Preventing Proteomics Data Tombs Through Collective Responsibility and Community Engagement

Public proteomics repositories now host vast amounts of mass spectrometry data, yet much of it remains difficult to reuse, risking "data tombs" that are open access but not practically re-analyzable. In spring 2025, a graduate-level course at the University of Helsinki tasked six student teams with reanalyzing six projects from the Proteomics Identification Database (label-free quantification only) using a common R-based workflow (rpx, mzR, QFeatures, DEP/MSqRob2/limma/OmicsQ packages) that was shared across all teams. The teams reproduced identification, optional quantification, normalization, imputation, and differential expression analyses, and compared the outcomes to the original studies. As expected, systemic barriers recurred across cases: (i) no sample and data relationship format for proteomics metadata in any of the cases; (ii) missing details regarding decoy sets for false discovery rate assessment; (iii) proprietary-only outputs or software (e.g., Thermo.msf, Progenesis) that impeded open reanalysis in interoperable, community-standard formats; (iv) missing data-independent acquisition spectral libraries or protein sequences database files (FASTA); (v) absent or vague normalization/imputation/statistical parameters; (vi) inconsistent file naming; and (vii) insufficient biological/technical replication in at least one project. These shortcomings yielded large discrepancies in the analysis results (e.g., 13,068 vs. 4,923 proteins; 108 vs. 11 differentially expressed proteins), and, in one instance, a highlighted protein lacked robust support in the deposited identifications. We observed that reproducibility in mass spectrometry-based proteomics hinges less on instruments than on transparent metadata, open formats, and executable analysis provenance. We propose that data creators provide a minimum re-analysis package, including raw data and open formats, community standards, basic quality control summaries, data-independent acquisition spectral libraries, and complete parameter/code sets with pinned versions or containers. Moreover, we recommend repository-level nudges toward making such packages mandatory. This educational exercise simultaneously trains the students as well as stress-tests the community data practices to prevent proteomics "data tombs".

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Data
Published
2026-01-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-026-06614-8
Primary Topic
Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Preventing Proteomics Data Tombs Through Collective Responsibility and Community Engagement

Leticia Castillon, Jannica Roininen, Tiialotta Tohmola, Ehsan Zangene et al.
Scientific Data
Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
article

Preventing Proteomics Data Tombs Through Collective Responsibility and Community Engagement

Leticia Castillon, Jannica Roininen, Tiialotta Tohmola, Ehsan Zangene, Rabah Soliymani, Ankita Srivastava, Sami T. Tuomivaara, Markku Varjosalo, Veit Schwämmle, Tyko Runeberg, Oluwatosin Abe, Swethaa Natraj Gayathri, Karina Šapovalovaitė, Srividhya Sundaresan, Uladzislau Vadadokhau, Tamara González-Armijos, Linda Id, Milda Sakalauskaite, Amir A. Saei, Mai Soliman, Sadiksha Adhikari, Paula Pastor Muñoz, Hanna Vesikukka, Mohieddin Jafari, Hao Li
article en

Abstract

Public proteomics repositories now host vast amounts of mass spectrometry data, yet much of it remains difficult to reuse, risking "data tombs" that are open access but not practically re-analyzable. In spring 2025, a graduate-level course at the University of Helsinki tasked six student teams with reanalyzing six projects from the Proteomics Identification Database (label-free quantification only) using a common R-based workflow (rpx, mzR, QFeatures, DEP/MSqRob2/limma/OmicsQ packages) that was shared across all teams. The teams reproduced identification, optional quantification, normalization, imputation, and differential expression analyses, and compared the outcomes to the original studies. As expected, systemic barriers recurred across cases: (i) no sample and data relationship format for proteomics metadata in any of the cases; (ii) missing details regarding decoy sets for false discovery rate assessment; (iii) proprietary-only outputs or software (e.g., Thermo.msf, Progenesis) that impeded open reanalysis in interoperable, community-standard formats; (iv) missing data-independent acquisition spectral libraries or protein sequences database files (FASTA); (v) absent or vague normalization/imputation/statistical parameters; (vi) inconsistent file naming; and (vii) insufficient biological/technical replication in at least one project. These shortcomings yielded large discrepancies in the analysis results (e.g., 13,068 vs. 4,923 proteins; 108 vs. 11 differentially expressed proteins), and, in one instance, a highlighted protein lacked robust support in the deposited identifications. We observed that reproducibility in mass spectrometry-based proteomics hinges less on instruments than on transparent metadata, open formats, and executable analysis provenance. We propose that data creators provide a minimum re-analysis package, including raw data and open formats, community standards, basic quality control summaries, data-independent acquisition spectral libraries, and complete parameter/code sets with pinned versions or containers. Moreover, we recommend repository-level nudges toward making such packages mandatory. This educational exercise simultaneously trains the students as well as stress-tests the community data practices to prevent proteomics "data tombs".

Scientific DataVol. 13(1)
Åbo Akademi University (FI), University of Helsinki (FI), Tampere University of Applied Sciences (FI), University of Turku (FI), University of Southern Denmark (DK), Turku Centre for Computer Science (FI), Helsinki Institute of Physics (FI), Karolinska Institutet (SE), Finland University (FI), Tampere University (FI), Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FI), Alexandria University (EG)
Helsingin Yliopisto
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.