Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

pLabel spectra ordering #84

Open
KellyM0 opened this issue Feb 27, 2025 · 2 comments
Open

pLabel spectra ordering #84

KellyM0 opened this issue Feb 27, 2025 · 2 comments

Comments

@KellyM0
Copy link

KellyM0 commented Feb 27, 2025

Hi,

  1. I noticed while browsing results in pLabel 2.4 that the spectra are no longer in the order of the scan number. I found it quite useful when spectra were ordered by scan number because I validate hundreds of spectra across many raw files manually, and I didn’t have to search for each spectrum individually. It would be great if spectra could once again be ordered by scan number, or if you can suggest a way for me to effect this in pLabel.

  2. I would find it useful if the Alpha Fragment Ion Coverage Rate and Beta Fragment Ion Coverage Rate that I can see in pLabel were reported in the file ending with: cross-linked_spectra.csv. (I'm still using pLink 2, so please forgive me if this is already included in pLink 3 output)

@pszt666
Copy link

pszt666 commented Mar 6, 2025

1.We apologize for any inconvenience. To make it easier for users to view the spectra with better matches, we have sorted the display order based on the quality of identification. For now, specific spectra can only be accessed through search. Thank you for your suggestion
2.Thank you for your suggestion. We will consider adding this feature in future iterations

@KellyM0
Copy link
Author

KellyM0 commented Mar 7, 2025

  1. Thank you for the information! It's useful to know that the spectra in pLabel are sorted by score.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants