The fact that some labs have some weird background ions that other labs don't (check my repositories for Pug keratin! There's tons of it!) isn't news. Someone a while back showed they could tell when a study was done in the winter due to the amount of wool peptides ionized in their deposited data. I forget who that was.
But this new paper in JASMS shows that it's not just proteomics and peptides. It can even be those nasty adduct things that everyone outside of one group in Madison, Wisconsin ignores is even a thing in proteomics.
This is the first time I've seen a multi-lab controlled study. It's been more of a "wow..that's fucking weird...wonder why they have axolotls there...? Totally worth thinking about, though. I wonder if we went back through the tightly controlled and super smart CPTAC studies if we'd see the same things with tools that actually consider such things? Probably!
No comments:
Post a Comment