Comparative proteomics: assessment of biological variability and dataset comparability

Abstract

BackgroundComparative proteomics in bacteria are often hampered by the differential nature of dataset quality and/or inherent biological deviations. Although common practice compensates by reproducing and normalizing datasets from a single sample, the degree of certainty is limited in comparison of multiple dataset. To surmount these limitations, we introduce a two-step assessment criterion using: (1) the relative number of total spectra (R TS) to determine if two LC-MS/MS datasets are comparable and (2) nine glycolytic enzymes as internal standards for a more accurate calculation of relative amount of proteins. Lactococcus lactis HR279 and JHK24 strains expressing high or low levels (respectively) of green fluorescent protein (GFP) were used for the model system. GFP abundance was determined by spectral counting and direct fluorescence measurements. Statistical analysis determined relative GFP quantity obtained from our approach matched values obtained from fluorescence measurements.Results L. lactis HR279 and JHK24 demonstrates two datasets with an R TS value less than 1.4 accurately reflects relative differences in GFP levels between high and low expression strains. Without prior consideration of R TS and the use of internal standards, the relative increase in GFP calculated by spectral counting method was 3.92 ± 1.14 fold, which is not correlated with the value determined by the direct fluorescence measurement (2.86 ± 0.42 fold) with the p = 0.024. In contrast, 2.88 ± 0.92 fold was obtained by our approach showing a statistically insignificant difference (p = 0.95).ConclusionsOur two-step assessment demonstrates a useful approach to: (1) validate the comparability of two mass spectrometric datasets and (2) accurately calculate the relative amount of proteins between proteomic datasets.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12859-015-0561-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Unravelling the biology of chromatin in health and cancer using proteomic approaches

“…Proteomics approaches are commonly used method for measuring the relative abundance of proteins in different biological conditions like during different phases of the cell cycle or after chromatin activation/repression [85, 86, 87]. To understand how complexes are assembled, regulated, and modulated it is useful to study, not only the conservation of networks and complexes, but also perturbed networks and complexes.…”

Extracellular Vesicle Protein Expression in Doped Bioactive Glasses: Further Insights Applying Anomaly Detection

“…Overall, anomaly detection in proteomics is a complex and essential area of research that has implications for understanding protein structure, protein–protein interactions, and identifying defective proteins; the literature encloses benchmarks and ad hoc analysis sequences for this task [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]. However, identifying anomalies of protein expression levels within small-dimensional datasets presents additional difficulties because the dataset is more susceptible to variability and noise, making it challenging to distinguish between actual biological variations and random fluctuations; anomalies may be masked by inherent variability [ 10 ]. Adopting specific solutions to match the characteristics of the data under exam could ensure the reliability of anomaly detection in small datasets; indeed, small datasets may not adequately represent the diverse biological conditions, making it challenging to distinguish between normal variation and true anomalies.…”