Optimization of XCMS parameters for LC–MS metabolomics: an assessment of automated versus manual tuning and its effect on the final results

Introduction Several software packages containing diverse algorithms are available for processing Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (LC–MS) chromatographic data and within these deconvolution packages different parameters settings can lead to different outcomes. XCMS is the most widely used peak picking and deconvolution software for metabolomics, but the parameter selection can be hard for inexpert users. To solve this issue, the automatic optimization tools such as Isotopologue Parameters Optimization (IPO) can be extremely helpful. Objectives To evaluate the suitability of IPO as a tool for XCMS parameters optimization and compare the results with those manually obtained by an exhaustive examination of the LC–MS characteristics and performance. Methods Raw HPLC-TOF–MS data from two types of biological samples (liver and plasma) analysed in both positive and negative electrospray ionization modes from three groups of piglets were processed with XCMS using parameters optimized following two different approaches: IPO and Manual. The outcomes were compared to determine the advantages and disadvantages of using each method. Results IPO processing produced the higher number of repeatable (%RSD < 20) and significant features for all data sets and allowed the different piglet groups to be distinguished. Nevertheless, on multivariate level, similar clustering results were obtained by Principal Component Analysis (PCA) when applied to IPO and manual matrices. Conclusion IPO is a useful optimization tool that helps in choosing the appropriate parameters. It works well on data with a good LC–MS performance but the lack of such adequate data can result in unrealistic parameter settings, which might require further investigation and manual tuning. On the contrary, manual selection criteria requires deeper knowledge on LC–MS, programming language and XCMS parameter interpretation, but allows a better fine-tuning of the parameters, and thus more robust deconvolution.

[1]  Shuzhao Li,et al.  MetaboAnalystR 3.0: Toward an Optimized Workflow for Global Metabolomics , 2020, Metabolites.

[2]  P. F. Vasconcelos,et al.  In situ immune response and mechanisms of cell damage in central nervous system of fatal cases microcephaly by Zika virus , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[3]  Dirk Walther,et al.  Metabolomic Profiles for Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis Stratification and Disease Course Monitoring , 2018, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[4]  G. Siuzdak,et al.  XCMS Online: a web-based platform to process untargeted metabolomic data. , 2012, Analytical chemistry.

[5]  Joshua D. Knowles,et al.  Procedures for large-scale metabolic profiling of serum and plasma using gas chromatography and liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry , 2011, Nature Protocols.

[6]  Christoph Steinbeck,et al.  Computational tools and workflows in metabolomics: An international survey highlights the opportunity for harmonisation through Galaxy , 2016, Metabolomics.

[7]  Christoph Steinbeck,et al.  Navigating freely-available software tools for metabolomics analysis , 2017, Metabolomics.

[8]  Tapio Salakoski,et al.  Application of the EVEX resource to event extraction and network construction: Shared Task entry and result analysis , 2015, BMC Bioinformatics.

[9]  M. Hütt,et al.  Bioactivity in Rhododendron: A Systemic Analysis of Antimicrobial and Cytotoxic Activities and Their Phylogenetic and Phytochemical Origins , 2017, Front. Plant Sci..

[10]  M. Schimek,et al.  An Untargeted Metabolomics Approach to Characterize Short-Term and Long-Term Metabolic Changes after Bariatric Surgery , 2016, PloS one.

[11]  Shuzhao Li,et al.  Detailed Investigation and Comparison of the XCMS and MZmine 2 Chromatogram Construction and Chromatographic Peak Detection Methods for Preprocessing Mass Spectrometry Metabolomics Data. , 2017, Analytical chemistry.

[12]  R. Abagyan,et al.  XCMS: processing mass spectrometry data for metabolite profiling using nonlinear peak alignment, matching, and identification. , 2006, Analytical chemistry.

[13]  D. Berg,et al.  Promising Metabolite Profiles in the Plasma and CSF of Early Clinical Parkinson's Disease , 2018, Front. Aging Neurosci..

[14]  S. Neumann,et al.  CAMERA: an integrated strategy for compound spectra extraction and annotation of liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry data sets. , 2012, Analytical chemistry.

[15]  J A Kirwan,et al.  Characterising and correcting batch variation in an automated direct infusion mass spectrometry (DIMS) metabolomics workflow , 2013, Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry.

[16]  Ian D. Wilson,et al.  Guidelines and considerations for the use of system suitability and quality control samples in mass spectrometry assays applied in untargeted clinical metabolomic studies , 2018, Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society.

[17]  E. Marcotte,et al.  Chromatographic alignment of ESI-LC-MS proteomics data sets by ordered bijective interpolated warping. , 2006, Analytical chemistry.

[18]  Diane O. Inglis,et al.  HEx: A heterologous expression platform for the discovery of fungal natural products , 2018, Science Advances.

[19]  C. Socaciu,et al.  Bioinformatics tools for metabolomic data processing and analysis using untargeted liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry. , 2015 .

[20]  Coral Barbas,et al.  Quality assurance procedures for mass spectrometry untargeted metabolomics. a review , 2018, Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis.

[21]  Steffen Neumann,et al.  Highly sensitive feature detection for high resolution LC/MS , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[22]  Steffen Neumann,et al.  IPO: a tool for automated optimization of XCMS parameters , 2015, BMC Bioinformatics.

[23]  Tissue storage affects lipidome profiling in comparison to in vivo microsampling approach , 2018, Scientific Reports.