Skip to main content

Messages

This section allows you to view all Messages made by this member. Note that you can only see Messages made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - joebonic00

1
XCMS / Re: m/z value off by 0.1~0.2 Da
Just got the message from the developer of ProteoWizard that lockmass correction function was very recently added to ProteoWizard.  Downloading the latest version, and using msconvert.exe with the new lockmassRefiner filter can solve this problem.
2
XCMS / Re: m/z value off by 0.1~0.2 Da
Quote from: "Jan Stanstrup"
How did you do the controiding yourself?
They probably use Proteowizard in XCMS online so I guess that is why the mass is off. I have no idea how continuous data is handled there. The way I would get correct files is do one of the following:
1) databridge followed by proteowizard with centroiding enabled
2) my masswolf wrapper followed by proteowizard with centroiding enabled

You can then use xcms online or anything else you want.

Hi Jan, I tried the method you recommended. I kind of get stuck in proteowizard since proteowizard seemed unable to read the .CDF file generated from databridge. I will try the package you wrote to see if it works.
3
XCMS / Re: m/z value off by 0.1~0.2 Da
Quote from: "Jan Stanstrup"
How did you convert the files? Proteowizards do not calibrate the data. You can use masswolf or data bridge. See here viewtopic.php?f=26&t=359&p=1694#p1694. I made a wrapper for masswolf that makes it possible to extract each "function" correctly.

Hi Jan,

Thanks so much for your reply. The format of my acquired data is continuum. What I did was just upload the raw file directly to online XCMS since XCMS is compatible with .raw format. However, I found that the m/z values of the processed data were off from my raw data.

The next thing I tried was to convert the continnum file to centroid file before uploading to online XCMS. The processed m/z values were still off. Do I need to convert the .raw file to .CDF by databridge and use the local XCMS?
4
XCMS / m/z value off by 0.1~0.2 Da
In our lab, we are using WATERS QTOF. I recently found that the m/z values of the results from XCMS is off around 0.1-0.2 Da from those of Progenesis (software developed by WATERS). I believe the m/z values of Progenesis are right since those values agree with the raw data where I applied mass correction during data acquisition. I just wonder if anyone have similar problems before. Is there any parameters in XCMS related to mass correction? Any help will be appreciated.