Cargando…
How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods?
Current bottom-up quantitative proteomics methods based on MS/MS sequencing of peptides are shown to be strongly dependent on sample preparation. Using cytosolic proteins from MCF-7 breast cancer cells, it is shown that protein pre-fractionation based on pI and MW is more effective than pre-fraction...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4340538/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25729266 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/PRI.S5882 |
_version_ | 1782359035306049536 |
---|---|
author | Mulvey, Claire Thur, Bettina Crawford, Mark Godovac-Zimmermann, Jasminka |
author_facet | Mulvey, Claire Thur, Bettina Crawford, Mark Godovac-Zimmermann, Jasminka |
author_sort | Mulvey, Claire |
collection | PubMed |
description | Current bottom-up quantitative proteomics methods based on MS/MS sequencing of peptides are shown to be strongly dependent on sample preparation. Using cytosolic proteins from MCF-7 breast cancer cells, it is shown that protein pre-fractionation based on pI and MW is more effective than pre-fractionation using only MW in increasing the number of observed proteins (947 vs. 704 proteins) and the number of spectral counts per protein. Combination of MS data from the different pre-fractionation methods results in further improvements (1238 proteins). We discuss that at present the main limitation on quantitation by MS/MS sequencing is not MS sensitivity and protein abundance, but rather extensive peptide overlap and limited MS/MS sequencing throughput, and that this favors internally calibrated methods such as SILAC, ICAT or ITRAQ over spectral counting methods in attempts to drastically improve proteome coverage of biological samples. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4340538 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43405382015-02-25 How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods? Mulvey, Claire Thur, Bettina Crawford, Mark Godovac-Zimmermann, Jasminka Proteomics Insights Article Current bottom-up quantitative proteomics methods based on MS/MS sequencing of peptides are shown to be strongly dependent on sample preparation. Using cytosolic proteins from MCF-7 breast cancer cells, it is shown that protein pre-fractionation based on pI and MW is more effective than pre-fractionation using only MW in increasing the number of observed proteins (947 vs. 704 proteins) and the number of spectral counts per protein. Combination of MS data from the different pre-fractionation methods results in further improvements (1238 proteins). We discuss that at present the main limitation on quantitation by MS/MS sequencing is not MS sensitivity and protein abundance, but rather extensive peptide overlap and limited MS/MS sequencing throughput, and that this favors internally calibrated methods such as SILAC, ICAT or ITRAQ over spectral counting methods in attempts to drastically improve proteome coverage of biological samples. 2010-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4340538/ /pubmed/25729266 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/PRI.S5882 Text en © the author(s), publisher and licensee Libertas Academica Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article. Unrestricted non-commercial use is permitted provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Article Mulvey, Claire Thur, Bettina Crawford, Mark Godovac-Zimmermann, Jasminka How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods? |
title | How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods? |
title_full | How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods? |
title_fullStr | How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods? |
title_full_unstemmed | How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods? |
title_short | How Many proteins are Missed in Quantitative proteomics Based on Ms/Ms sequencing Methods? |
title_sort | how many proteins are missed in quantitative proteomics based on ms/ms sequencing methods? |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4340538/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25729266 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/PRI.S5882 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mulveyclaire howmanyproteinsaremissedinquantitativeproteomicsbasedonmsmssequencingmethods AT thurbettina howmanyproteinsaremissedinquantitativeproteomicsbasedonmsmssequencingmethods AT crawfordmark howmanyproteinsaremissedinquantitativeproteomicsbasedonmsmssequencingmethods AT godovaczimmermannjasminka howmanyproteinsaremissedinquantitativeproteomicsbasedonmsmssequencingmethods |