Literature DB >> 15532550

Critical survey of quantitative proteomics in two-dimensional electrophoretic approaches.

Pier Giorgio Righetti1, Annalisa Castagna, Francesca Antonucci, Chiara Piubelli, Daniela Cecconi, Natascia Campostrini, Paolo Antonioli, Hubert Astner, Mahmoud Hamdan.   

Abstract

The present review attempts to cover a number of methods that appeared in the last few years for performing quantitative proteome analysis. However, due to the large number of methods described for both electrophoretic and chromatographic approaches, we have limited this excursus only to conventional two-dimensional (2D) map analysis, coupling orthogonally a charge-based step (isoelectric focusing) to a size-based separation (sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-electrophoresis). The first and oldest method applied in 2D mapping is based on statistical analysis performed on sets of gels via powerful software packages, such as the Melanie, PDQuest, Z3 and Z4000, Phoretix and Progenesis. This method calls for separately-running a number of replicas for control and treated samples, the merging and comparing between these two sets of data being accomplished via the softwares just mentioned. Recent developments permit analyses on a single gel containing mixed samples differentially labelled and resolved by either fluorescence or isotopic means. In one approach, a set of fluorophors, called Cy3 and Cy5, are selected for differentially tagging Lys residues, via a "minimal labelling" protocol. A variant of this, adopts a newer set of fluorophors, also of the Cy3 and Cy5 type, reacting on Cys residues, via a strategy of "saturation labelling". There are at present two methods for quantitative proteomics in a 2D gel format exploiting stable isotopes: one utilizes tagging Cys residues with [2H0]/[2H3]-acrylamide; the other one, also based on a Cys reactive compound, exploits [2H0]/[2H4] 2-vinylpyridine. The latter reagent achieves 100% efficiency coupled to 100% specificity. The advantages and limitations of the various protocols are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15532550     DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2004.05.106

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chromatogr A        ISSN: 0021-9673            Impact factor:   4.759


  10 in total

1.  Quantitative proteomics: assessing the spectrum of in-gel protein detection methods.

Authors:  Victoria J Gauci; Elise P Wright; Jens R Coorssen
Journal:  J Chem Biol       Date:  2010-06-19

2.  Excessive ovarian production of nerve growth factor elicits granulosa cell apoptosis by setting in motion a tumor necrosis factor α/stathmin-mediated death signaling pathway.

Authors:  Cecilia Garcia-Rudaz; Mauricio Dorfman; Srinivasa Nagalla; Konstantin Svechnikov; Olle Söder; Sergio R Ojeda; Gregory A Dissen
Journal:  Reproduction       Date:  2011-06-06       Impact factor: 3.906

3.  Analysis of pressure ulcer wound fluid using two-dimensional electrophoresis.

Authors:  Jennifer T Wyffels; Kristin M Fries; Jason S Randall; Daniel S Ha; Christa A Lodwig; Michael S Brogan; Marlene Shero; Laura E Edsberg
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2010-05-18       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  Granzyme A Produced by γ9δ2 T Cells Activates ER Stress Responses and ATP Production, and Protects Against Intracellular Mycobacterial Replication Independent of Enzymatic Activity.

Authors:  Valerio Rasi; David C Wood; Christopher S Eickhoff; Mei Xia; Nicola Pozzi; Rachel L Edwards; Michael Walch; Niels Bovenschen; Daniel F Hoft
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 7.561

Review 5.  Studies of complex biological systems with applications to molecular medicine: the need to integrate transcriptomic and proteomic approaches.

Authors:  Elena Silvestri; Assunta Lombardi; Pieter de Lange; Daniela Glinni; Rosalba Senese; Federica Cioffi; Antonia Lanni; Fernando Goglia; Maria Moreno
Journal:  J Biomed Biotechnol       Date:  2010-10-11

Review 6.  The plasma proteome, adductome and idiosyncratic toxicity in toxicoproteomics research.

Authors:  B Alex Merrick
Journal:  Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic       Date:  2008-02-12

Review 7.  Cancer proteomics by quantitative shotgun proteomics.

Authors:  Emily I Chen; John R Yates
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 6.603

Review 8.  Cardiovascular proteomics: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Melanie Y White; Jennifer E Van Eyk
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.074

Review 9.  The role of toxicoproteomics in assessing organ specific toxicity.

Authors:  B Alex Merrick; Frank A Witzmann
Journal:  EXS       Date:  2009

10.  Proteomics analysis reveals protein expression differences for hypopharyngeal gland activity in the honeybee, Apis mellifera carnica Pollmann.

Authors:  Ting Ji; Zhenguo Liu; Jie Shen; Fang Shen; Qin Liang; Liming Wu; Guohong Chen; Miguel Corona
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 3.969

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.