Table 4.
Results for filtering of non-peptide masses.
Arabidopsis t. | Rhodopirelulla b. | Mus musculus | ||
1 | Identification no PR filtering | 423 | 1009 | 872 |
2 | Identification with PR filtering | 432 | 1017 | 894 |
3 | Change in identification (Percent) | 2.13 | 0.79 | 2.52 |
4 | Total nr. of samples* | 818 | 1169 | 1709 |
5 | Nr. samples with PBMS increase | 240 | 622 | 724 |
6 | Nr. samples with no change of PBMS | 571 | 542 | 982 |
7 | Nr. samples with PBMS decrease | 7 | 5 | 3 |
8 | Percent increase of PBMS score | 29.34 | 53.21 | 42.36 |
9 | Percent decrease of PBMS score | 0.86 | 0.43 | 0.18 |
Columns: Arabidopsis t., Rhodopirelulla b., Mus musculus – peptide mass fingerprint datasets (cf. Methods). Row 1 – number of samples with a significant PBMS score prior to filtering of non-peptide peak masses. Row 2 – number of samples with a significant PBMS score for peak-lists with non-peptide removed. Row 3 – relative change of the identification rate (Row 2 – Row 1)/Row1 100. Row 4 – Total number of samples which produced a PBMS score. Row 5 -number of samples for which an increase of the PBMS score due to non peptide peak filtering was observed. Row 6 – number of samples for which no change of the PBMS score due to non-peptide peak filtering was observed. Row 7 – number of samples for which a decrease of the PBMS score due to non-peptide peak filtering was observed. Row 8–9 – relative increase and decrease of the PBMS score, respectively.