Literature DB >> 17922506

Carrier ampholytes for IEF, on their fortieth anniversary (1967-2007), brought to trial in court: the verdict.

Pier Giorgio Righetti1, Carolina Simó, Roberto Sebastiano, Attilio Citterio.   

Abstract

The present review summarizes the data accumulated in 1-year work, by exploring, via a 3-D methodology (Rotofor fractionation followed by CE-MS), all the narrow (2 pH unit wide) carrier ampholyte (CA) compounds for IEF, produced by three companies (Pharmacia with Pharmalyte and Ampholine, BioRad with Bio-Lyte and Serva with Servalyt). All species have been assessed by measuring the types of pH gradient produced, the total number of individual chemicals (with M(r) values) and isoforms and their focusing behavior ('good' or 'poor' ampholytes). Servalyt contains a grand total of 686 chemical entities and no less than 3899 isoforms; Pharmalyte 643 and 2211; Bio-Lyte 255 and 1192; Ampholine 294 and 1182, respectively. In terms of M(r) distribution, although all 2-pH-unit ranges start with the same low M(r) values (ca. 200) their upper limits are quite different. Thus, Pharmalyte reaches an upper M(r) value of 1179 (in the pH 4-6 range), versus 907 for Servalyt, 835 for Bio-Lyte and 893 for Ampholine. In general, in going towards the more alkaline pH intervals (e.g. pH 8-10) the molecular mass of carrier ampholytes (CAs) is reduced to as low as 491 (Bio-Lyte), indicating that the alkaline species are probably made with shorter oligoamines and are, in general, less substituted. All acidic pH intervals (up to pH 6-8) appear to be constituted by a very large proportion of well focusing species, indicating small values of DeltapK across their pI. Above pH 8, all brands of CAs worsen, the vast majority being unable to focus properly and sustain adequately the pH gradient. General guidelines are given for the synthesis of new alkaline species for improving the basic pH ranges.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17922506     DOI: 10.1002/elps.200700232

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Electrophoresis        ISSN: 0173-0835            Impact factor:   3.535


  10 in total

1.  Capillary isoelectric focusing of individual mitochondria.

Authors:  Gregory G Wolken; Vratislav Kostal; Edgar A Arriaga
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 6.986

2.  Microfluidic integration for automated targeted proteomic assays.

Authors:  Alex J Hughes; Robert K C Lin; Donna M Peehl; Amy E Herr
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Avoiding acidic region streaking in two-dimensional gel electrophoresis: case study with two bacterial whole cell protein extracts.

Authors:  Arnab Roy; Umesh Varshney; Debnath Pal
Journal:  J Biosci       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.826

Review 4.  Trajectory of isoelectric focusing from gels to capillaries to immobilized gradients in capillaries.

Authors:  Brooke M Koshel; Mary J Wirth
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2012-09-24       Impact factor: 3.984

5.  Membrane-assisted capillary isoelectric focusing coupling with matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-Fourier transform mass spectrometry for neuropeptide analysis.

Authors:  Zichuan Zhang; Junhua Wang; Limei Hui; Lingjun Li
Journal:  J Chromatogr A       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 4.759

Review 6.  Isotachophoresis: Theory and Microfluidic Applications.

Authors:  Ashwin Ramachandran; Juan G Santiago
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 72.087

7.  Femtomolar concentration detection limit and zeptomole mass detection limit for protein separation by capillary isoelectric focusing and laser-induced fluorescence detection.

Authors:  Lauren M Ramsay; Jane A Dickerson; Oluwatosin Dada; Norman J Dovichi
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2009-03-01       Impact factor: 6.986

Review 8.  Isoelectric Point Separations of Peptides and Proteins.

Authors:  Melissa R Pergande; Stephanie M Cologna
Journal:  Proteomes       Date:  2017-01-25

9.  Qualification of NISTmAb charge heterogeneity control assays.

Authors:  Abigail Turner; John E Schiel
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 4.142

10.  Intact and middle-down CIEF of commercial therapeutic monoclonal antibody products under non-denaturing conditions.

Authors:  Johannes Schmailzl; Marcel W Vorage; Hanno Stutz
Journal:  Electrophoresis       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 3.535

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.