Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The advent of algorithms for fragmentation spectrum-based label-free quantitative proteomics has enabled straightforward quantification of shotgun proteomic experiments. Despite the popularity of these approaches, few studies have been performed to assess their performance. We have therefore profiled the precision and the accuracy of three distinct relative label-free methods on both the protein and the proteome level. We derived our test data from two well-characterized publicly available quantitative data sets.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201000521 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!