Cargando…
Cumulative Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data
[Image: see text] Clean high-resolution mass spectra (HRMS) are essential to a successful structural elucidation of an unknown feature during nontarget analysis (NTA) workflows. This is a crucial step, particularly for the spectra generated during data-independent acquisition or during direct infusi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Chemical Society
2023
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10448439/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37549176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.3c00896 |
_version_ | 1785094733593313280 |
---|---|
author | van Herwerden, Denice O’Brien, Jake W. Lege, Sascha Pirok, Bob W. J. Thomas, Kevin V. Samanipour, Saer |
author_facet | van Herwerden, Denice O’Brien, Jake W. Lege, Sascha Pirok, Bob W. J. Thomas, Kevin V. Samanipour, Saer |
author_sort | van Herwerden, Denice |
collection | PubMed |
description | [Image: see text] Clean high-resolution mass spectra (HRMS) are essential to a successful structural elucidation of an unknown feature during nontarget analysis (NTA) workflows. This is a crucial step, particularly for the spectra generated during data-independent acquisition or during direct infusion experiments. The most commonly available tools only take advantage of the time domain for spectral cleanup. Here, we present an algorithm that combines the time domain and mass domain information to perform spectral deconvolution. The algorithm employs a probability-based cumulative neutral loss (CNL) model for fragment deconvolution. The optimized model, with a mass tolerance of 0.005 Da and a score(CNL) threshold of 0.00, was able to achieve a true positive rate (TPr) of 95.0%, a false discovery rate (FDr) of 20.6%, and a reduction rate of 35.4%. Additionally, the CNL model was extensively tested on real samples containing predominantly pesticides at different concentration levels and with matrix effects. Overall, the model was able to obtain a TPr above 88.8% with FD rates between 33 and 79% and reduction rates between 9 and 45%. Finally, the CNL model was compared with the retention time difference method and peak shape correlation analysis, showing that a combination of correlation analysis and the CNL model was the most effective for fragment deconvolution, obtaining a TPr of 84.7%, an FDr of 54.4%, and a reduction rate of 51.0%. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10448439 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | American Chemical Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104484392023-08-25 Cumulative Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data van Herwerden, Denice O’Brien, Jake W. Lege, Sascha Pirok, Bob W. J. Thomas, Kevin V. Samanipour, Saer Anal Chem [Image: see text] Clean high-resolution mass spectra (HRMS) are essential to a successful structural elucidation of an unknown feature during nontarget analysis (NTA) workflows. This is a crucial step, particularly for the spectra generated during data-independent acquisition or during direct infusion experiments. The most commonly available tools only take advantage of the time domain for spectral cleanup. Here, we present an algorithm that combines the time domain and mass domain information to perform spectral deconvolution. The algorithm employs a probability-based cumulative neutral loss (CNL) model for fragment deconvolution. The optimized model, with a mass tolerance of 0.005 Da and a score(CNL) threshold of 0.00, was able to achieve a true positive rate (TPr) of 95.0%, a false discovery rate (FDr) of 20.6%, and a reduction rate of 35.4%. Additionally, the CNL model was extensively tested on real samples containing predominantly pesticides at different concentration levels and with matrix effects. Overall, the model was able to obtain a TPr above 88.8% with FD rates between 33 and 79% and reduction rates between 9 and 45%. Finally, the CNL model was compared with the retention time difference method and peak shape correlation analysis, showing that a combination of correlation analysis and the CNL model was the most effective for fragment deconvolution, obtaining a TPr of 84.7%, an FDr of 54.4%, and a reduction rate of 51.0%. American Chemical Society 2023-08-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10448439/ /pubmed/37549176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.3c00896 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Permits the broadest form of re-use including for commercial purposes, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | van Herwerden, Denice O’Brien, Jake W. Lege, Sascha Pirok, Bob W. J. Thomas, Kevin V. Samanipour, Saer Cumulative Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data |
title | Cumulative
Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution
in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data |
title_full | Cumulative
Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution
in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data |
title_fullStr | Cumulative
Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution
in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data |
title_full_unstemmed | Cumulative
Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution
in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data |
title_short | Cumulative
Neutral Loss Model for Fragment Deconvolution
in Electrospray Ionization High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Data |
title_sort | cumulative
neutral loss model for fragment deconvolution
in electrospray ionization high-resolution mass spectrometry data |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10448439/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37549176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.3c00896 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanherwerdendenice cumulativeneutrallossmodelforfragmentdeconvolutioninelectrosprayionizationhighresolutionmassspectrometrydata AT obrienjakew cumulativeneutrallossmodelforfragmentdeconvolutioninelectrosprayionizationhighresolutionmassspectrometrydata AT legesascha cumulativeneutrallossmodelforfragmentdeconvolutioninelectrosprayionizationhighresolutionmassspectrometrydata AT pirokbobwj cumulativeneutrallossmodelforfragmentdeconvolutioninelectrosprayionizationhighresolutionmassspectrometrydata AT thomaskevinv cumulativeneutrallossmodelforfragmentdeconvolutioninelectrosprayionizationhighresolutionmassspectrometrydata AT samanipoursaer cumulativeneutrallossmodelforfragmentdeconvolutioninelectrosprayionizationhighresolutionmassspectrometrydata |