In nontarget screening, structure elucidation of small molecules from high resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) data is challenging, particularly the selection of the most likely candidate structure among the many retrieved from compound databases. Several fragmentation and retention prediction methods have been developed to improve this candidate selection. In order to evaluate their performance, we compared two in silico fragmenters (MetFrag and CFM-ID) and two retention time prediction models (based on the chromatographic hydrophobicity index (CHI) and on log D). A set of 78 known organic micropollutants was analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to a LTQ Orbitrap HRMS with electrospray ionization (ESI) in positive and negative mode using two fragmentation techniques with different collision energies. Both fragmenters (MetFrag and CFM-ID) performed well for most compounds, with average ranking the correct candidate structure within the top 25% and 22 to 37% for ESI+ and ESI− mode, respectively. The rank of the correct candidate structure slightly improved when MetFrag and CFM-ID were combined. For unknown compounds detected in both ESI+ and ESI−, generally positive mode mass spectra were better for further structure elucidation. Both retention prediction models performed reasonably well for more hydrophobic compounds but not for early eluting hydrophilic substances. The log D prediction showed a better accuracy than the CHI model. Although the two fragmentation prediction methods are more diagnostic and sensitive for candidate selection, the inclusion of retention prediction by calculating a consensus score with optimized weighting can improve the ranking of correct candidates as compared to the individual methods.

The use of mass spectrometry-based metabolomics to study human, plant and microbial biochemistry and their interactions with the environment largely depends on the ability to annotate metabolite structures by matching mass spectral features of the measured metabolites to curated spectra of reference standards. While reference databases for metabolomics now provide information for hundreds of thousands of compounds, barely 5% of these known small molecules have experimental data from pure standards. Remarkably, it is still unknown how well existing mass spectral libraries cover the biochemical landscape of prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms. To address this issue, we have investigated the coverage of 38 genome-scale metabolic networks by public and commercial mass spectral databases, and found that on average only 40% of nodes in metabolic networks could be mapped by mass spectral information from standards. Next, we deciphered computationally which parts of the human metabolic network are poorly covered by mass spectral libraries, revealing gaps in the eicosanoids, vitamins and bile acid metabolism. Finally, our network topology analysis based on the betweenness centrality of metabolites revealed the top 20 most important metabolites that, if added to MS databases, may facilitate human metabolome characterization in the future.

Chemical database searching has become a fixture in many non-targeted identification workflows based on high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS). However, the form of a chemical structure observed in HRMS does not always match the form stored in a database (e.g., the neutral form versus a salt; one component of a mixture rather than the mixture form used in a consumer product). Linking the form of a structure observed via HRMS to its related form(s) within a database will enable the return of all relevant variants of a structure, as well as the related metadata, in a single query. A Konstanz Information Miner (KNIME) workflow has been developed to produce structural representations observed using HRMS (“MS-Ready structures”) and links them to those stored in a database. These MS-Ready structures, and associated mappings to the full chemical representations, are surfaced via the US EPA’s Chemistry Dashboard (https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/). This article describes the workflow for the generation and linking of ~ 700,000 MS-Ready structures (derived from ~ 760,000 original structures) as well as download, search and export capabilities to serve structure identification using HRMS. The importance of this form of structural representation for HRMS is demonstrated with several examples, including integration with the in silico fragmentation software application MetFrag. The structures, search, download and export functionality are all available through the CompTox Chemistry Dashboard, while the MetFrag implementation can be viewed at https://msbi.ipb-halle.de/MetFragBeta/.

The 2017 Dagstuhl Seminar on Computational Proteomics provided an opportunity for a broad discussion on the current state and future directions of the generation and use of peptide tandem mass spectrometry spectral libraries. Their use in proteomics is growing slowly, but there are multiple challenges in the field that must be addressed to further increase the adoption of spectral libraries and related techniques. The primary bottlenecks are the paucity of high quality and comprehensive libraries and the general difficulty of adopting spectral library searching into existing workflows. There are several existing spectral library formats, but none captures a satisfactory level of metadata; therefore, a logical next improvement is to design a more advanced, Proteomics Standards Initiative-approved spectral library format that can encode all of the desired metadata. The group discussed a series of metadata requirements organized into three designations of completeness or quality, tentatively dubbed bronze, silver, and gold. The metadata can be organized at four different levels of granularity: at the collection (library) level, at the individual entry (peptide ion) level, at the peak (fragment ion) level, and at the peak annotation level. Strategies for encoding mass modifications in a consistent manner and the requirement for encoding high-quality and commonly seen but as-yet-unidentified spectra were discussed. The group also discussed related topics, including strategies for comparing two spectra, techniques for generating representative spectra for a library, approaches for selection of optimal signature ions for targeted workflows, and issues surrounding the merging of two or more libraries into one. We present here a review of this field and the challenges that the community must address in order to accelerate the adoption of spectral libraries in routine analysis of proteomics datasets.