2017
DOI: 10.1101/239715
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

False discovery rate estimation and heterobifunctional cross-linkers

Abstract: False discovery rate (FDR) estimation is a cornerstone of proteomics that has recently been adapted to cross-linking/mass spectrometry. Here we demonstrate that heterobifunctional cross-linkers, while theoretically different from homobifunctional cross-linkers, need not be considered separately in practice. We develop and then evaluate the impact of applying a correct FDR formula for use of heterobifunctional cross-linkers and conclude that there are minimal practical advantages. Hence a single formula can be … Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

2
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To create the final list of unique crosslinked peptide pairs, we first concatenated the search results from all crosslinking and sample prep conditions (250:1, 500:1, 750:1, 1000:1 DSSO:augmin molar ratio, and in-gel vs. in-solution digests). Our MetaMorpheus search settings resulted in 1% FDR for both intersubunit and intrasubunit crosslink pairs when calculated using an established formula for target-decoy searches, FDR = (TD−DD)/TT, where TT is the number of target–target crosslink pairs, TD is the number of target–decoy crosslink pairs, and DD is the number of decoy–decoy crosslink pairs 52 , 53 . We then eliminated redundant entries, keeping the highest scoring incidences, and applied a final cutoff below MetaMorpheus q -value of 0.01 (1% FDR).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To create the final list of unique crosslinked peptide pairs, we first concatenated the search results from all crosslinking and sample prep conditions (250:1, 500:1, 750:1, 1000:1 DSSO:augmin molar ratio, and in-gel vs. in-solution digests). Our MetaMorpheus search settings resulted in 1% FDR for both intersubunit and intrasubunit crosslink pairs when calculated using an established formula for target-decoy searches, FDR = (TD−DD)/TT, where TT is the number of target–target crosslink pairs, TD is the number of target–decoy crosslink pairs, and DD is the number of decoy–decoy crosslink pairs 52 , 53 . We then eliminated redundant entries, keeping the highest scoring incidences, and applied a final cutoff below MetaMorpheus q -value of 0.01 (1% FDR).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Raw files were preprocessed with MaxQuant (v1.5.4.1), using the partial processing until step 5. Resulting peak files (APL format) were subjected to Xi, 17 The respective search databases consisted of a single entry with the sequence of the corresponding protein, that was extracted from the crystal structure PDB file (PDB IDs: 1AO6, 2CRK, 2FRJ). FDR was estimated using XiFDR 18 on 5% residue level with enabled boosting and including only unique peptide-spectra matches (PSMs).…”
Section: ■ Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To normalize the expression levels of different genes and different samples, the reads were converted to fragments per kilobase of transcripts per million fragments mapped (FPKM) value. The false discovery rate (FDR) is the adjusted P value obtained by multiple hypothesis test correction on the original P value (16). The DEGs in the libraries were defined as having a FPKM value ≥1.5 and an FDR <0.05.…”
Section: Screening Of Degsmentioning
confidence: 99%