Journal home
Advance online publication
Current issue
Archive
Press releases
Methagora
Focuses
Guide to authors
Online submissionOnline submission
Permissions
For referees
Free online issue
Contact the journal
Subscribe
naturejobs
For Advertisers
work@npg
naturereprints
About this site
For librarians
Application notes
 
NPG Resources
Nature
Nature Biotechnology
Nature Protocols
Nature Genetics
Nature Chemical Biology
Nature Cell Biology
Nature Neuroscience
Nature Reviews Genetics
Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology
Nature Reviews Drug Discovery
Nature Conferences
NPG Subject areas
Biotechnology
Cancer
Chemistry
Clinical Medicine
Dentistry
Development
Drug Discovery
Earth Sciences
Evolution & Ecology
Genetics
Immunology
Materials Science
Medical Research
Microbiology
Molecular Cell Biology
Neuroscience
Pharmacology
Physics
Browse all publications
Perspective
Nature Methods - 4, 207 - 214 (2007)
Published online: 27 February 2007; | doi:10.1038/nmeth1019

Target-decoy search strategy for increased confidence in large-scale protein identifications by mass spectrometry

Joshua E Elias1 & Steven P Gygi1, 2

1  Department of Cell Biology, 240 Longwood Avenue, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA

2  Taplin Biological Mass Spectrometry Facility, 240 Longwood Avenue, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.

Correspondence should be addressed to Steven P Gygi steven_gygi@hms.harvard.edu

Liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has become the preferred method for conducting large-scale surveys of proteomes. Automated interpretation of tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) spectra can be problematic, however, for a variety of reasons. As most sequence search engines return results even for 'unmatchable' spectra, proteome researchers must devise ways to distinguish correct from incorrect peptide identifications. The target-decoy search strategy represents a straightforward and effective way to manage this effort. Despite the apparent simplicity of this method, some controversy surrounds its successful application. Here we clarify our preferred methodology by addressing four issues based on observed decoy hit frequencies: (i) the major assumptions made with this database search strategy are reasonable; (ii) concatenated target-decoy database searches are preferable to separate target and decoy database searches; (iii) the theoretical error associated with target-decoy false positive (FP) rate measurements can be estimated; and (iv) alternate methods for constructing decoy databases are similarly effective once certain considerations are taken into account.

MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS

These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.

NEWS AND VIEWS

Valid data from large-scale proteomics studies

Nature Methods News and Views (01 Sep 2005)

Automated phosphorylation site mapping

Nature Biotechnology News and Views (01 Oct 2006)

 Top
Abstract
Previous | Next
Table of contents
Full textFull text
Download PDFDownload PDF
Send to a friendSend to a friend
rights and permissionsRights and permissions
Order commercial reprintsOrder commercial reprints
CrossRef lists 86 articles citing this articleCrossRef lists 86 articles citing this article
Save this linkSave this link
Figures & Tables
Supplementary info
Export citation

Open Innovation Challenges

natureproducts

Search buyers guide:

ADVERTISEMENT

 
Nature Methods
ISSN: 1548-7091
EISSN: 1548-7105
Journal home | Current issue | Archive | Press releases |
Nature Publishing Group, publisher of Nature, and other science journals and reference works©2007 Nature Publishing Group | Privacy policy