English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The field of proteomics has been developing rapidly toward quantification of proteins. Despite the variety of experimental techniques available for peptide and protein labelling, there are few commercially available analytical tools with the ability to interpret data from any mass spectrometer. In this study, we compare two software packages, Mascot and Peaks, for the analysis of iTRAQ data from ESI-Q/TOF mass spectrometry. In the case of a six-protein mixture combined in a known proportion, the output of the Peaks algorithm deviated from the correct result by 14% on average, while the error of the Mascot quantification was nearly 200%. When the software were used to analyse iTRAQ data from a complex protein sample, the quantification results agreed within 20% for only 26% of the quantified proteins, showing significant differences in the two quantification algorithms. This comparison and analysis revealed major intricacies in peptide and protein quantification that must be taken into consideration for software development.

Analysis of iTRAQ data using Mascot and Peaks quantification algorithms