Cargando…

Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress

In this review we examine the current state of analytical methods in proteomics. The conventional methodology using two-dimensional electrophoresis gels and mass spectrometry is discussed, with particular reference to the advantages and shortcomings thereof. Two recently published methods which offe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haynes, Paul A., Yates III, John R.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2000
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2448324/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10900454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0061(20000630)17:2<81::AID-YEA22>3.0.CO;2-Z
_version_ 1782157109090058240
author Haynes, Paul A.
Yates III, John R.
author_facet Haynes, Paul A.
Yates III, John R.
author_sort Haynes, Paul A.
collection PubMed
description In this review we examine the current state of analytical methods in proteomics. The conventional methodology using two-dimensional electrophoresis gels and mass spectrometry is discussed, with particular reference to the advantages and shortcomings thereof. Two recently published methods which offer an alternative approach are presented and discussed, with emphasis on how they can provide information not available via two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. These two methods are the isotope-coded affinity tags approach of Gygi et al. and the two-dimensional liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry approach as presented by Link et al. We conclude that both of these new techniques represent significant advances in analytical methodology for proteome analysis. Furthermore, we believe that in the future biological research will continue to be enhanced by the continuation of such developments in proteomic analytical technology.
format Text
id pubmed-2448324
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2000
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-24483242008-07-14 Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress Haynes, Paul A. Yates III, John R. Yeast Research Article In this review we examine the current state of analytical methods in proteomics. The conventional methodology using two-dimensional electrophoresis gels and mass spectrometry is discussed, with particular reference to the advantages and shortcomings thereof. Two recently published methods which offer an alternative approach are presented and discussed, with emphasis on how they can provide information not available via two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. These two methods are the isotope-coded affinity tags approach of Gygi et al. and the two-dimensional liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry approach as presented by Link et al. We conclude that both of these new techniques represent significant advances in analytical methodology for proteome analysis. Furthermore, we believe that in the future biological research will continue to be enhanced by the continuation of such developments in proteomic analytical technology. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2000 /pmc/articles/PMC2448324/ /pubmed/10900454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0061(20000630)17:2<81::AID-YEA22>3.0.CO;2-Z Text en Copyright © 2000 Hindawi Publishing Corporation. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Haynes, Paul A.
Yates III, John R.
Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress
title Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress
title_full Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress
title_fullStr Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress
title_full_unstemmed Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress
title_short Proteome Profiling—Pitfalls and Progress
title_sort proteome profiling—pitfalls and progress
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2448324/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10900454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0061(20000630)17:2<81::AID-YEA22>3.0.CO;2-Z
work_keys_str_mv AT haynespaula proteomeprofilingpitfallsandprogress
AT yatesiiijohnr proteomeprofilingpitfallsandprogress