Dear Eric

Yes, I have considered that. I am using iTRAQ though and hence I was hoping 
the features could be implemented in Libra. I don't think I can use iTRAQ 
data in MSStatsTMT, but I will recheck. Thank you for the suggestions.

Regards,

Debojyoti
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 8:18:13 AM UTC+5:30 Eric Deutsch wrote:

> Hi Debojyoti, we will see if we see if we can add that feature to Libra, 
> but you’re probably best off exporting the data from Libra to MSstatsTMT, 
> which you cite below, itself. It has many nice features in addition to 
> normalization, and so a good workflow would be to compute the raw TMT 
> values with Libra and then export to MSstatsTMT and do all your 
> normalization and comparisons there.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From:* spctools...@googlegroups.com <spctools...@googlegroups.com> *On 
> Behalf Of *Debojyoti Pal
> *Sent:* Monday, October 2, 2023 9:57 AM
> *To:* spctools-discuss <spctools...@googlegroups.com>
> *Subject:* [spctools-discuss] Feature request for LIBRA
>
>  
>
> Dear TPP team
>
>  
>
> I would like to point out that one of the most important aspects of 
> iTRAQ/TMT quantification is proper normalization. Many studies have 
> demonstrated the crucial importance of global spectrum level normalization 
> i.e. normalization of the whole data by the respective total intensity of 
> each channel (Huang et al., 2020, Mol Cell Proteomics 19(10), 1706–1723). 
> Unfortunately, this very simple normalization is missing in LIBRA. 
>
>  
>
> I would request the TPP team to please incorporate this feature in the 
> LIBRA tool, so that intensity of each channel can be normalized with 
> respect to the total intensity of each channel. For example, if total 
> intensity of channel A is 100000 and channel B is 120000, then each reading 
> in channel B should be multiplied by 100000/120000. 
>
>  
>
> Please incorporate this feature into the tool. It will dramatically 
> increase the accuracy of quantification when we compare it to validation 
> methods. Multiple studies have already pointed this out.
>
>  
>
> Regards
>
> Debojyoti
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "spctools-discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to spctools-discu...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/spctools-discuss/89e5356d-8cb9-497d-9a74-367281a8c48fn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/spctools-discuss/89e5356d-8cb9-497d-9a74-367281a8c48fn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"spctools-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to spctools-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/spctools-discuss/ee4bfa37-bf2a-46d7-b747-6a84d1b034b8n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to