The 2012/2013 ABRF Proteomic Research Group Study: Assessing Longitudinal Intralaboratory Variability in Routine Peptide Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Analyses.

{"sci_version": "1.2", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:26435129", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 2, "content_hash": "sha256:3eb9bea70da16447fe75a786de28160b3870b3315da199892e7153eaa3ce0ee9", "created_at": "2026-11-01T15:40:11Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T18:47:34Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01"}, "paper": {"state": "complete", "title": "The 2012/2013 ABRF Proteomic Research Group Study: Assessing Longitudinal Intralaboratory Variability in Routine Peptide Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Analyses.", "doi": "10.1074/mcp.O115.051888", "pmid": "26435129", "authors": ["Keiryn L Bennett", "Xia Wang", "Cory E Bystrom", "Matthew C Chambers", "Tracy M Andacht", "Larry J Dangott", "Félix Elortza", "John Leszyk", "Henrik Molina", "Robert L Moritz", "Brett S Phinney", "J Will Thompson", "Maureen K Bunger", "David L Tabb"], "journal": "Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP", "year": 2015, "abstract": "Questions concerning longitudinal data quality and reproducibility of proteomic laboratories spurred the Protein Research Group of the Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities (ABRF-PRG) to design a study to systematically assess the reproducibility of proteomic laboratories over an extended period of time. Developed as an open study, initially 64 participants were recruited from the broader mass spectrometry community to analyze provided aliquots of a six bovine protein tryptic digest mixture every month for a period of nine months. Data were uploaded to a central repository, and the operators answered an accompanying survey. Ultimately, 45 laboratories submitted a minimum of eight LC-MSMS raw data files collected in data-dependent acquisition (DDA) mode. No standard operating procedures were enforced; rather the participants were encouraged to analyze the samples according to usual practices in the laboratory. Unlike previous studies, this investigation was not designed to compare laboratories or instrument configuration, but rather to assess the temporal intralaboratory reproducibility. The outcome of the study was reassuring with 80% of the participating laboratories performing analyses at a medium to high level of reproducibility and quality over the 9-month period. For the groups that had one or more outlying experiments, the major contributing factor that correlated to the survey data was the performance of preventative maintenance prior to the LC-MSMS analyses. Thus, the Protein Research Group of the Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities recommends that laboratories closely scrutinize the quality control data following such events. Additionally, improved quality control recording is imperative. This longitudinal study provides evidence that mass spectrometry-based proteomics is reproducible. When quality control measures are strictly adhered to, such reproducibility is comparable among many disparate groups. Data from the study are available via ProteomeXchange under the accession code PXD002114.", "claims": [{"id": "claim-target-result", "statement": "The study found that 80% of participating laboratories achieved medium-to-high reproducibility and quality over nine months; the abstract does not identify a statistical method, and states that the study data are available through ProteomeXchange under accession code PXD002114.", "kind": "quantitative", "target": {"value": 80.0, "unit": "per cent", "tolerance": null, "source": "The outcome of the study was reassuring with 80% of the participating laboratories performing analyses at a medium to high level of reproducibility and quality over the 9-month period."}, "evidence": [{"asset": "source:pmid:26435129", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 1", "quote": "The outcome of the study was reassuring with 80% of the participating laboratories performing analyses at a medium to high level of reproducibility and quality over the 9-month period."}, {"asset": "source:pmid:26435129", "locator": "sections[0] \"Abstract\" paragraph 1", "quote": "Data from the study are available via ProteomeXchange under the accession code PXD002114."}], "state": "complete"}], "gaps": []}, "experiment": {"state": "partial", "objective": "The study found that 80% of participating laboratories achieved medium-to-high reproducibility and quality over nine months; the abstract does not identify a statistical method, and states that the study data are available through ProteomeXchange under accession code PXD002114.", "steps": [{"id": "read_published_estimate", "order": 1, "name": "Read the published estimate from the source", "kind": "other", "state": "complete", "blocked_on": null, "description": "The claim, method and evidence span published with the source article.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": ["source:pmid:26435129"], "outputs": ["the published estimate and its evidence"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "obtain_source_data", "order": 2, "name": "Obtain the source data from the named repository", "kind": "data-preparation", "state": "blocked", "blocked_on": "data:accession_absent", "description": "The GEO series accession resolves and its sample accessions are listed. This lane did not download the dataset or read its licence.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": [], "outputs": ["the source data with its repository provenance"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "run_analysis", "order": 3, "name": "Run the published analysis", "kind": "analysis", "state": "complete", "blocked_on": null, "description": "Apply the paper's statistical method to the resolved series and compare the result with the published target.