2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.12.047
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Standardization of retention time data for AMT tag proteomics database generation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such experiments are currently being carried out to screen the impact of different environmental conditions or of knock-out mutations at the chloroplast level. Moreover, such an AT_CHLORO database is usable by any laboratory having a high resolution mass spectrometer (FT-ICR or Orbitrap) provided that standardization of the retention times is achieved (104) and that tools dedicated to the AMT strategy are used.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such experiments are currently being carried out to screen the impact of different environmental conditions or of knock-out mutations at the chloroplast level. Moreover, such an AT_CHLORO database is usable by any laboratory having a high resolution mass spectrometer (FT-ICR or Orbitrap) provided that standardization of the retention times is achieved (104) and that tools dedicated to the AMT strategy are used.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Outlier data are marked by a black square and are indicative of incorrect identifications or interfered ion intensity measurements. The value and specificity of f1 and f2 increases substantially by supplementing the fragment ion signature with additional orthogonal information, such as standardized peptide retention time [49], drift time [51,55] or collision cross section [56]. Supplementary Figure 3 illustrates the addition of the standardized retention time to f1 and f2, thereby creating a subset ion map for the three fragment ions of interest, indicating substantially improved specificity compared with the results shown in Figs.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Panel (a) of Supplementary Figure 3 illustrates that experimental retention time correlate linearly with predicted normalized hydrophobicity. Panel (b) shows f1 and f2 as a function of non-standardized (raw) retention time, and panel (c) f1 and f2 as a function of retention time after normalization and standardization [49]. Drift time and collision cross section information were not acquired and/or available for the results described.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Absolute retention times vary from instrument to instrument and from column to column (even between columns of the same make and model), and are therefore considered to be of limited use for highconfidence inter-laboratory peak identification. However, relative retention times (or retention indices), where the retention time of each peak is expressed relative to one or two other peaks in the same chromatogram, are far more stable (Tarasova et al, 2009) and may provide an avenue to the compilation of LC-MS reference libraries capable of providing MSI-compliant peak identifications by combining accurate mass MS or MS/MS spectra with meaningful and highly reproducible retention index (RI) properties. Complementary to this approach would be the further development of RI-prediction models that can accurately predict the LC retention indices of metabolites based on their structures (Hagiwara et al, 2010).…”
Section: The Need For Chromatographic Retention Data In Lc/ms Referenmentioning
confidence: 99%