DDA was a mess 20 years ago, but the field converged to certain accepted principles rather quickly. The MCP guidelines were useful. DIA is more complex as it blurs the line between ID and quant a lot more than DDA. Still, we can come up with a set of guidelines. www.mcponline.org/article/S153...
I have a radical idea. All DIA tool developers meet in Geneva for a convention and agree to apply certain additional conservative quality filters by default (so yeah, not 10k proteins but “just” 8k…). And then provide users an option to relax the filters at their own risk. Not the other way around.
I am really worried about DIA approach trustworthiness in the field if something like this will not be done. If there will not be free seminar room in Geneva you are invited to come to Vienna!
Sorry for joinning so late. Funny fact under the line - RSLC can manage most problematic samples without any problems... There is always a posibility to try to improve sample prep... But it turns me crazy to know RSLC makes it better and not finding why so far
We are having issues with our Vanquish Neos recently. The most annoying is quite obvious peak tailing in samples that are fine when run on a U3000. Problem is that the HeLa QC is OK, so it seems to be a combination of samples and Neo. We use a trap column, prior desalting does not help. Any ideas?