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": [], "outputs": ["the replicated result and its comparison"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": ["step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:accession_absent"]}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:26435129", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.O115.051888", "sha256": "sha256:52eef4904f127af61ed9fd4795ef522b0f2b8681c96fbca7396235f5d0ab0fd9", "bytes": 2069, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.1074/mcp.O115.051888", "version": null, "note": "Full article fetched from PMC; the checksum covers the rendered section body, not the original XML bytes.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC4762617", "source": "ncbi_pmc_fulltext", "coverage": "whole_body", "text_hash_scope": "rendered_section_body"}}], "gaps": []}, "analysis": {"state": "absent", "methods": [], "targets": [{"id": "target-published-estimate", "claim_id": "claim-target-result", "operation": null, "expected_value": 80.0, "unit": "per cent", "tolerance": null, "state": "complete", "note": "The published estimate as the reader quoted it from the paper. No tolerance is published because the paper states none."}], "gaps": ["method", "operations"]}, "capability": {"state": "complete", "requirements": [{"capability_id": "capability:computational_analysis", "label": "Computational analysis platform", "assay_families": ["meta_analysis", "machine_learning", "survival_analysis", "statistical_regression", "pca", "molecular_docking", "network_analysis", "differential_expression", "gwas"], "availability_state": "owned", "tier_unlocked": "R1", "candidate": "Automated Assays Laravel application and simulated adapters"}], "gaps": []}, "readiness": {"state": "blocked", "tier": "R4", "blocking_axis": "data", "blocked_on": "data:accession_absent", "axes": {"method": {"tier": "R4", "expressible": false, "required_operations": [], "missing_operations": [], "basis": "The reader quoted the method the paper names (not named), but the corpus's method extractor could not map it onto a DSL operation, so the method is published but not expressible."}, "capability": {"tier": "R1", "capability_id": "capability:computational_analysis", "availability_state": "owned", "basis": "The computational analysis is owned. The physical bench the paper used is not, so a physical validation cannot be run here."}, "data": {"tier": "R4", "reachable": false, "accessions": [], "resolved_accessions": [], "statements": [], "basis": "The paper names no accession to its source data, so the data has to come from the authors."}}, "can_run": {"dsl_operations": [], "assets": ["source:pmid:26435129"], "steps": ["run_analysis"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": [], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["data:geo:None"]}, "gaps": ["data:accession_absent"]}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"kind": "extraction_review", "reader": {"model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax", "provider_family": "minimax", "read_at": "2026-10-31T18:24:55Z", "independence": "single_reader"}, "evidence_check": {"method": null, "availability": null}, "calls": 2, "usage": {"prompt_tokens": 1708, "completion_tokens": 459, "cached_tokens": 521}}, "human_critique": null, "stages": [{"id": "extraction", "state": "complete", "reader": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "provider": "minimax"}], "gaps": ["review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique", "review.human_critique"]}, "execution": {"state": "absent", "status": "not_run", "mode": null, "runs": [], "gaps": ["execution.not_run"]}, "provenance": {"entities": [{"id": "pmid:26435129", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:26435129"}, {"id": "source:pmid:26435129", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 26435129 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:None", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO None"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity-reading-sci-2026-11-01", "type": "classification", "used": [{"id": "pmid:26435129", "type": "paper", "label": "pmid:26435129"}, {"id": "source:pmid:26435129", "type": "manuscript", "label": "PMID 26435129 full text"}, {"id": "data:geo:None", "type": "dataset", "label": "GEO None"}], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}, {"id": "activity-read-26435129", "type": "extraction", "used": ["source:pmid:26435129"], "agent": "agent:minimax-reader"}, {"id": "activity-resolve-None", "type": "accession_resolution", "used": ["data:geo:None"], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}], "agents": [{"id": "agent:corpus-assay-engine", "type": "software", "label": "Corpus assay engine"}, {"id": "agent:minimax-reader", "type": "software", "label": "MiniMax literature reader"}], "source_run_id": "reading-sci-2026-11-01", "dsl_catalogue_fingerprint": "343fb30756ba6ec3", "capability_table_fingerprint": "2cb3e42f047d2ecf", "snapshot_id": "ba34b49490d9bfaf"}, "lineage": {"parent_id": "pmid:26435129", "parent_hash": "sha256:fd5cc9d6a7510ddcd4f5a93d50612a9569edd302efa16dbcd0bf761061304335", "fork_of": null, "generation": 1}, "gaps": ["execution.not_run", "method", "operations", "review.human_critique", "review.independent_reader", "review.machine_critique", "step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:accession_absent"], "assays": [{"role": "data_generation", "definition_id": "mass_spectrometry", "definition_version": "99e1195c7d6f", "definition_digest": null, "required_operations": [], "support_state": "partial", "source_hashes": {"assay_lexicon": "99e1195c7d6f"}, "confidence": 0.99, "evidence": ["Routine Peptide Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Analyses.", "participants were recruited from the broader mass spectrometry community to analyze provided aliquots of a", "is longitudinal study provides evidence that mass spectrometry-based proteomics is reproducible. When quali", "The 2012/2013 ABRF Proteomic Research Group Study: Assessing Longitudinal"], "order_basis": "paper_text_order:0", "id": "assay:1"}]}