Area under the curve quantification outperforms spectral counting in metaproteomics, but matching between runs is detrimental

Metaproteomics enables the functional characterization of microbiomes and host-microbe interactions by detecting and quantifying thousands of proteins. In data-dependent acquisition metaproteomics, protein quantification is commonly performed using either MS1-based area under the curve (AUC) or MS2-based peptide spectral counts (SpC). In AUC quantification, match between runs (MBR) is frequently employed to minimize data sparsity, yet its impact on metaproteomic data remains unclear. Understanding MBR's impact on metaproteomics data is especially important due to the high peak density in the MS1 mass spectra and the potential presence of not only proteins, but even entire organisms, in one sample and their absence in the other, which would complicate accurate feature mapping and transfer. While accurate quantification is essential for deriving meaningful biological inferences from metaproteomic analyses, systematic evaluations of AUC and SpC quantification in metaproteomics remain scarce. In this study, we used defined complex metaproteomic samples to perform a ground truth-based evaluation of AUC and SpC quantification and to determine the impact of MBR on AUC quantification. We found that MBR led to a substantial number of falsely identified proteins in complex samples. Protein identifications from an organism not present in the sample were wrongly transferred from other samples when MBR was used. We found that MBR-free AUC data had a wider dynamic range, higher quantitative accuracy, and more sensitive detection of abundance differences.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Published
2026-04-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.04.05.716595
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

Area under the curve quantification outperforms spectral counting in metaproteomics, but matching between runs is detrimental

Manuel Kleiner, Tjorven Hinzke, J. Alfredo Blakeley‐Ruiz, Ayesha Awan
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
article

Area under the curve quantification outperforms spectral counting in metaproteomics, but matching between runs is detrimental

Manuel Kleiner, Tjorven Hinzke, J. Alfredo Blakeley‐Ruiz, Ayesha Awan
article en

Abstract

Metaproteomics enables the functional characterization of microbiomes and host-microbe interactions by detecting and quantifying thousands of proteins. In data-dependent acquisition metaproteomics, protein quantification is commonly performed using either MS1-based area under the curve (AUC) or MS2-based peptide spectral counts (SpC). In AUC quantification, match between runs (MBR) is frequently employed to minimize data sparsity, yet its impact on metaproteomic data remains unclear. Understanding MBR's impact on metaproteomics data is especially important due to the high peak density in the MS1 mass spectra and the potential presence of not only proteins, but even entire organisms, in one sample and their absence in the other, which would complicate accurate feature mapping and transfer. While accurate quantification is essential for deriving meaningful biological inferences from metaproteomic analyses, systematic evaluations of AUC and SpC quantification in metaproteomics remain scarce. In this study, we used defined complex metaproteomic samples to perform a ground truth-based evaluation of AUC and SpC quantification and to determine the impact of MBR on AUC quantification. We found that MBR led to a substantial number of falsely identified proteins in complex samples. Protein identifications from an organism not present in the sample were wrongly transferred from other samples when MBR was used. We found that MBR-free AUC data had a wider dynamic range, higher quantitative accuracy, and more sensitive detection of abundance differences.

bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
North Carolina State University (US), Universitätsmedizin Greifswald (DE), Universität Greifswald (DE)
National Science Foundation, National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
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.