That's the issue I was thinking about, yes - so it sounds like using the
"xinteract *.pep.xm" approach you're on to a new and different problem,
then?

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bernt
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 10:15 AM
To: spctools-discuss
Subject: [spctools-discuss] Re: Does Peptideprophet accept only a limited
no. of pepXML files?


Hi Brian,

Thanks for your response. I'm using TPPv4.2 Rev 1 on Windows XP. I
read the thread on "limit on number of pep.xml files that can be
analysed with interact" before, and Eric Deutsch was suggesting using
<xinteract *.pep.xml> on the command line. I tried it, and it started
processing all the 100 over files i had, but in the end there was a
problem with the generated interact.pep.xml file. Were you going to
suggest this <xinteract *.pep.xml> method?


Bernt

On Jul 1, 11:32 pm, "Brian Pratt" <[email protected]> wrote:
> What operating system are you on (windows, linux etc)?  My guess is that
> it's probably about the length of the command line, rather than the file
> count.  We've had issues with this in the past, it might be borken again.
>
> Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
>
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bernt
> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 3:14 AM
> To: spctools-discuss
> Subject: [spctools-discuss] Does Peptideprophet accept only a limited no.
of
> pepXML files?
>
> Dear all,
>
> I wonder if anyone has encountered this problem: For < 80 files,
> Peptideprophet works normally, but when there are more than 80 files,
> it doesn't start at all.
>
> If we split them up into 2 batches to run peptideprophet, the
> statistical distributions that we obtain would be different since it
> may happen that we unknowingly choose a group of poor scoring spectra
> to model for 1 batch, while the other batch contains high scoring
> ones. Would the peptideprophet probabilities obtained for the poor
> scoring batch be reliable ? Ideally we should analyse the distribution
> across all the files from a single sample (separated into different
> protein fractions) altogether, isn't it?
>
> Would really appreciate if someone could enlighten on this, and
> whether this can be gotten around by simply merging the some of the
> smaller pepxml files in the first place.
>
> Thanks,
> Bernt




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"spctools-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/spctools-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to