IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v53y2009i5p1720-1726.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Statistically appraising process quality of affinity isolation experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Sharp, Julia L.
  • Borkowski, John J.
  • Schmoyer, Denise
  • Daly, Don S.
  • Purvine, Samuel
  • Cannon, William R.
  • Hurst, Gregory B.

Abstract

Quality affinity isolation experiments are necessary to identify valid protein-protein interactions. Biological error, processing error, and random variability can reduce the quality of an experiment, and thus hinder the identification of protein interaction pairs. Appraising affinity isolation assay quality is essential to inferring protein associations. An important step of the assay is the mass spectrometric identification of proteins. To evaluate this step, a known mixture of proteins is processed through a mass spectrometer as a quality control mixture. If the mass spectrometer yields unexpected results, the process is currently qualitatively evaluated, tuned, and reset. Statistical quality control (SQC) procedures, including the use of cumulative sum, the individual measurement, and moving range charts are implemented to analyze the stability of the mass spectrometric analysis. The SQC measures presented can assist in establishing preliminary control limits to identify an out-of-control process and investigate assignable causes for shifts in the process mean in real time.

Suggested Citation

  • Sharp, Julia L. & Borkowski, John J. & Schmoyer, Denise & Daly, Don S. & Purvine, Samuel & Cannon, William R. & Hurst, Gregory B., 2009. "Statistically appraising process quality of affinity isolation experiments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 1720-1726, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2009:i:5:p:1720-1726
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(08)00259-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:53:y:2009:i:5:p:1720-1726. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.