Cargando…

More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics

Metaproteomics, the study of protein expression in microbial communities, is a versatile tool for environmental microbiology. Achieving sufficiently high metaproteome coverage to obtain a comprehensive picture of the activities and interactions in microbial communities is one of the current challeng...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hinzke, Tjorven, Kouris, Angela, Hughes, Rebecca-Ayme, Strous, Marc, Kleiner, Manuel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6383543/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30837968
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00238
_version_ 1783396858995933184
author Hinzke, Tjorven
Kouris, Angela
Hughes, Rebecca-Ayme
Strous, Marc
Kleiner, Manuel
author_facet Hinzke, Tjorven
Kouris, Angela
Hughes, Rebecca-Ayme
Strous, Marc
Kleiner, Manuel
author_sort Hinzke, Tjorven
collection PubMed
description Metaproteomics, the study of protein expression in microbial communities, is a versatile tool for environmental microbiology. Achieving sufficiently high metaproteome coverage to obtain a comprehensive picture of the activities and interactions in microbial communities is one of the current challenges in metaproteomics. An essential step to maximize the number of identified proteins is peptide separation via liquid chromatography (LC) prior to mass spectrometry (MS). Thorough optimization and comparison of LC methods for metaproteomics are, however, currently lacking. Here, we present an extensive development and test of different 1D and 2D-LC approaches for metaproteomic peptide separations. We used fully characterized mock community samples to evaluate metaproteomic approaches with very long analytical columns (50 and 75 cm) and long gradients (up to 12 h). We assessed a total of over 20 different 1D and 2D-LC approaches in terms of number of protein groups and unique peptides identified, peptide spectrum matches (PSMs) generated, the ability to detect proteins of low-abundance species, the effect of technical replicate runs on protein identifications and method reproducibility. We show here that, while 1D-LC approaches are faster and easier to set up and lead to more identifications per minute of runtime, 2D-LC approaches allow for a higher overall number of identifications with up to >10,000 protein groups identified. We also compared the 1D and 2D-LC approaches to a standard GeLC workflow, in which proteins are pre-fractionated via gel electrophoresis. This method yielded results comparable to the 2D-LC approaches, however with the drawback of a much increased sample preparation time. Based on our results, we provide recommendations on how to choose the best LC approach for metaproteomics experiments, depending on the study aims.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6383543
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63835432019-03-05 More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics Hinzke, Tjorven Kouris, Angela Hughes, Rebecca-Ayme Strous, Marc Kleiner, Manuel Front Microbiol Microbiology Metaproteomics, the study of protein expression in microbial communities, is a versatile tool for environmental microbiology. Achieving sufficiently high metaproteome coverage to obtain a comprehensive picture of the activities and interactions in microbial communities is one of the current challenges in metaproteomics. An essential step to maximize the number of identified proteins is peptide separation via liquid chromatography (LC) prior to mass spectrometry (MS). Thorough optimization and comparison of LC methods for metaproteomics are, however, currently lacking. Here, we present an extensive development and test of different 1D and 2D-LC approaches for metaproteomic peptide separations. We used fully characterized mock community samples to evaluate metaproteomic approaches with very long analytical columns (50 and 75 cm) and long gradients (up to 12 h). We assessed a total of over 20 different 1D and 2D-LC approaches in terms of number of protein groups and unique peptides identified, peptide spectrum matches (PSMs) generated, the ability to detect proteins of low-abundance species, the effect of technical replicate runs on protein identifications and method reproducibility. We show here that, while 1D-LC approaches are faster and easier to set up and lead to more identifications per minute of runtime, 2D-LC approaches allow for a higher overall number of identifications with up to >10,000 protein groups identified. We also compared the 1D and 2D-LC approaches to a standard GeLC workflow, in which proteins are pre-fractionated via gel electrophoresis. This method yielded results comparable to the 2D-LC approaches, however with the drawback of a much increased sample preparation time. Based on our results, we provide recommendations on how to choose the best LC approach for metaproteomics experiments, depending on the study aims. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6383543/ /pubmed/30837968 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00238 Text en Copyright © 2019 Hinzke, Kouris, Hughes, Strous and Kleiner. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Microbiology
Hinzke, Tjorven
Kouris, Angela
Hughes, Rebecca-Ayme
Strous, Marc
Kleiner, Manuel
More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics
title More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics
title_full More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics
title_fullStr More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics
title_full_unstemmed More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics
title_short More Is Not Always Better: Evaluation of 1D and 2D-LC-MS/MS Methods for Metaproteomics
title_sort more is not always better: evaluation of 1d and 2d-lc-ms/ms methods for metaproteomics
topic Microbiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6383543/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30837968
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00238
work_keys_str_mv AT hinzketjorven moreisnotalwaysbetterevaluationof1dand2dlcmsmsmethodsformetaproteomics
AT kourisangela moreisnotalwaysbetterevaluationof1dand2dlcmsmsmethodsformetaproteomics
AT hughesrebeccaayme moreisnotalwaysbetterevaluationof1dand2dlcmsmsmethodsformetaproteomics
AT strousmarc moreisnotalwaysbetterevaluationof1dand2dlcmsmsmethodsformetaproteomics
AT kleinermanuel moreisnotalwaysbetterevaluationof1dand2dlcmsmsmethodsformetaproteomics