Back

Benchmarking DIA data analysis workflows

Staes, A.; Maia, T. M.; Dufour, S.; Bouwmeester, R.; Gabriels, R.; Martens, L.; Impens, F.; Devos, S.

2023-06-06 bioinformatics
10.1101/2023.06.02.543441 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Data independent acquisition (DIA) has become a well-established method in LC-MS driven proteomics. Nonetheless, there are still a lot of possibilities at the data analysis level. By benchmarking different DIA analysis workflows using a ground-truth sample, consisting of a differential spike-in of UPS2 in a constant yeast background, we provide a roadmap for DIA data analysis of shotgun samples based on whether sensitivity, precision or accuracy is of the essence. Three different commonly used DIA software tools (DIA-NN, EncyclopeDIA and SpectronautTM) were tested in both spectral library mode and spectral library-free mode. In spectral library mode we used the independent spectral library prediction tools PROSIT and MS2PIP together with DeepLC, next to the classical DDA-based spectral libraries. In total we benchmarked 12 DIA workflows. DIA-NN in library-free mode or using in silico predicted libraries, together with Spectronaut in library-free mode, shows the highest sensitivity maintaining a high reproducibility and accuracy. In general, DIA-NN shows the best reproducibility, while the accuracy is comparable for all DIA workflows.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.