Comparative Evaluation of MaxQuant and Proteome Discoverer MS1-Based Protein Quantification Tools

被引:41
作者
Palomba, Antonio [1 ]
Abbondio, Marcello [2 ]
Fiorito, Giovanni [2 ,3 ]
Uzzau, Sergio [2 ]
Pagnozzi, Daniela [1 ]
Tanca, Alessandro [2 ]
机构
[1] Porto Conte Ric, I-07041 Alghero, Italy
[2] Univ Sassari, Dept Biomed Sci, I-07100 Sassari, Italy
[3] Imperial Coll London, MRC Ctr Environm & Hlth, London W2 1PG, England
关键词
accuracy; differential analysis; label-free quantification; log ratio; mass spectrometry; precision; proteomics; sensitivity; specificity; LABEL-FREE; COMPUTATIONAL PLATFORM; NORMALIZATION;
D O I
10.1021/acs.jproteome.1c00143
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
MS1-based label-free quantification can compare precursor ion peaks across runs, allowing reproducible protein measurements. Among bioinformatic platforms enabling MS1-based quantification, MaxQuant (MQ) is one of the most used, while Proteome Discoverer (PD) has recently introduced the Minora tool. Here, we present a comparative evaluation of six MS1-based quantification methods available in MQ and PD. Intensity (MQand PD) and area (PD only) of the precursor ion peaks were measured and then subjected or not to normalization. The six methods were applied to data sets simulating various differential proteomics scenarios and covering a wide range of protein abundance ratios and amounts. PD outperformed MQ in terms of quantification yield, dynamic rang; and reproducibility, although neither platform reached a fully satisfactory quality of measurements at low-abundance ranges. PD methods including normalization were the most accurate in estimating the abundance ratio between groups and the most sensitive when comparing groups with a narrow abundance ratio; on the contrary, MQ methods generally reached slightly higher specificity, accuracy, and precision values. Moreover, we found that applying an optimized log ratio-based threshold can maximize specificity, accuracy, and precision. Taken together, these results can help researchers choose the most appropriate MS1-based protein quantification strategy for their studies.
引用
收藏
页码:3497 / 3507
页数:11
相关论文
共 17 条
[11]   A critical comparison of three MS-based approaches for quantitative proteomics analysis [J].
Taverna, Domenico ;
Gaspari, Marco .
JOURNAL OF MASS SPECTROMETRY, 2021, 56 (01)
[12]   The MaxQuant computational platform for mass spectrometry-based shotgun proteomics [J].
Tyanova, Stefka ;
Temu, Tikira ;
Cox, Juergen .
NATURE PROTOCOLS, 2016, 11 (12) :2301-2319
[13]  
Tyanova S, 2016, NAT METHODS, V13, P731, DOI [10.1038/NMETH.3901, 10.1038/nmeth.3901]
[14]   A comprehensive evaluation of popular proteomics software workflows for label-free proteome quantification and imputation [J].
Valikangas, Tommi ;
Suomi, Tomi ;
Elo, Laura L. .
BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS, 2018, 19 (06) :1344-1355
[15]   A systematic evaluation of normalization methods in quantitative label-free proteomics [J].
Valikangas, Tommi ;
Suomi, Tomi ;
Elo, Laura L. .
BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS, 2018, 19 (01) :1-11
[16]   MS1 ion current-based quantitative proteomics: A promising solution for reliable analysis of large biological cohorts [J].
Wang, Xue ;
Shen, Shichen ;
Rasam, Sailee Suryakant ;
Qu, Jun .
MASS SPECTROMETRY REVIEWS, 2019, 38 (06) :461-482
[17]   Comparative evaluation of label-free quantification strategies [J].
Zhao, Lei ;
Cong, Xiaoji ;
Zhai, Linhui ;
Hu, Hao ;
Xu, Jun-Yu ;
Zhao, Wensi ;
Zhu, Mengdi ;
Tan, Minjia ;
Ye, Bang-Ce .
JOURNAL OF PROTEOMICS, 2020, 215