Back

Detection of human unannotated microproteins by mass spectrometry-based proteomics: a community assessment

Wacholder, A.; Deutsch, E. W.; Kok, L. W.; van Dinter, J. T.; Lee, J.; Wright, J. C.; Leblanc, S.; Jayatissa, A. H.; Jiang, K.; Arefiev, I.; Cao, K.; Bourassa, F.; Trifiro, F.-A.; Bassani-Sternberg, M.; Baranov, P. V.; Bogaert, A.; Chothani, S.; Fierro-Monti, I.; Fijalkowska, D.; Gevaert, K.; Hubner, N.; Mudge, J. M.; Ruiz-Orera, J.; Schulz, J.; Vizcaino, J. A.; Prensner, J. R.; Brunet, M. A.; Martinez, T. F.; Slavoff, S. A.; Roucou, X.; Chaudhary, J. S.; van Heesch, S.; Moritz, R. L.; Carvunis, A.-R.

2025-02-23 genomics
10.1101/2025.02.19.639069 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Thousands of short open reading frames (sORFs) are translated outside of annotated coding sequences. Recent studies have pioneered searching for sORF-encoded microproteins in mass spectrometry (MS)- based proteomics and peptidomics datasets. Here, we assessed literature-reported MS-based identifications of unannotated human proteins. We find that studies vary by three orders of magnitude in the number of unannotated proteins they report. Of nearly 10,000 reported sORF-encoded peptides, 96% were unique to a single study, and 12% mapped to annotated proteins or proteoforms. Manual curation of a benchmark dataset of 406 manually evaluated spectra from 204 sORF-encoded proteins revealed large variation in peptide-spectrum match (PSM) quality between studies, with immunopeptidomics studies generally reporting higher quality PSMs than conventional enzymatic digests of whole cell lysates. We estimate that 65% of predicted sORF-encoded protein detections in immunopeptidomics studies were supported by high-quality PSMs versus 7.8% in non-immunopeptidomics datasets. Our work stresses the need for standardized protocols and analysis workflows to guide future advancements in microprotein detection by MS towards uncovering how many human microproteins exist.

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.