Distribution of summed MS1 intensities

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
13-1 Designing Engineering Experiments Every experiment involves a sequence of activities: Conjecture – the original hypothesis that motivates the.
Advertisements

ANOVA  Used to test difference of means between 3 or more groups. Assumptions: Independent samples Normal distribution Equal Variance.
Comparing Several Means: One-way ANOVA Lesson 14.
Statistical Methods in Computer Science Hypothesis Testing II: Single-Factor Experiments Ido Dagan.
Introduction to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Statistics Or Do our Data mean Diddly?. Why are stat important Sometimes two data sets look different, but aren’t Other times, two data sets don’t look.
Normal and Sampling Distributions A normal distribution is uniquely determined by its mean, , and variance,  2 The random variable Z = (X-  /  is.
PS 225 Lecture 15 Analysis of Variance ANOVA Tables.
Chapter 11 HYPOTHESIS TESTING USING THE ONE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE.
Comparing Three or More Means ANOVA (One-Way Analysis of Variance)
12: Basic Data Analysis for Quantitative Research.
Copyright © 2013, 2009, and 2007, Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 14 Comparing Groups: Analysis of Variance Methods Section 14.1 One-Way ANOVA: Comparing.
- We have samples for each of two conditions. We provide an answer for “Are the two sample means significantly different from each other, or could both.
One-way ANOVA Example Analysis of Variance Hypotheses Model & Assumptions Analysis of Variance Multiple Comparisons Checking Assumptions.
© 2008 McGraw-Hill Higher Education The Statistical Imagination Chapter 5. Measuring Dispersion or Spread in a Distribution of Scores.
Date of download: 6/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Experimental SEM images of an ArF-photoresist pattern. The images are 2000 nm long.
1 Experimental Statistics - week 5 Chapter 9: Multiple Comparisons Chapter 15: Randomized Complete Block Design (15.3)
Comparing k Populations Means – One way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
GFP‐Sed5p localization defect in sgt2Δ.
Network topology reflects target gene expression profile and function.
Quantitative proteomics reveals daf‐16‐mediated reduction in protein metabolism in long‐lived daf‐2(e1370) mutants. Quantitative proteomics reveals daf‐16‐mediated.
Analysis of mutational effects of parameters on the phenotype (i. e
Hnf4g importance in human colon cancer organoids and regulation of the Hnf4a locus Hnf4g importance in human colon cancer organoids and regulation of the.
(A) Graph depicting interaction between the five regulatory motifs measured by synergy and cooccurrence. (A) Graph depicting interaction between the five.
Heatmaps of the gene mutation distributions in oncogene‐signaling blocks for six representative cancer types. Heatmaps of the gene mutation distributions.
Predicted and measured double‐ring formation.
Functional assays confirm daf‐2‐dependent reduction in protein metabolism. Functional assays confirm daf‐2‐dependent reduction in protein metabolism. (A)
Proteins with hotspot mutations are often in the interaction networks with known cancer driver proteins Proteins with hotspot mutations are often in the.
Comparative analysis of RNA and protein profiles.
Highly correlating interaction profiles can predict functional similarity Highly correlating interaction profiles can predict functional similarity AROC.
Isolation of transcription elongation complexes from the 5′ and 3′ regions of a single gene Isolation of transcription elongation complexes from the 5′
Correlating protein to mRNA and proteins per mRNA ratios
Validation cell‐type‐enriched culturing methods, metabolome dynamics, and mitochondria abundance and bioenergetics in differentiating organoids Validation.
The tissue‐specific protein expression in 65 cell types corresponding to 48 tissues and organs. The tissue‐specific protein expression in 65 cell types.
Characterization of promoters relative to pAGA1
Detection of specific interacting partners of CBL and CBLB in peripheral CD4+ T cells prior to and following TCR stimulation Detection of specific interacting.
A paired-samples t-test compares the means of two related sets of data to see if they differ statistically. IQ Example We may want to compare the IQ scores.
Differences in cellular organization emerge from quantitative proteomic experiments Differences in cellular organization emerge from quantitative proteomic.
Topographical effects of cell line, mitotic phase, and inhibitors
Dynamic changes of protein phosphorylation identify ERK1/2 substrates from cytosolic and nuclear compartments. Dynamic changes of protein phosphorylation.
Multi‐Omics Factor Analysis: model overview and downstream analyses
Collective shifts of abundance for nuclear and extracellular proteins in colorectal cancer Collective shifts of abundance for nuclear and extracellular.
Characterization of Factor 5 (oxidative stress response factor) in the CLL data Characterization of Factor 5 (oxidative stress response factor) in the.
Analysis of the phosphomimetic ProP‐PD selection results
The cell cycle influences circadian phase progression Circadian intervals with divisions (p1,d1,p2) last 21.95 ± 3.8 h (n = 1,926) and are significantly.
Geology Geomath Chapter 7 - Statistics tom.h.wilson
ClpX facilitates FtsZ depletion during carbon starvation
Comparison of proteomics and RNA‐Seq data.
Comparison of nuclear surface area of HeLa and RKO cells
Dynamics of induction of mating promoters after pheromone stimulation
Impact of growth phase on the Escherichia coli meltome and proteome
Antibody analysis of Erk.
Subnetworks enriched for the hallmarks of cancer.
Melting behavior of protein complexes
These probabilities are the probabilities that individual values in a sample will fall in a 50 gram range, and thus represent the integral of individual.
Antisense expression associates with larger gene expression variability. Antisense expression associates with larger gene expression variability. (A–D)
Statistics Standard: S-ID
Remodeling of the mitochondrial and extracellular proteome during Caenorhabditis elegans aging Remodeling of the mitochondrial and extracellular proteome.
Functional metabolic rearrangements in chloramphenicol‐resistant populations Functional metabolic rearrangements in chloramphenicol‐resistant populations.
SP3 provides an efficient means for preparing protein and peptide samples for MS analysis Schematic of the SP3 workflow in a single tube. SP3 provides.
Competence initiation during the progression to spore formation.
Correlation of flux and enzyme concentration (inferred from transcripts) changes for reactions in central metabolism. Correlation of flux and enzyme concentration.
Genomewide profiling of chromatin accessibility in prostate cancer specimens Genomewide profiling of chromatin accessibility in prostate cancer specimens.
(A) Observed significant protein fold‐changes during the fed–fasting transition in C57BL/6J (B6) and 129Sv (S9) mice fed with a normal diet (T0). (A) Observed.
Sequence dependence of Met4 recruitment.
Intestinal differentiation is coupled with global rewiring of gene expression Intestinal differentiation is coupled with global rewiring of gene expression.
Reliability of Assessment of Protein Structure Prediction Methods
Identification of PVM candidates by quantitative mass spectrometry.
Correlation and Simple Linear Regression
Correlation and Simple Linear Regression
Presentation transcript:

Distribution of summed MS1 intensities Distribution of summed MS1 intensities A–DThe distribution of summed MS1 intensities from all peptides corresponding to each protein identified in each mass spectrometry run are plotted. The distribution of MS1 intensities is plotted for all nine samples (triplicate 5′ IPs, triplicate 3′ IPs, and triplicate mock IPs). Also shown is a table displaying the mean and standard deviation for the number of unique proteins identified from the triplicate IPs. The distributions are plotted for (A) raw MS1 intensities, (B) mean normalized (see Materials and Methods) intensities, (C) mean normalized intensities filtered for proteins present in all three samples from at least one condition, and (D) mean normalized intensities filtered for proteins present in all three samples from at least one condition with missing values (i.e. proteins present in one condition but not the other) imputed (see Materials and Methods). The mean and variance are shown in the table next to the distributions represent the mean and variance from averaging the triplicate datasets. t‐tests to test for differences in the mean and F‐tests to test for differences in the variance for each dataset are also shown. These data demonstrate that both raw and normalized datasets do not vary in their variances as F‐tests between the datasets are not significant. The 5′ and 3′ IPs show highly similar mean MS1 intensity values and distributions in the raw data. The mock IPs display a mean shifted toward larger MS1 intensities. Thus, to allow for comparison between 5′, 3′ IPs, and mock IPs, the data were mean normalized (as described in the Materials and Methods) to center the distributions of the datasets around zero, allowing the samples to be compared to one another. As the variance was not significantly different between any of the datasets, no adjustment of the variance was made. After mean normalization, the MS1 intensity distributions and variances are all similar, allowing direct comparison of protein enrichment within samples as well as t‐tests between each protein in each sample. Note that dataset mean and variance values do not differ between samples until imputation of missing values to allow for statistical analysis between samples. Kevin M Harlen, and L Stirling Churchman Mol Syst Biol 2017;13:900 © as stated in the article, figure or figure legend