Large Scale Mass Spectrometry-based Identifications of Enzyme-mediated Protein Methylation Are Subject to High False Discovery Rates

• Published in: Molecular & cellular proteomics Vol. 15; no. 3; pp. 989 - 1006
• Main Authors: Hart-Smith, Gene, Yagoub, Daniel, Tay, Aidan P., Pickford, Russell, Wilkins, Marc R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.03.2016; The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
• Subjects: False Positive Reactions; Methylation; Peptides - chemistry; Proteomics - instrumentation; Proteomics - methods; Regular; Saccharomyces cerevisiae - metabolism; Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins - metabolism; Tandem Mass Spectrometry - instrumentation; Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods
• ISSN: 1535-9476; 1535-9484
• DOI: 10.1074/mcp.M115.055384

All large scale LC-MS/MS post-translational methylation site discovery experiments require methylpeptide spectrum matches (methyl-PSMs) to be identified at acceptably low false discovery rates (FDRs). To meet estimated methyl-PSM FDRs, methyl-PSM filtering criteria are often determined using the target-decoy approach. The efficacy of this methyl-PSM filtering approach has, however, yet to be thoroughly evaluated. Here, we conduct a systematic analysis of methyl-PSM FDRs across a range of sample preparation workflows (each differing in their exposure to the alcohols methanol and isopropyl alcohol) and mass spectrometric instrument platforms (each employing a different mode of MS/MS dissociation). Through 13CD3-methionine labeling (heavy-methyl SILAC) of Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells and in-depth manual data inspection, accurate lists of true positive methyl-PSMs were determined, allowing methyl-PSM FDRs to be compared with target-decoy approach-derived methyl-PSM FDR estimates. These results show that global FDR estimates produce extremely unreliable methyl-PSM filtering criteria; we demonstrate that this is an unavoidable consequence of the high number of amino acid combinations capable of producing peptide sequences that are isobaric to methylated peptides of a different sequence. Separate methyl-PSM FDR estimates were also found to be unreliable due to prevalent sources of false positive methyl-PSMs that produce high peptide identity score distributions. Incorrect methylation site localizations, peptides containing cysteinyl-S-β-propionamide, and methylated glutamic or aspartic acid residues can partially, but not wholly, account for these false positive methyl-PSMs. Together, these results indicate that the target-decoy approach is an unreliable means of estimating methyl-PSM FDRs and methyl-PSM filtering criteria. We suggest that orthogonal methylpeptide validation (e.g. heavy-methyl SILAC or its offshoots) should be considered a prerequisite for obtaining high confidence methyl-PSMs in large scale LC-MS/MS methylation site discovery experiments and make recommendations on how to reduce methyl-PSM FDRs in samples not amenable to heavy isotope labeling. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with the data identifier PXD002857.