Fig. 3: iMAATSA performance evaluations. | Communications Chemistry

Fig. 3: iMAATSA performance evaluations.

From: Experimental strategies to improve drug-target identification in mass spectrometry-based thermal stability assays

Fig. 3

a Comparison of MS2 and PSM identifications for the evaluated approaches. b Protein group and peptide group identifications in the assessed iMAATSA techniques. SIILCC, FAIMS, and ΦSDM increased both protein and peptide identifications. c Heatmap and clustering (using Euclidean distance and complete linkage method) showing protein abundances from 126 reporter ion channel (37 ˚C) in all iMAATSA approaches. Grey represents missing values. The iMAATSA without FAIMS display more missing values but, overall, a higher signal intensity compared to iMAATSA implementing FAIMS. d High quality melting curve comparisons for the iMAATSA approaches. The use of ΦSDM, FAIMS, and SIILCC produced the highest number of melting-curve comparisons and identified MEK1 and MEK2 as having a significantly shifted Tm. The error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 4) for panels a and b.

Back to article page