Bi-linear regression for 18O quantification: Modeling across the elution profile

Journal of Proteomics and Bioinformatics

Volumn 3, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 323-329

  Eckel Passow, Jeanette E ^a   Mahoney, Douglas W ^a   Oberg, Ann L ^a   Zenka, Roman M ^b   Johnson, Kenneth L ^b   Nair, K Sreekumaran ^b,c   Kudva, Yogish C ^c   Bergen, H Robert ^b   Therneau, Terry M ^a  

^a Mayo Clinic College of Medicine   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^c Endocrine Research Unit   (United States)

Author keywords

Mass spectrometry; Proteomics; Quantification; Stable isotope labeling

Indexed keywords

ALBUMIN; OXYGEN 18; TRANSFERRIN;

ACCURACY; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELUTION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; ISOTOPE LABELING; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MASS SPECTROMETRY;

EID: 78651235168     PISSN: None     EISSN: 0974276X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4172/jpb.1000159     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. 16O labeling. BMC Bioinformatics 10: 141.
2. Anderson NL, Anderson NG (2002) The human plasma proteome. Mol Cell Proteomics 1: 845-867.
3. Bro R (1997) PARAFAC. Tutorial and applications. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 38: 149-171.
4. Carrillo B, Yanofsky C, Laboissiere S, Nadon R, Kearney RE (2010) Methods for combining peptide intensities to estimate relative protein abundance. Bioinformatics 26: 98-103.
5. Cox J, Mann M (2008) MaxQuant enables high peptide identification rates, individualized p.p.b.-range mass accuracies and proteome-wide protein quantification. Nat Biotechnol 26: 1367-1372.
6. 18O stableisotope labeled mass spectrometry. Bioinformatics 22: 2739-2745.
7. Faber NM, Bro R, Hopke PK (2003) Recent developments in CANDECOMP/ PARAFAC algorithms: a critical review. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 65: 119-137.
8. Fraga CG, Corley CA (2005) The chemometric resolution and quantification of overlapped peaks form comprehensive two-dimensional liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr A, 1096: 40-49.
9. 18O labeling with an ion trap mass spectrometer and the analysis software application "ZoomQuant". J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 16: 916-925.
10. 18O peptide ion ratios for the relative quantification of proteomes. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom, 15: 437-445.
11. Jorge I (2009) Statistical model to analyzing quantitative proteomics data obtained by 18O/16O labeling and linear ion trap mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics 8: 1130-1149.
12. Leurgans S, Ross RT (1992) Multilinear models: applications in spectroscopy. Statistical Science 7: 289-319.
13. Linder M, Sundberg R (1998) Second-order calibration: bilinear least squares regression and a simple alternative. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 42: 159-178.
14. 18O-labeled isotopic clusters. Mol Cell Proteomics 6: 305-318.
15. 18O-labeled internal standards. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 14: 1226-1232.
16. 18O labeling with a correction for labeling efficiency. Mol Cell Proteomics 6: 1274-1286.
17. Senko MW, Beu SC, McLafferty FW, et al. (1995) Determination of monoisotopic masses and ion populations for large biomolecules from resolved isotopic distributions. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 6: 229-233.
18. Valkenborg D, Jansen I, Burzykowski T (2008) A model-based method for the prediction of the isotopic distribution of peptides. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 19: 703-712.
19. 18O-labeling in combination with MS/MS spectra analysis. J Proteome Res 8: 3653-3665.
20. 18O labeling for comparative proteomics: model studies with two serotypes of adenovirus. Anal Chem 73: 2836-2842.
21. 18O-labeled mass spectra. J Proteome Res 9: 2669-2677.