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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |