Romel P Dator1, Kirk W Gaston, Patrick A Limbach. 1. Rieveschl Laboratories for Mass Spectrometry, Department of Chemistry, P.O. Box 210172, University of Cincinnati , Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0172, United States.
Abstract
Mass spectrometry-based quantification of ribosomal proteins (r-proteins) associated with mature ribosomes and ribosome assembly complexes is typically accomplished by relative quantification strategies. These strategies provide information on the relative stoichiometry of proteins within the complex compared to a wild-type strain. Here we have evaluated the applicability of a label-free approach, enhanced liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS(E)), for absolute "ribosome-centric" quantification of r-proteins in Escherichia coli mature ribosomes. Because the information obtained in this experiment is related to the number of peptides identified per protein, experimental conditions that allow accurate and reproducible quantification of r-proteins were found. Using an additional dimension of gas-phase separation through ion mobility and the use of multiple endoproteinase digestion significantly improved quantification of proteins associated with mature ribosomes. The actively translating ribosomes (polysomes) contain amounts of proteins consistent with their known stoichiometry within the complex. These measurements exhibited technical and biological reproducibilities at %CV less than 15% and 35%, respectively. The improved LC-MS(E) approach described here can be used to characterize in vivo ribosome assembly complexes captured during ribosome biogenesis and assembly under different perturbations (e.g., antibiotics, deletion mutants of assembly factors, oxidative stress, nutrient deprivation). Quantitative analysis of these captured complexes will provide information relating to the interplay and dynamics of how these perturbations interfere with the assembly process.
Mass spectrometry-based quantification of ribosomal proteins (r-proteins) associated with mature ribosomes and ribosome assembly complexes is typically accomplished by relative quantification strategies. These strategies provide information on the relative stoichiometry of proteins within the complex compared to a wild-type strain. Here we have evaluated the applicability of a label-free approach, enhanced liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS(E)), for absolute "ribosome-centric" quantification of r-proteins in Escherichia coli mature ribosomes. Because the information obtained in this experiment is related to the number of peptides identified per protein, experimental conditions that allow accurate and reproducible quantification of r-proteins were found. Using an additional dimension of gas-phase separation through ion mobility and the use of multiple endoproteinase digestion significantly improved quantification of proteins associated with mature ribosomes. The actively translating ribosomes (polysomes) contain amounts of proteins consistent with their known stoichiometry within the complex. These measurements exhibited technical and biological reproducibilities at %CV less than 15% and 35%, respectively. The improved LC-MS(E) approach described here can be used to characterize in vivo ribosome assembly complexes captured during ribosome biogenesis and assembly under different perturbations (e.g., antibiotics, deletion mutants of assembly factors, oxidative stress, nutrient deprivation). Quantitative analysis of these captured complexes will provide information relating to the interplay and dynamics of how these perturbations interfere with the assembly process.
The ribosome is a ribonucleoprotein
(RNP) particle responsible for catalyzing protein synthesis in living
organisms. The bacterial 70S ribosome is composed of two unequal subunits
defined by their relative sedimentation coefficients. The large ribosomal
subunit 50S consists of two ribonucleic acid (rRNA) molecules (23S
rRNA and 5S rRNA) plus 34 ribosomal proteins (r-proteins, L1–L36).
The small ribosomal subunit 30S is composed of only one rRNA molecule
(16S rRNA) and 21 r-proteins (S1–S21). Detailed X-ray crystal
structures of the bacterial ribosome have revealed a wealth of information
that increased our understanding of ribosome structure, function as
well as antibiotic action.[1−6]Because r-proteins are present in one copy per translating
ribosome
except for proteins L7 and L12, which are present in two copies each,
the ribosome presents an ideal model system to develop analytical
tools for quantitative analyses. One such tool is the enhanced liquid
chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MSE)
approach developed by Silva and co-workers for absolute quantification
of proteins in simple and complex mixtures.[7,8] This
method is based upon the observation that the average signal response
of the three most intense peptides per mole of protein is constant
with CV less than 10% (MW range from 14 to 97 kDa). This technique
involves alternating scans of low-energy collision-induced dissociation
(CID) and high-energy CID during LC–MS to enable both protein
identification and quantification in a single experiment. Using an
internal standard, a universal MS signal response factor (counts/mol
of protein) is determined and then applied to other well-characterized
proteins in the mixture to determine their absolute amounts.The alternate scanning mode of data acquisition during LC–MS
analysis allows a comprehensive inventory of all precursor ions with
their corresponding time-resolved product ions. This approach does
not bias gas-phase preselection of precursor ions during CID, as compared
to that of data dependent analysis (DDA). Thus, all components that
are above the detection limit of the instrument are detected and identified.
In addition, two aspects of the LC–MSE approach
make it a potentially viable method for high-throughput qualitative
and quantitative analyses. First, the accurate mass measurements of
precursor and their respective product ions provide confident identifications
of large number of proteins with high sequence coverage. Second, its
ability to collect high-quality MS data across the entire chromatographic
peak width for all detected peptides allows accurate quantification
of peptides/proteins present in a given sample.[8] These attributes of the LC–MSE approach
enabled quantification of many important analytes in a variety of
biological systems including viral antigens,[9] microsomal membrane and bacterial proteome,[10,11] human serum,[12] and plant proteins.[13,14] Further, the approach was also evaluated in different instrumental
platforms such as on FT-ICR instruments and has been found to be robust
if at least three or more peptides are identified and detected per
protein.[15]One major limitation of
the original LC–MSE approach,
however, is that the method is biased against low molecular weight
(under 14 kDa) proteins.[7,8] The magnitude of the
error in quantification is highly dependent on the number of peptides
available for quantification.[8] As the majority
of the bacterial ribosomal proteins have a molecular weight less than
14 kDa (Figure 1), absolute quantification
of ribosomal proteins by LC–MSE has not been effective.
To improve quantitative results across the entire molecular weight
range of bacterial r-proteins, methods that can increase the number
of peptides per protein amenable to quantification are needed.
Figure 1
Plot of the
molecular weight of bacterial ribosomal proteins from
the small 30S subunit (A) and the large 50S subunit (B). More than
50% of the proteins have molecular weight less than 14 kDa, a cutoff
range that was originally determined in quantifying proteins by LC–MSE.
Plot of the
molecular weight of bacterial ribosomal proteins from
the small 30S subunit (A) and the large 50S subunit (B). More than
50% of the proteins have molecular weight less than 14 kDa, a cutoff
range that was originally determined in quantifying proteins by LC–MSE.Ion mobility separation provides
an additional dimension of gas-phase
separation prior to CID. It offers a rapid 2D separation (microsecond–millisecond)
of ionized precursor ions and the reduction of chemical noise and
ion suppression effects. This technique offers a greater number of
observed proteolytically derived peptides.[16] Valentine and co-workers showed that ion mobility separation provides
more than an order of magnitude enhancement in component resolution.[18] This gain leads to improvements in measurement
sensitivity, dynamic range,[17] spectral
quality,[19] peptide/protein identifications
via higher sequence coverage, and lower errors in protein abundance
measurements. Therefore, it is of interest here to determine whether
the addition of ion mobility separation will improve LC–MSE quantification of lower molecular weight bacterial ribosomal
proteins.Other approaches used to increase sequence coverage
of proteins
involve the use of more than one protease. Choudhary et al. showed
that multiple enzyme digestion (trypsin, Lys-C, and Asp-N) significantly
increased the sequence coverage of proteins identified by shotgun
sequencing.[20] Likewise, Swaney and co-workers
demonstrated, using Saccharomyces cerevisiae as the model organism, that a large portion of the proteome is inaccessible
using a single protease digestion alone.[21] Using multiple proteases (trypsin, LysC, ArgC, Asp-N, and Glu-C),
the sequence coverage of the proteins is improved 3-fold. Similar
results were observed using multiple enzymatic digestion to enhance
sequence coverage of proteins in human cerebrospinal fluid[22] and ErbB2tumor receptor.[23]To evaluate the applicability of the LC–MSE approach
for “ribosome-centric” quantification of r-proteins
in wild-type Escherichia coli polysomes,
we have investigated strategies to enable reproducible and accurate
quantification of r-proteins. These improvements include incorporation
of orthogonal gas-phase separation using ion mobility and multiple
endoproteinase digestion. These strategies significantly enhanced
the number of peptides identified per protein, protein sequence coverage,
and thus r-protein quantification. With this optimized LC–MSE approach, r-proteins with molecular weights >5 kDa, with
few exceptions, can be accurately quantified.
Experimental Procedures
Materials
Tryptone and yeast extract were obtained
from Fisher Scientific (Fairlawn, NJ). Trypsin (sequencing grade)
and RNase-free DNase were purchased from Promega (Madison, WI). Chymotrypsin
(sequencing grade) was obtained from Protea Biosciences (Morgantown,
WV). Micrococcal nuclease (MNase) was purchased from New England Biolabs
(Ipswich, MA). Phosphorylase b (MassPrep Standard) and Fibrinopeptide
b (Glu-Fib) were obtained from Waters (Milford, MA). Protease Inhibitor
Cocktail, endoproteinases Asp-N and Glu-C, chloramphenicol (CAM),
2-mercaptoethanol, dithiothreitol (DTT), iodoacetamide (IA), and molecular-grade
sucrose were obtained from Sigma (St. Louis, MO). Acids and organic
solvents were HPLC grade or better.
Bacterial Culture
E. coli wild-type (wt) K-12 strain
was obtained from the American Type Culture
Collection (ATCC, Manassas, VA). The strain was cultured following
standard growth conditions, harvesting and isolation procedures previously
described with minor modifications.[24] A
single colony of wt K-12 was inoculated in 10 mL of 2xYT media (1.6%
Bacto Tryptone, 1% Bacto Yeast Extract, 0.5% NaCl) and incubated overnight
at 37 °C and 200 rpm. One milliliter of cell suspension was transferred
into 1 L of culture media. At mid log phase (A600: 0.6–0.8), chloramphenicol was added (0.1 mg/mL,
final concentration) 3 min before harvesting. The cells were rapidly
cooled on ice and harvested by centrifugation at 6000 rpm, 4 °C
for 7 min. The cell pellet was resuspended in lysis buffer (60 mM
KCl, 60 mM NH4Cl, 50 mM Tris–HCl, 6 mM MgCl2, 6 mM 2-mercaptoethanol, pH 7.5–7.7). Cells were passed
twice through a French Press, and the supernatant was collected. RNase-free
DNase (1 g of cell/2.5 μL) and protease inhibitor cocktail (2
g of cell/0.5 mL) were added and incubated on ice for 20 min. An equal
volume of buffer D (60 mM KCl, 60 mM NH4Cl, 10 mM Tris–HCl,
12 mM MgCl2, 6 mM β-mercaptoethanol, pH 7.5–7.7)
was added, and the mixture was then clarified by centrifugation at
16,000 rpm, 4 °C for 30 min. The crude lysate was recovered and
stored at −80 °C until further use.
Isolation of
70S Ribosomes and Polysomes
Following
culturing, 70S ribosomes and polysomes were purified by sucrose density
gradient ultracentrifugation. A 10–50% sucrose gradient in
buffer D was prepared using a gradient mixer. Approximately 80–100
ODU of crude lysate were gently layered on top of the gradients. The
gradients were then centrifuged for 15 h at 23,000 rpm at 4 °C
using a Beckman SW32 rotor/SW28 swinging bucket rotor. The fractions
were collected using an ISCO automated fraction collector with continuous
monitoring at 254 nm. Fractions corresponding to the 70S ribosomes
or polysomes were pooled and pelleted by centrifugation for 20 h at
48,000 rpm at 4 °C. The ribosome pellets were resuspended in
buffer D and stored at −80 °C until further use.
Micrococcal
Nuclease (MNase) Digestion of RNA and Protein Extraction
To enable dissociation of proteins from ribosomes, the RNA was
first digested with MNase (100 μg ribosomes/100 U MNase) at
37 °C overnight. Proteins were then precipitated by acetone after
RNA extraction with acetic acid. The total protein concentration was
determined using the Coomassie Plus Bradford Assay Kit (Pierce Scientific,
Rockford, IL).
Quantification of
total polysomal r-proteins using
LC–MSE was performed as described elsewhere.[8] Five micrograms of total polysomal proteins were
resuspended in 8 M urea, 0.4 M ammonium bicarbonate (pH 7.5–8.5).
The protein mixture was reduced and alkylated using DTT and IAA, respectively.
Trypsin (1:30 enzyme: protein ratio) was added and incubated overnight
at 37 °C to digest the proteins. Tryptic digests were cleaned
using C18 ziptips and spiked with predigested phosphorylase b (0.5
pmol on column) as the internal standard (IS).Tryptic peptides
were analyzed on a Synapt G2S mass spectrometer coupled to a nanoAcquity
UPLC (Waters, Milford, MA). Reversed-phase chromatography on a BEH130
C18 column (1.7 μm, 100 μm × 100 mm, Waters, Milford,
MA) was performed at a flow rate of 1.0 μL min–1 using 0.1% formic acid in water as mobile phase A and 0.1% formic
acid in acetonitrile as mobile phase B. Two microliters of tryptic
digest was injected on column (500 ng total protein concentration).
Gradient elution was carried out starting with 5% B for the first
minute and 5% B min–1 to 10% B for another minute.
A linear gradient from 10% B to 50% B for 58 min was then employed
followed by a constant 50% B for 10 min. Finally, a 4.5% B min–1 to 5% B for 10 min was carried out and the column
was re-equilibrated at 5% B for another 10 min. Mass spectra were
recorded in positive ion mode with a source temperature of 100 °C
and spray voltage of 3.5 kV. Lock mass (Glu-Fib, mass-to-charge 875.8426,
2+) was delivered using an auxiliary pump at 0.5 μL min–1 at 100 fmol μL–1 to the reference
sprayer of the NanoLock Spray source. All LC–MSE analyses were operated in sensitivity mode with at least a 10 000
mass resolving power (fwhm). Continuum and accurate mass LC–MSE spectral data were collected on alternating acquisition mode
of low-energy CID and high-energy CID, as previously described.[8] A constant 4 eV was applied at low-energy CID
mode while an energy ramp from 15 to 40 eV was used at high-energy
CID mode. Scan time was 1 s for both low-energy CID mode and high-energy
CID mode. For ion mobility MS separation (IMS) of peptides, the triwave
region was operated at constant wave velocity and wave height of 1500
m/s and 40 V, respectively. All samples were analyzed in triplicate.
Multiple Endoproteinase Digestion of Proteins
Multiple
proteases including trypsin, chymotrypsin, Asp-N, and Glu-C were used
to digest total r-proteins. The digestion conditions for each protease
were individually optimized as described in the manufacturer’s
protocol. Five micrograms of total proteins were digested with each
protease and the proteolytic digests were combined and spiked with
IS before LC–MSE analysis. Identical LC–MS
conditions were used, as described above.
Database Searching and
Data Analysis
Continuum LC–MSE spectral
data were uploaded to PLGS (ProteinLynx Global Server,
Version 2.5.2, Waters, Milford, MA) for protein identification and
quantification.[25] Searches were limited
to E. coli (22 708 sequences).
Search parameters used included monoisotopic masses with peptide mass
tolerance and fragment mass tolerance set to automatic. Typical peptide
and fragment mass tolerances in sensitivity mode are less than 10
ppm. One internal missed cleavage was allowed with cysteine residues
being carbamidomethylated (+57.0215 Da) and methionine being oxidized
(+15.9949 Da). A composite decoy search was performed and specific
cutoff scores were determined allowing a <4% false positive rate.
A minimum of two peptide matches was considered for positive protein
identification. Manual inspection of MS/MS data was performed for
proteins having only two peptide matches to verify sequence assignments.
For quantification of proteins in continuum LC–MSE data, the calibration protein, phosphorylase b (P00489), was set
to 500 fmol. For database searching of LC–MSE data
from multiple protease digestion, trypsin was set as the primary digest
reagent while nonspecific protease was set as the secondary digest
reagent.
Results and Discussion
The LC–MSE approach was originally developed
and evaluated for proteins with molecular weight range of 14 kDa to
97 kDa.[8] Large errors in quantification
will occur for small proteins as they generate too few tryptic peptides
and therefore are underrepresented in a typical tryptic digest. Because
more than 50% of bacterial 70S r-proteins have molecular weight less
than 14 kDa, absolute quantification of these proteins by LC–MSE is challenging (Figure 1). To evaluate
improvements to the original LC–MSE method, r-proteins
isolated from wild type E. coli polysomes were quantified.
Polysomes are actively translating ribosomes and the r-proteins in
these complexes are present in stoichiometric amounts of one copy
for each r-protein except for proteins L7 and L12, which are present
in two copies each.[6,26]
Absolute Quantification
of Proteins in E. coli Polysomes by LC–MSE
An initial LC–MSE analysis of
total polysomal proteins using the previously
described approach by Silva et al. revealed
a nonuniform distribution of both small subunit and large subunit
proteins associated with the complex (Figure 2). The original approach is based upon a single protease digestion
of total polysomal proteins with trypsin and the corresponding tryptic
digests were analyzed by LC–MSE. To limit run-to-run
variability, protein levels were normalized to protein S4 and protein
L3 for 30S proteins and 50S proteins, respectively. Proteins S4 and
L3 are expected to be present in one copy per ribosome, as they are
primary binding proteins and essential for ribosome assembly. The
small molecular weight r-proteins from both subunits did not yield
good quantitative results, as some of these proteins are present in
substoichiometric amounts (less than 0.8). Only 21 out of 55 r-proteins
(38%) were detected at the expected level. The majority of proteins
present in substoichiometric amounts are lower molecular (<14 kDa)
proteins, consistent with previous reports on LC–MSE analysis of r-proteins.[8] Therefore, strategies
to enhance quantification of most, if not all, ribosomal proteins
associated with mature ribosomes were investigated.
Figure 2
Quantification of 30S
r-proteins (A) and 50S r-proteins (B) by
LC–MSE as described by Silva et al.[8] Ribosomal proteins
are not uniformly distributed and are not detected in one copy per
ribosome as determined by LC–MSE. Amounts of small
subunit and large subunit proteins are normalized to r-protein S4
and r-protein L3, respectively. Error bars represent the standard
deviation of three replicate measurements.
Quantification of 30S
r-proteins (A) and 50S r-proteins (B) by
LC–MSE as described by Silva et al.[8] Ribosomal proteins
are not uniformly distributed and are not detected in one copy per
ribosome as determined by LC–MSE. Amounts of small
subunit and large subunit proteins are normalized to r-protein S4
and r-protein L3, respectively. Error bars represent the standard
deviation of three replicate measurements.
Ion Mobility Separation with LC–MSE
The
first approach for improving quantification of r-proteins was
the additional dimension of gas-phase separation afforded by ion mobility.
Figure 3A,B shows the number of peptides detected
for the small subunit and large subunit proteins after trypsin digestion
without and with ion mobility separation. The number of peptides detected
for each protein increases with ion mobility compared to without ion
mobility. Similarly, the sequence coverage of the proteins increases
as well (Figure 3C,D).
Figure 3
Plots of the number of
peptides (A,B) and sequence coverage (C,D)
of r-proteins using trypsin digestion alone with and without ion mobility
separation. The additional dimension of gas-phase separation through
ion mobility increases the number of peptides detected and sequence
coverage of the proteins.
Plots of the number of
peptides (A,B) and sequence coverage (C,D)
of r-proteins using trypsin digestion alone with and without ion mobility
separation. The additional dimension of gas-phase separation through
ion mobility increases the number of peptides detected and sequence
coverage of the proteins.Some proteins show a dramatic enhancement in the number of
peptides
detected and protein sequence coverage. For instance, protein S1 has
an almost 6-fold increase in the number of peptides identified with
ion mobility separation. This increase afforded a 3-fold improvement
in sequence coverage. This increase is attributed to the ability of
ion mobility separation to reduce and eliminate chemical noise and
ion suppression effects, thereby confidently identifying low-abundant
peptides. The increased ability to disperse peptide ions signals during
ion mobility separation facilitates simultaneous MS/MS fragmentation
of IMS-separated ions, thus enhancing throughput and experimental
sensitivity.[16] Other proteins, such as
protein S6 and S7, have no appreciable increase in either the number
of peptides detected or the sequence coverage. Although the number
of peptides and the sequence coverage of r-proteins were improved
by addition of ion mobility separation, a nonstoichiometric trend
in the amounts of proteins is still observed for both small and large
subunit proteins (Figure S1, Supporting Information).
Multiple Endoproteinase Digestion
The next strategy
investigated was the use of multiple proteases. The small subunit
proteins S15, S17, S18, S19, S20, and S21 and the large subunit proteins
L21, L23, L28, L29, L30, L31, L32, L33, L34, L35, and L36 generate
few detectable tryptic peptides during LC–MSE analysis
(cf. Figure 3A,B). Consequently, these proteins
are more likely to have large quantification errors. Chymotrypsin,
Asp-N, and Glu-C were used in addition to trypsin. The high specificity
of these enzymes allows generation of unique peptides from each protease,
thereby improving protein quantification. Figure 4 shows the experimental strategy used for multiple enzymatic
digestion of r-proteins from mature E. coli polysomes.
Figure 4
Experimental strategy using multiple enzymes to digest
total proteins
(TP) from wild-type E. coli polysomes.
The high specificity of these different enzymes generate unique proteolytic
peptides, which are then subjected to LC–MSE analysis.
Experimental strategy using multiple enzymes to digest
total proteins
(TP) from wild-type E. coli polysomes.
The high specificity of these different enzymes generate unique proteolytic
peptides, which are then subjected to LC–MSE analysis.To evaluate whether multiple protease
digestion improves quantification
of r-proteins, each protease was first evaluated individually to determine
optimal digestion conditions. After optimizing the conditions for
each endoproteinase, the proteolytic peptides were combined and subjected
to LC–MSE analysis. The number of peptides detected
and protein sequence coverage were dramatically improved (Figure 5) leading to higher accuracy r-protein quantification
(Figure 6). A representative example of the
data obtained by this improved approach is illustrated using r-protein
S9. In the standard MSE sample preparation and analysis
strategy, this r-protein is significantly underrepresented during
quantification (cf. Figure 1). Figure 7 presents extracted ion chromatograms (XICs) and
low-energy MS data from three digestion products identified with S9,
with high-energy MS sequence confirmation shown in Figure S2 (Supporting Information). The combination of multiple
protease digestion with ion mobility separation significantly improves
sequence coverage (Figure 5C) and absolute
quantification (Figure 6A) of this 14.8 kDa
r-protein. Such improvements were consistently observed for all r-proteins,
including all low molecular weight (<14 kDa) r-proteins except
S21, L34, L35, and L36.
Figure 5
Plots of the number of peptides (A,B) and sequence
coverage (C,D)
of r-proteins using multiple endoproteinase digestion with and without
ion mobility separation. The additional dimension of gas-phase separation
through ion mobility increases the number of peptides detected and
sequence coverage of the proteins.
Figure 6
Quantification of 30S r-proteins (A) and 50S r-proteins (B) using
ion mobility separation and multiple protease digestion as improvements
to the LC–MSE approach. A uniform distribution of
proteins is observed for the majority of r-proteins quantified, which
is in agreement with their known stoichiometry within the complex.
Ribosomal proteins S21, L34, L35, and L36 are not quantified because
they generate too few peptides, even using multiple enzymatic digestion
and ion mobility separation. Amounts of small subunit and large subunit
proteins are normalized to r-protein S4 and r-protein L3, respectively.
Error bars represent the standard deviation of three replicate measurements.
Figure 7
(A) Extracted ion chromatograms (XIC’s)
of the three most
intense peptides of small ribosomal subunit protein S9. (B) Low-energy
mass spectrum of GGGISGQAGAIR peptide (2+, m/z 522.19). (C) Low-energy mass spectrum of SLEQYFGR peptide
(2+, m/z 502.71). (D) Low-energy
mass spectrum of ALMEYDESLR peptide (2+, m/z 613.67). High-energy mass spectral data confirming peptide
sequences are shown in Figure S2 (Supporting Information).
Plots of the number of peptides (A,B) and sequence
coverage (C,D)
of r-proteins using multiple endoproteinase digestion with and without
ion mobility separation. The additional dimension of gas-phase separation
through ion mobility increases the number of peptides detected and
sequence coverage of the proteins.Quantification of 30S r-proteins (A) and 50S r-proteins (B) using
ion mobility separation and multiple protease digestion as improvements
to the LC–MSE approach. A uniform distribution of
proteins is observed for the majority of r-proteins quantified, which
is in agreement with their known stoichiometry within the complex.
Ribosomal proteins S21, L34, L35, and L36 are not quantified because
they generate too few peptides, even using multiple enzymatic digestion
and ion mobility separation. Amounts of small subunit and large subunit
proteins are normalized to r-protein S4 and r-protein L3, respectively.
Error bars represent the standard deviation of three replicate measurements.(A) Extracted ion chromatograms (XIC’s)
of the three most
intense peptides of small ribosomal subunit protein S9. (B) Low-energy
mass spectrum of GGGISGQAGAIR peptide (2+, m/z 522.19). (C) Low-energy mass spectrum of SLEQYFGR peptide
(2+, m/z 502.71). (D) Low-energy
mass spectrum of ALMEYDESLR peptide (2+, m/z 613.67). High-energy mass spectral data confirming peptide
sequences are shown in Figure S2 (Supporting Information).One advantage observed using multiple
proteases to digest r-protein
is the generation of longer peptide digestion products. These longer
peptides exhibit a narrower range of ionization efficiencies and are
usually the three most intense peptides used for quantification, consequently
improving r-protein quantification (data not shown). Most importantly,
combining the use of multiple proteases to generate proteolytically
unique peptides with ion mobility separation now allows for a wider
mass range of proteins to be quantified.
Reproducibility of an optimized
LC–MSE approach
To confirm the technical
and biological reproducibility of these
measurements, additional experiments were performed using two biological
replicates of E. coli wild-type cells.
For each biological replicate, the proteins in polysomes were purified
and analyzed by the improved LC–MSE. Quantification
of proteins by the improved LC–MSE approach showed
very good run-to-run reproducibility with CV less than 13% for both
large and small subunit r-proteins (Tables S1 and S2, Supporting Information). Likewise, the biological
reproducibility was also examined using two biological preparations
of wild-type cells. Although the %CV between biological replicates
can reach up to 35% for some proteins, most proteins showed consistent
biological reproducibility (Tables S3 and S4, Supporting Information). Because ribosomes are highly dynamic
complexes within a cell, the composition of the ribosomes varies depending
on its functional state, which could explain some of the biological
heterogeneity detected here.
