Peak picking NMR spectral data using non-negative matrix factorization

BMC Bioinformatics

Suhas Tikole¹  Victor Jaravine¹  Vladimir Rogov¹  Volker Dötsch¹  Peter Güntert² 

[1] Institute of Biophysical Chemistry, Center for Biomolecular Magnetic Resonance, and Frankfurt Institute of Advanced Studies, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Max-von-Laue-Str. 9, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany

[2] Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397, Japan

关键词: Peak overlap;    NMR spectrum;    Peak picking;    Non-negative matrix factorization;   

Others  :  1087622
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2105-15-46

 received in 2013-11-20, accepted in 2014-02-04,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Simple peak-picking algorithms, such as those based on lineshape fitting, perform well when peaks are completely resolved in multidimensional NMR spectra, but often produce wrong intensities and frequencies for overlapping peak clusters. For example, NOESY-type spectra have considerable overlaps leading to significant peak-picking intensity errors, which can result in erroneous structural restraints. Precise frequencies are critical for unambiguous resonance assignments.

Results

To alleviate this problem, a more sophisticated peaks decomposition algorithm, based on non-negative matrix factorization (NMF), was developed. We produce peak shapes from Fourier-transformed NMR spectra. Apart from its main goal of deriving components from spectra and producing peak lists automatically, the NMF approach can also be applied if the positions of some peaks are known a priori, e.g. from consistently referenced spectral dimensions of other experiments.

