Cargando…

Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS

[Image: see text] Large-scale proteomics often employs two orthogonal separation methods to fractionate complex peptide mixtures. Fractionation can involve ion exchange separation coupled to reversed-phase separation or, more recently, two reversed-phase separations performed at different pH values....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Magdeldin, Sameh, Moresco, James J., Yamamoto, Tadashi, Yates, John R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2014
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4123945/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25040086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/pr500530e
_version_ 1782329558379266048
author Magdeldin, Sameh
Moresco, James J.
Yamamoto, Tadashi
Yates, John R.
author_facet Magdeldin, Sameh
Moresco, James J.
Yamamoto, Tadashi
Yates, John R.
author_sort Magdeldin, Sameh
collection PubMed
description [Image: see text] Large-scale proteomics often employs two orthogonal separation methods to fractionate complex peptide mixtures. Fractionation can involve ion exchange separation coupled to reversed-phase separation or, more recently, two reversed-phase separations performed at different pH values. When multidimensional separations are combined with tandem mass spectrometry for protein identification, the strategy is often referred to as multidimensional protein identification technology (MudPIT). MudPIT has been used in either an automated (online) or manual (offline) format. In this study, we evaluated the performance of different MudPIT strategies by both label-free and tandem mass tag (TMT) isobaric tagging. Our findings revealed that online MudPIT provided more peptide/protein identifications and higher sequence coverage than offline platforms. When employing an off-line fractionation method with direct loading of samples onto the column from an eppendorf tube via a high-pressure device, a 5.3% loss in protein identifications is observed. When off-line fractionated samples are loaded via an autosampler, a 44.5% loss in protein identifications is observed compared with direct loading of samples onto a triphasic capillary column. Moreover, peptide recovery was significantly lower after offline fractionation than in online fractionation. Signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio, however, was not significantly altered between experimental groups. It is likely that offline sample collection results in stochastic peptide loss due to noncovalent adsorption to solid surfaces. Therefore, the use of the offline approaches should be considered carefully when processing minute quantities of valuable samples.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4123945
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher American Chemical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41239452015-07-11 Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS Magdeldin, Sameh Moresco, James J. Yamamoto, Tadashi Yates, John R. J Proteome Res [Image: see text] Large-scale proteomics often employs two orthogonal separation methods to fractionate complex peptide mixtures. Fractionation can involve ion exchange separation coupled to reversed-phase separation or, more recently, two reversed-phase separations performed at different pH values. When multidimensional separations are combined with tandem mass spectrometry for protein identification, the strategy is often referred to as multidimensional protein identification technology (MudPIT). MudPIT has been used in either an automated (online) or manual (offline) format. In this study, we evaluated the performance of different MudPIT strategies by both label-free and tandem mass tag (TMT) isobaric tagging. Our findings revealed that online MudPIT provided more peptide/protein identifications and higher sequence coverage than offline platforms. When employing an off-line fractionation method with direct loading of samples onto the column from an eppendorf tube via a high-pressure device, a 5.3% loss in protein identifications is observed. When off-line fractionated samples are loaded via an autosampler, a 44.5% loss in protein identifications is observed compared with direct loading of samples onto a triphasic capillary column. Moreover, peptide recovery was significantly lower after offline fractionation than in online fractionation. Signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio, however, was not significantly altered between experimental groups. It is likely that offline sample collection results in stochastic peptide loss due to noncovalent adsorption to solid surfaces. Therefore, the use of the offline approaches should be considered carefully when processing minute quantities of valuable samples. American Chemical Society 2014-07-11 2014-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4123945/ /pubmed/25040086 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/pr500530e Text en Copyright © 2014 American Chemical Society Terms of Use (http://pubs.acs.org/page/policy/authorchoice_termsofuse.html)
spellingShingle Magdeldin, Sameh
Moresco, James J.
Yamamoto, Tadashi
Yates, John R.
Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS
title Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS
title_full Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS
title_fullStr Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS
title_full_unstemmed Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS
title_short Off-Line Multidimensional Liquid Chromatography and Auto Sampling Result in Sample Loss in LC/LC–MS/MS
title_sort off-line multidimensional liquid chromatography and auto sampling result in sample loss in lc/lc–ms/ms
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4123945/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25040086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/pr500530e
work_keys_str_mv AT magdeldinsameh offlinemultidimensionalliquidchromatographyandautosamplingresultinsamplelossinlclcmsms
AT morescojamesj offlinemultidimensionalliquidchromatographyandautosamplingresultinsamplelossinlclcmsms
AT yamamototadashi offlinemultidimensionalliquidchromatographyandautosamplingresultinsamplelossinlclcmsms
AT yatesjohnr offlinemultidimensionalliquidchromatographyandautosamplingresultinsamplelossinlclcmsms