Fig. 4: Relative performance of UnidecNMR versus a series of alternative peak-picking algorithms on ‘real’ NMR data acquired on 4 different proteins. | Nature Communications

Fig. 4: Relative performance of UnidecNMR versus a series of alternative peak-picking algorithms on ‘real’ NMR data acquired on 4 different proteins.

From: UnidecNMR: automatic peak detection for NMR spectra in 1-4 dimensions

Fig. 4

Counts of correct (i) and incorrect picks (ii) are shown for a set of 4 × 2D 15N1H HSQCs (A), 3D HNCO (B) and 3D HNCA (C) spectra as described in the text. The results were scored against independently determined peak lists by a skilled user. A detailed tabulation of these results and scoring criteria is provided (Supplementary Table 1). When running UnidecNMR in 2D, the tuneable parameter ‘fac’ was set to 1.4, and in 3D, 1.6. In all cases, the peak shape parameters were fitted on isolated resonances using the GUI, and when running in 3D, a 2D peak list was provided (‘boring’ mode) as described in the text.

Back to article page