2021
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkab329
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ProteoSign v2: a faster and evolved user-friendly online tool for statistical analyses of differential proteomics

Abstract: Bottom-up proteomics analyses have been proved over the last years to be a powerful tool in the characterization of the proteome and are crucial for understanding cellular and organism behaviour. Through differential proteomic analysis researchers can shed light on groups of proteins or individual proteins that play key roles in certain, normal or pathological conditions. However, several tools for the analysis of such complex datasets are powerful, but hard-to-use with steep learning curves. In addition, some… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Until this is done, we will be unable to advance our methods or thus deep and routine proteomic analyses to the extent that is both necessary and sufficient for unbiased identification of genuine highly selective biomarkers and drug targets. That said, there are indeed critical ongoing efforts to improve both sample and data analyses, and the best of these must be integrated into a continuously developing unified approach to proteoform and thus proteome analysis [29,81,88,[257][258][259][260][261][262][263][264][265][266][267][268][269][270][271][272][273][274]. We are hopeful and confident of a more collaborative and unbiased future for the discipline of proteomics.…”
Section: What Next?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Until this is done, we will be unable to advance our methods or thus deep and routine proteomic analyses to the extent that is both necessary and sufficient for unbiased identification of genuine highly selective biomarkers and drug targets. That said, there are indeed critical ongoing efforts to improve both sample and data analyses, and the best of these must be integrated into a continuously developing unified approach to proteoform and thus proteome analysis [29,81,88,[257][258][259][260][261][262][263][264][265][266][267][268][269][270][271][272][273][274]. We are hopeful and confident of a more collaborative and unbiased future for the discipline of proteomics.…”
Section: What Next?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An additional analysis for lysine acetylation was performed as previously mentioned one but with the addition of lysine acetylation as a variable modification. For differential abundance analysis, the resulting evidence.txt and proteingroups.txt files were analyzed using the aggregation, normalization, and differential expression analysis tools in ProteoSign, v2 ( 42 ). Default parameters were used, which only consider proteins quantified in both biological replicates and with at least two different peptides.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rat parathyroid MS proteomics and phosphoproteomics data have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifiers PXD029368 and PXD029401, respectively (64). For the primary statistical analysis of the MaxQuant proteomic data we uploaded proteinGroups.txt and evidence.txt files to the ProteoSign webserver (65). Supplemental Table S1 and Fig 1 present ProteoSign’s differential protein expression results and Supplemental Fig 1 shows ProteoSign’s enrichment results, processed with g:Profiler (66) and plotted using ggplot2 (https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org) for R. MaxQuant-identified phosphoproteins , with the detectable proteome as background, subjected to enrichment analysis using DAVID (67), and the results displayed with ggplot2.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%