Cargando…

Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics

One of the most widely used strategies for metabolite annotation in untargeted LCMS is based on the analysis of MS(n) spectra acquired using data-dependent acquisition (DDA), where precursor ions are sequentially selected from MS scans based on user-selected criteria. However, the number of MS(n) sp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ten-Doménech, Isabel, Martínez-Sena, Teresa, Moreno-Torres, Marta, Sanjuan-Herráez, Juan Daniel, Castell, José V., Parra-Llorca, Anna, Vento, Máximo, Quintás, Guillermo, Kuligowski, Julia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7241085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32225041
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/metabo10040126
_version_ 1783537022191796224
author Ten-Doménech, Isabel
Martínez-Sena, Teresa
Moreno-Torres, Marta
Sanjuan-Herráez, Juan Daniel
Castell, José V.
Parra-Llorca, Anna
Vento, Máximo
Quintás, Guillermo
Kuligowski, Julia
author_facet Ten-Doménech, Isabel
Martínez-Sena, Teresa
Moreno-Torres, Marta
Sanjuan-Herráez, Juan Daniel
Castell, José V.
Parra-Llorca, Anna
Vento, Máximo
Quintás, Guillermo
Kuligowski, Julia
author_sort Ten-Doménech, Isabel
collection PubMed
description One of the most widely used strategies for metabolite annotation in untargeted LCMS is based on the analysis of MS(n) spectra acquired using data-dependent acquisition (DDA), where precursor ions are sequentially selected from MS scans based on user-selected criteria. However, the number of MS(n) spectra that can be acquired during a chromatogram is limited and a trade-off between analytical speed, sensitivity and coverage must be ensured. In this research, we compare four different strategies for automated MS(2) DDA, which can be easily implemented in the frame of standard QA/QC workflows for untargeted LC–MS. These strategies consist of (i) DDA in the MS working range; (ii) iterated DDA split into several m/z intervals; (iii) dynamic iterated DDA of (pre)selected potentially informative features; and (iv) dynamic iterated DDA of (pre)annotated metabolic features using a reference database. Their performance was assessed using the analysis of human milk samples as model example by comparing the percentage of LC–MS features selected as the precursor ion for MS(2), the number, and class of annotated features, the speed and confidence of feature annotation, and the number of LC runs required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7241085
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72410852020-06-02 Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics Ten-Doménech, Isabel Martínez-Sena, Teresa Moreno-Torres, Marta Sanjuan-Herráez, Juan Daniel Castell, José V. Parra-Llorca, Anna Vento, Máximo Quintás, Guillermo Kuligowski, Julia Metabolites Article One of the most widely used strategies for metabolite annotation in untargeted LCMS is based on the analysis of MS(n) spectra acquired using data-dependent acquisition (DDA), where precursor ions are sequentially selected from MS scans based on user-selected criteria. However, the number of MS(n) spectra that can be acquired during a chromatogram is limited and a trade-off between analytical speed, sensitivity and coverage must be ensured. In this research, we compare four different strategies for automated MS(2) DDA, which can be easily implemented in the frame of standard QA/QC workflows for untargeted LC–MS. These strategies consist of (i) DDA in the MS working range; (ii) iterated DDA split into several m/z intervals; (iii) dynamic iterated DDA of (pre)selected potentially informative features; and (iv) dynamic iterated DDA of (pre)annotated metabolic features using a reference database. Their performance was assessed using the analysis of human milk samples as model example by comparing the percentage of LC–MS features selected as the precursor ion for MS(2), the number, and class of annotated features, the speed and confidence of feature annotation, and the number of LC runs required. MDPI 2020-03-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7241085/ /pubmed/32225041 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/metabo10040126 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Ten-Doménech, Isabel
Martínez-Sena, Teresa
Moreno-Torres, Marta
Sanjuan-Herráez, Juan Daniel
Castell, José V.
Parra-Llorca, Anna
Vento, Máximo
Quintás, Guillermo
Kuligowski, Julia
Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics
title Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics
title_full Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics
title_fullStr Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics
title_short Comparing Targeted vs. Untargeted MS(2) Data-Dependent Acquisition for Peak Annotation in LC–MS Metabolomics
title_sort comparing targeted vs. untargeted ms(2) data-dependent acquisition for peak annotation in lc–ms metabolomics
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7241085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32225041
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/metabo10040126
work_keys_str_mv AT tendomenechisabel comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT martinezsenateresa comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT morenotorresmarta comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT sanjuanherraezjuandaniel comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT castelljosev comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT parrallorcaanna comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT ventomaximo comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT quintasguillermo comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics
AT kuligowskijulia comparingtargetedvsuntargetedms2datadependentacquisitionforpeakannotationinlcmsmetabolomics