella;Prestagiacomo, Licia E.;Giuliano, Annarita;Gabriele, Caterina;Signoretti, Sara;Cuda, Giovanni;Gaspari, Marco
2024-01-01

Abstract

: The aim of this study was to compare filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) and protein aggregation capture (PAC) starting from a three-species protein mix (Human, Soybean and Pisum sativum) and two different starting amounts (1 and 10 µg). Peptide mixtures were analyzed by data-independent acquisition (DIA) and raw files were processed by three commonly used software: Spectronaut, MaxDIA and DIA-NN. Overall, the highest number of proteins (mean value of 5491) were identified by PAC (10 µg), while the lowest number (4855) was identified by FASP (1 µg). The latter experiment displayed the worst performance in terms of both specificity (0.73) and precision (0.24). Other tested conditions showed better diagnostic accuracy, with specificity values of 0.95-0.99 and precision values between 0.61 and 0.86. In order to provide guidance on the data analysis pipeline, the accuracy diagnostic of three software was investigated: (i) the highest sensitivity was obtained with Spectronaut (median of 0.67) highlighting the ability of Spectronaut to quantify low-abundance proteins, (ii) the best precision value was obtained by MaxDIA (median of 0.84), but with a reduced number of identifications compared to Spectronaut and DIA-NN data, and (iii) the specificity values were similar (between 0.93 and 0.99). The data are available on ProteomeXchange with the identifier PXD044349.
2024
DIA-NN
MaxDIA
Spectronaut
benchmarking
filter-aided sample preparation
protein aggregation capture
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12317/95017
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact