Quality standards in proteomics research facilities: Common standards and quality procedures are essential for proteomics facilities and their users.

Cristina Chiva,Francis Impens,Mandy Rettel,Christian Panse,Damarys Loew,Dominic Helm,Paolo Nanni,Eduard Sabidó,Thibaut Douché,Teresa Mendes Maia,Mariette Matondo,Anna Shevchenko,Karel Stejskal,Karl Mechtler

doi:10.15252/embr.202152626

Abstract

Proteomics research infrastructures and core facilities within the Core for Life alliance advocate for community policies for quality control to ensure high standards in proteomics services.

Highlights

By delegating part of their work to these services, researchers expect that the core facility adjusts their analytical protocols appropriately for their project to acquire data conforming best research practice of the scientific community
“. . .current quality control and quality assessment procedures in proteomics core facilities and research infrastructures are a motley collection of protocols, standards, reference compounds and software tools.”
Current quality control and quality assessment procedures in proteomics core facilities and research infrastructures are a motley collection of protocols, standards, reference compounds and software tools

Summary

Quality standards in proteomics research facilities

Common standards and quality procedures are essential for proteomics facilities and their users. The implementation of quality assessment measures and commonly accepted quality controls in data generation is crucially important for proteomics research infrastructures and the scientists who rely on them. Current quality control and quality assessment procedures in proteomics core facilities and research infrastructures are a motley collection of protocols, standards, reference compounds and software tools. Proteomics relies on a customized multi-step workflow typically consisting of sample preparation, data acquisition and data processing, and the implementation of each step differs among facilities. Core facilities implement their own guidelines to monitor the performance and quality of the entire workflow, typically utilizing different commercially available standards such as pre-digested cell lysates, recombinant proteins, protein mixtures, or isotopically labeled peptides. It is not surprising that instrument stability and robustness of the applied analytical approach are often unclear, which compromises analytical rigor

Establishing standardized practices

Common quality control procedures

FOR SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY

The role of funders and technology providers