posted on 2013-12-06, 00:00authored byPiliang Hao, Yan Ren, James
P. Tam, Siu Kwan Sze
The tandem mass spectrum
extraction of phosphopeptides is more
difficult and error-prone than that of unmodified peptides due to
their lower abundance, lower ionization efficiency, the cofragmentation
with other high-abundance peptides, and the use of MS3 on
MS2 fragments with neutral losses. However, there are still
no established methods to evaluate its correctness. Here we propose
to identify and correct these errors via the combinatorial use of
multiple spectrum extraction tools. We evaluated five free and two
commercial extraction tools using Mascot and phosphoproteomics raw
data from LTQ FT Ultra, in which RawXtract 1.9.9.2 identified the
highest number of unique phosphopeptides (peptide expectation value
<0.05). Surprisingly, ProteoWizzard (v. 3.0.3476) extracted wrong
precursor mass for most MS3 spectra. Comparison of the
top three free extraction tools showed that only 54% of the identified
spectra were identified consistently from all three tools, indicating
that some errors might happen during spectrum extraction. Manual check
of 258 spectra not identified from all three tools revealed 405 errors
of spectrum extraction with 7.4% in selecting wrong precursor charge,
50.6% in selecting wrong precursor mass, and 42.1% in exporting MS/MS
fragments. We then corrected the errors by selecting the best extracted
MGF file for each spectrum among the three tools for another database
search. With the errors corrected, it results in the 22.4 and 12.2%
increase in spectrum matches and unique peptide identification, respectively,
compared with the best single method. Correction of errors in spectrum
extraction improves both the sensitivity and confidence of phosphopeptide
identification. Data analysis on nonphosphopeptide spectra indicates
that this strategy applies to unmodified peptides as well. The identification
of errors in spectrum extraction will promote the improvement of spectrum
extraction tools in future.