Conclusions
Overall, the improvements
of the LC–MSE method
using ion mobility separation and multiple endoproteinase digestion
allow accurate and reproducible quantification of r-proteins in ribosomes.
A uniform distribution of r-proteins was observed in actively synthesizing
ribosomes, in agreement with the known stoichiometry of these proteins
within the complex. Although most of the polysomal r-proteins are
reproducibly quantified by the improved LC–MSE,
several proteins (S21, L34, L35, and L36) are still not quantifiable
by this technique, even using ion mobility separation and multiple
endoproteinase digestion. This technique is limited to proteins that
generate enough peptides for detection and quantification. Too small
proteins do not generate many peptides, even using multiple proteases
and therefore cannot be quantified.Although not specifically
investigated here, the use of multiple
proteases to increase protein sequence coverage should also improve
quantification methods based on spectral counting. Label-free approaches
based on spectral counts and ion abundance have been shown to correlate
with protein abundance.[27] For example,
spectral counting can be used to establish a normalized spectral abundance
factor (NSAF)[28] that can then enable quantitative
analysis of multicomponent protein complexes.[28,29] As the NSAF depends on peptide coverage, one could envision improvements
in r-protein quantification throughout the entire molecular weight
range by that and other related approaches, which would not necessarily
require additional ion mobility separation of the multiple protease
digestion mixture.The presence of post-translational modifications
in r-proteins
might affect the resulting stoichiometry of the proteins. This is
true when dealing with in vivo ribosome assembly complexes wherein
some r-proteins are not fully modified yet during the course of ribosome
biogenesis and assembly.[30] For mature ribosomes,
however, r-proteins are fully modified and the errors and variability
due to PTMs are less or negligible. Some proteins might be lost during
purification of these complexes as well and could affect quantification
of the proteins. The improved LC–MSE approach described
here can be used to characterize in vivo ribosome assembly complexes
captured during ribosome biogenesis and assembly under different perturbations
(e.g., antibiotics, deletion mutants of assembly factors, oxidative
stress, nutrient deprivation). Quantitative analysis of these captured
complexes will provide information relating to the interplay and dynamics
of how these perturbations interfere with ribosome assembly.
Authors: B T Wimberly; D E Brodersen; W M Clemons; R J Morgan-Warren; A P Carter; C Vonrhein; T Hartsch; V Ramakrishnan Journal: Nature Date: 2000-09-21 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: William M Old; Karen Meyer-Arendt; Lauren Aveline-Wolf; Kevin G Pierce; Alex Mendoza; Joel R Sevinsky; Katheryn A Resing; Natalie G Ahn Journal: Mol Cell Proteomics Date: 2005-06-23 Impact factor: 5.911
Authors: Emma L Harry; Daniel J Weston; Anthony W T Bristow; Ian D Wilson; Colin S Creaser Journal: J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci Date: 2008-05-08 Impact factor: 3.205
Authors: Scott J Geromanos; Chris Hughes; Dan Golick; Steven Ciavarini; Marc V Gorenstein; Keith Richardson; John B Hoyes; Johannes P C Vissers; James I Langridge Journal: Proteomics Date: 2011-02-07 Impact factor: 3.984
Authors: Andrew C Paoletti; Tari J Parmely; Chieri Tomomori-Sato; Shigeo Sato; Dongxiao Zhu; Ronald C Conaway; Joan Weliky Conaway; Laurence Florens; Michael P Washburn Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-11-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jason M Held; Birgit Schilling; Alexandria K D'Souza; Tara Srinivasan; Jessica B Behring; Dylan J Sorensen; Christopher C Benz; Bradford W Gibson Journal: Int J Proteomics Date: 2013-04-04
Authors: Indra Mani Sharma; Mollie C Rappé; Balasubrahmanyam Addepalli; Wade W Grabow; Zhuoyun Zhuang; Sanjaya C Abeysirigunawardena; Patrick A Limbach; Luc Jaeger; Sarah A Woodson Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 16.971