Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Empty results file from the workflow: Metabolomics LCMSMS CAMERA MetFrag processing and annotation #20

Open
DaqiangP opened this issue Sep 18, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@DaqiangP
Copy link

I used the supplied data with this workflow and it could run without error, but in the end, I got only empty result files. Can anybody check it and fix this issue? Thank you!

@c-ruttkies
Copy link
Member

Hi, is this the default example? Can you change the database from KEGG to PubChem in the msms2metfrag node. KEGG is a rather small database oftentimes causing no matching candidates given the precursor information. With PubChem there should be hits. Just let me know.

@DaqiangP
Copy link
Author

Hi, thank you for your answer. Now it works, but I got only eight files, each of which is one peak compared with the database. But I have more than hundred of peaks, how can I search the rest peaks?

@c-ruttkies
Copy link
Member

Hi again, well this is not easy to answer as the peak picking and grouping in the workflow is dependent on the setting of the parameters of the single tools. It might be that only 8 peaks are properly annotated with adduct information which is needed for further processing, which is actually not much I have to admit.
Can you provide your mzml file, so I can have a look at that example by myself? Is this a standard mix of compounds or an untargeted experiment?

@DaqiangP
Copy link
Author

Hi, it was the same with the sample data. And our data is from an untargeted experiment, from which we could identify about 40 metabolites. Please find the file through Google drive.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8w7CrpVCqFeTE5HaTlyeGw4Q3c/view?usp=sharing
Thank you again and have a nice weekend!

@c-ruttkies
Copy link
Member

Hi, I played a little bit with your dataset and it seems the problem is related to a shift in the precursor masses triggered for MS/MS compared to the masses we find in MS1. The shift is that high that we can simply not map the MS/MS spectra to the corresponding MS1 features by mass.
Do you have an example compound from that you know it's in your data and has a MS/MS spectrum?
Thanks in advance.
Christoph

@DaqiangP
Copy link
Author

DaqiangP commented Oct 16, 2017 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants