A feedback framework for protein inference with peptides identified from tandem mass spectra

Protein Inference from the Integration of Tandem MS Data and Interactome Networks

Since proteins are digested into a mixture of peptides in the preprocessing step of tandem mass spectrometry (MS), it is difficult to determine which specific protein a shared peptide belongs to. In recent studies, besides tandem MS data and peptide identification information, some other information is exploited to infer proteins. Different from the methods which first use only tandem MS data to infer proteins and then use network information to refine them, this study proposes a protein inference method named TMSIN, which uses interactome networks directly. As two interacting proteins should co-exist, it is reasonable to assume that if one of the interacting proteins is confidently inferred in a sample, its interacting partners should have a high probability in the same sample, too. Therefore, we can use the neighborhood information of a protein in an interactome network to adjust the probability that the shared peptide belongs to the protein. In TMSIN, a multi-weighted graph is constructed by incorporating the bipartite graph with interactome network information, where the bipartite graph is built with the peptide identification information. Based on multi-weighted graphs, TMSIN adopts an iterative workflow to infer proteins. At each iterative step, the probability that a shared peptide belongs to a specific protein is calculated by using the Bayes' law based on the neighbor protein support scores of each protein which are mapped by the shared peptides. We carried out experiments on yeast data and human data to evaluate the performance of TMSIN in terms of ROC, q-value, and accuracy. The experimental results show that AUC scores yielded by TMSIN are 0.742 and 0.874 in yeast dataset and human dataset, respectively, and TMSIN yields the maximum number of true positives when q-value less than or equal to 0.05. The overlap analysis shows that TMSIN is an effective complementary approach for protein inference.

Soil and leaf litter metaproteomics-a brief guideline from sampling to understanding

The increasing application of soil metaproteomics is providing unprecedented, in-depth characterization of the composition and functionality of in situ microbial communities. Despite recent advances in high-resolution mass spectrometry, soil metaproteomics still suffers from a lack of effective and reproducible protein extraction protocols and standardized data analyses. This review discusses the opportunities and limitations of selected techniques in soil-, and leaf litter metaproteomics, and presents a step-by-step guideline on their application, covering sampling, sample preparation, extraction and data evaluation strategies. In addition, we present recent applications of soil metaproteomics and discuss how such approaches, linking phylogenetics and functionality, can help gain deeper insights into terrestrial microbial ecology. Finally, we strongly recommend that to maximize the insights environmental metaproteomics may provide, such methods should be employed within a holistic experimental approach considering relevant aboveground and belowground ecosystem parameters.

Improving protein identification from tandem mass spectrometry data by one-step methods and integrating data from other platforms

MOTIVATION

Many approaches have been proposed for the protein identification problem based on tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) data. In these experiments, proteins are digested into peptides and the resulting peptide mixture is subjected to mass spectrometry. Some interesting putative peptide features (peaks) are selected from the mass spectra. Following that, the precursor ions undergo fragmentation and are analyzed by MS/MS. The process of identification of peptides from the mass spectra and the constituent proteins in the sample is called protein identification from MS/MS data. There are many two-step protein identification procedures, reviewed in the literature, which first attempt to identify the peptides in a separate process and then use these results to infer the proteins. However, in recent years, there have been attempts to provide a one-step solution to protein identification, which simultaneously identifies the proteins and the peptides in the sample.

RESULTS

In this review, we briefly introduce the most popular two-step protein identification procedure, PeptideProphet coupled with ProteinProphet. Following that, we describe the difficulties with two-step procedures and review some recently introduced one-step protein/peptide identification procedures that do not suffer from these issues. The focus of this review is on one-step procedures that are based on statistical likelihood-based models, but some discussion of other one-step procedures is also included. We report comparative performances of one-step and two-step methods, which support the overall superiorities of one-step procedures. We also cover some recent efforts to improve protein identification by incorporating other molecular data along with MS/MS data.