These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Quantitative comparison and evaluation of two commercially available, two-dimensional electrophoresis image analysis software packages, Z3 and Melanie.
    Author: Raman B, Cheung A, Marten MR.
    Journal: Electrophoresis; 2002 Jul; 23(14):2194-202. PubMed ID: 12210223.
    Abstract:
    While a variety of software packages are available for analyzing two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) gel images, no comparisons between these packages have been published, making it difficult for end users to determine which package would best meet their needs. The goal here was to develop a set of tests to quantitatively evaluate and then compare two software packages, Melanie 3.0 and Z3, in three of the fundamental steps involved in 2-DE image analysis: (i) spot detection, (ii) gel matching, and (iii) spot quantitation. To test spot detection capability, automatically detected protein spots were compared to manually counted, "real" protein spots. Spot matching efficiency was determined by comparing distorted (both geometrically and nongeometrically) gel images with undistorted original images, and quantitation tests were performed on artificial gels with spots of varying Gaussian volumes. In spot detection tests, Z3 performed better than Melanie 3.0 and required minimal user intervention to detect approximately 89% of the actual protein spots and relatively few extraneous spots. Results from gel matching tests depended on the type of image distortion used. For geometric distortions, Z3 performed better than Melanie 3.0, matching 99% of the spots, even for extreme distortions. For nongeometrical distortions, both Z3 and Melanie 3.0 required user intervention and performed comparably, matching 95% of the spots. In spot quantitation tests, both Z3 and Melanie 3.0 predicted spot volumes relatively well for spot ratios less than 1:6. For higher ratios, Melanie 3.0 did much better. In summary, results suggest Z3 requires less user intervention than Melanie 3.0, thus simplifying differential comparison of 2-DE gel images. Melanie 3.0, however, offers many more optional tools for image editing, spot detection, data reporting and statistical analysis than Z3. All image files used for these tests and updated information on the software are available on the internet (http://www.umbc.edu/proteome), allowing similar testing of other 2-DE image analysis software packages.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]