Fig. 3 | Nature Communications

Fig. 3

From: Metabolic reaction network-based recursive metabolite annotation for untargeted metabolomics

Fig. 3

Validation of high annotation accuracy from MetDNA and the comparison with CFM-ID. a, b Validation of metabolite annotations from MetDNA by spiking 200 metabolite standards into mouse liver samples. c, d Validation of metabolite annotations using the confirmed seed metabolites in the Drosophila aging datasets. e, f Validation of metabolite annotations in Drosophila aging datasets from MetDNA using external NIST and MassBank spectral databases. a, c, e Statistics of the annotation coverage, and correct, isomer, and error rates among the top three candidates; b, d, f statistics of correct, isomer, and error rates among top n (n = 1 to 10) annotations. The x-axis represents the top n (n = 1–10) metabolite candidates for each peak. The y-axis represents the percentages for correct (purple), isomeric (blue), and erroneous (black) annotations. g The numbers of annotated metabolites using in-house library, CFM-ID, and MetDNA in Drosophila aging datasets. h Comparison of annotation correct rates between CFM-ID and MetDNA in the same chemical search space

Back to article page