Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) and protein aggregation capture (PAC) starting from a three-species protein mix (Human, Soybean and Pisum sativum) and two different starting amounts (1 and 10 µg). Peptide mixtures were analyzed by data-independent acquisition (DIA) and raw files were processed by three commonly used software: Spectronaut, MaxDIA and DIA-NN. Overall, the highest number of proteins (mean value of 5491) were identified by PAC (10 µg), while the lowest number (4855) was identified by FASP (1 µg). The latter experiment displayed the worst performance in terms of both specificity (0.73) and precision (0.24). Other tested conditions showed better diagnostic accuracy, with specificity values of 0.95-0.99 and precision values between 0.61 and 0.86. In order to provide guidance on the data analysis pipeline, the accuracy diagnostic of three software was investigated: (i) the highest sensitivity was obtained with Spectronaut (median of 0.67) highlighting the ability of Spectronaut to quantify low-abundance proteins, (ii) the best precision value was obtained by MaxDIA (median of 0.84), but with a reduced number of identifications compared to Spectronaut and DIA-NN data, and (iii) the specificity values were similar (between 0.93 and 0.99). The data are available on ProteomeXchange with the identifier PXD044349.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