Conclusions

Application of the NMF algorithm to a three-dimensional peak list of the 23 kDa bi-domain section of the RcsD protein (RcsD-ABL-HPt, residues 688-890) as well as to synthetic HSQC data shows that peaks can be picked accurately also in spectral regions with strong overlap.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Tikole et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Güntert P: Automated NMR protein structure calculation. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc 2003, 43:105-125.
• [2]Paatero P, Tapper U: Positive matrix factorization - a nonnegative factor model with optimal utilization of error-estimates of data values. Environmetrics 1994, 5:111-126.
• [3]Paatero P: Least squares formulation of robust non-negative factor analysis. Chemometrics Intellig Lab Syst 1997, 37:23-35.
• [4]Lee DD, Seung HS: Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization. Nature 1999, 401:788-791.
• [5]Lee DD, Seung HS: Algorithms for non-negative matrix factorization. Adv Neur In 2001, 13:556-562.
• [6]Wang YX, Zhang YJ: Nonnegative matrix factorization: a comprehensive review. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 2013, 25:1336-1353.
• [7]Hoyer PO: Non-negative matrix factorization with sparseness constraints. J Mach Learn Res 2004, 5:1457-1469.
• [8]Berry MW, Browne M, Langville AN, Pauca VP, Plemmons RJ: Algorithms and applications for approximate nonnegative matrix factorization. Comput Stat Data Anal 2007, 52:155-173.
• [9]Buciu I: Non-negative matrix factorization, a new tool for feature extraction: theory and applications. Int J Comput Commun 2008, 3:67-74.
• [10]Pauca VP, Piper J, Plemmons RJ: Nonnegative matrix factorization for spectral data analysis. Linear Algebra Appl 2006, 416:29-47.
• [11]Plemmons R, Chung IM: Nonnegative matrix factorization and applications. Bull of the Int'l Linear Algebra Soc 2005, 34:2-7.
• [12]Cichocki A, Lee H, Kim YD, Choi S: Non-negative matrix factorization with alpha-divergence. Pattern Recog Lett 2008, 29:1433-1440.
• [13]Zafeiriou S, Tefas A, Buciu I, Pitas I: Exploiting discriminant information in nonnegative matrix factorization with application to frontal face verification. IEEE Trans Neural Networks 2006, 17:683-695.
• [14]Wang W: Squared Euclidean distance based convolutive non-negative matrix factorization with multiplicative learning rules for audio pattern separation. Cairo, Egypt: In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Signal Processing and Information Technology: 15–18 December 2007; 2007:347-352.
• [15]Kim H, Park H: Sparse non-negative matrix factorizations via alternating non-negativity-constrained least squares for microarray data analysis. Bioinformatics 2007, 23:1495-1502.
• [16]Snyder DA, Zhang F, Robinette SL, Bruschweiler-Li L, Brüschweiler R: Non-negative matrix factorization of two-dimensional NMR spectra: application to complex mixture analysis. J Chem Phys 2008, 128:052313.
• [17]Kleywegt GJ, Boelens R, Kaptein R: A versatile approach toward the partially automatic recognition of cross peaks in 2D 1H NMR spectra. J Magn Reson 1990, 88:601-608.
• [18]Johnson BA, Blevins RA: NMR View - a computer program for the visualization and analysis of NMR data. J Biomol NMR 1994, 4:603-614.
• [19]Delaglio F, Grzesiek S, Vuister GW, Zhu G, Pfeifer J, Bax A: NMRPipe - a multidimensional spectral processing system based on Unix pipes. J Biomol NMR 1995, 6:277-293.
• [20]Koradi R, Billeter M, Engeli M, Güntert P, Wüthrich K: Automated peak picking and peak integration in macromolecular NMR spectra using AUTOPSY. J Magn Reson 1998, 135:288-297.
• [21]Goddard TD, Kneller DG: Sparky 3. San Francisco: University of California; 2001.
• [22]Alipanahi B, Gao X, Karakoc E, Donaldson L, Li M: PICKY: a novel SVD-based NMR spectra peak picking method. Bioinformatics 2009, 25:i268-i275.
• [23]Jaravine VA, Zhuravleva AV, Permi P, Ibraghimov I, Orekhov VY: Hyperdimensional NMR spectroscopy with nonlinear sampling. J Am Chem Soc 2008, 130:3927-3936.
• [24]Cichocki A, Amari S: Adaptive Blind Signal and Image Processing. New York: Wiley; 2003.
• [25]Byrne CL: Accelerating the EMML algorithm and related iterative algorithms by rescaled block-iterative methods. Ieee T Image Process 1998, 7:100-109.
• [26]Daube-Witherspoon ME, Muehllehner G: An iterative image space reconstruction algorithm suitable for volume ECT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1986, 5:61-66.
• [27]De Pierro AR: On the convergence of the iterative image space reconstruction algorithm for volume ECT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1987, 6:174-175.
• [28]Bro R, Kiers HAL: A new efficient method for determining the number of components in PARAFAC models. J Chemometrics 2003, 17:274-286.
• [29]Timmerman ME, Kiers HAL: Three-mode principal components analysis: choosing the numbers of components and sensitivity to local optima. Br J Math Stat Psychol 2000, 53:1-16.
• [30]Ceulemans E, Kiers HAL: Selecting among three-mode principal component models of different types and complexities: a numerical convex hull based method. Brit J Math Stat Psy 2006, 59:133-150.
• [31]Da Costa JPCL, Haardt M, Roemer F: Robust methods based on the HOVSD for estimating the model order in PARAFAC models. Darmstadt, Germany: In Proceedings of SAM 2008 – The fifth IEEE Sensor Array and Multichannel Signal Processing Workshop 21–23 July 2008; 2008:510-514.
• [32]Niesing J: Simultaneous component and factor analysis methods for two or more groups: A comparative study. Leiden, The Netherlands: DSWO Press; 1997.
• [33]Cichocki A, Zdunek R, Phan A, Amari S: Nonnegative Matrix and Tensor Factorizations: Applications to Exploratory Multi-way Data Analysis and Blind Source Separation. New York: Wiley; 2009.
• [34]Schmöe K, Rogov VV, Rogova NY, Löhr F, Güntert P, Bernhard F, Dötsch V: Structural insights into Rcs phosphotransfer: the newly identified RcsD-ABL domain enhances interaction with the response regulator RcsB. Structure 2011, 19:577-587.
• [35]Schmidt E, Güntert P: A new algorithm for reliable and general NMR resonance assignment. J Am Chem Soc 2012, 134:12817-12829.