Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Mol Cell Proteomics. 2011 Sep;10(9):M111.008490. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M111.008490. Epub 2011 Jun 23.

Published and perished? The influence of the searched protein database on the long-term storage of proteomics data.

Author information

  • 1EMBL-European Bioinformatics Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, UK.

Abstract

In proteomics, protein identifications are reported and stored using an unstable reference system: protein identifiers. These proprietary identifiers are created individually by every protein database and can change or may even be deleted over time. To estimate the effect of the searched protein sequence database on the long-term storage of proteomics data we analyzed the changes of reported protein identifiers from all public experiments in the Proteomics Identifications (PRIDE) database by November 2010. To map the submitted protein identifier to a currently active entry, two distinct approaches were used. The first approach used the Protein Identifier Cross Referencing (PICR) service at the EBI, which maps protein identifiers based on 100% sequence identity. The second one (called logical mapping algorithm) accessed the source databases and retrieved the current status of the reported identifier. Our analysis showed the differences between the main protein databases (International Protein Index (IPI), UniProt Knowledgebase (UniProtKB), National Center for Biotechnological Information nr database (NCBI nr), and Ensembl) in respect to identifier stability. For example, whereas 20% of submitted IPI entries were deleted after two years, virtually all UniProtKB entries remained either active or replaced. Furthermore, the two mapping algorithms produced markedly different results. For example, the PICR service reported 10% more IPI entries deleted compared with the logical mapping algorithm. We found several cases where experiments contained more than 10% deleted identifiers already at the time of publication. We also assessed the proportion of peptide identifications in these data sets that still fitted the originally identified protein sequences. Finally, we performed the same overall analysis on all records from IPI, Ensembl, and UniProtKB: two releases per year were used, from 2005. This analysis showed for the first time the true effect of changing protein identifiers on proteomics data. Based on these findings, UniProtKB seems the best database for applications that rely on the long-term storage of proteomics data.

PMID:
21700957
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC3186200
Free PMC Article

Images from this publication.See all images (4)Free text

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for HighWire Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk