Literature DB >> 26864288

Label-free proteomic analysis of the hydrophobic membrane protein complement in articular chondrocytes: a technique for identification of membrane biomarkers.

Csaba Matta1,2, Xiaofei Zhang3, Susan Liddell3, Julia R Smith4, Ali Mobasheri1,5,6.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: There is insufficient knowledge about the chondrocyte membranome and its molecular composition.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a Triton X-114 based separation technique using nanoLC-MS/MS combined with shotgun proteomics to identify chondrocyte membrane proteins.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Articular chondrocytes from equine metacarpophalangeal joints were separated into hydrophobic and hydrophilic fractions; trypsin-digested proteins were analysed by nanoLC-MS/MS.
RESULTS: A total of 315 proteins were identified. The phase extraction method yielded a high proportion of membrane proteins (56%) including CD276, S100-A6 and three VDAC isoforms. DISCUSSION: Defining the chondrocyte membranome is likely to reveal new biomarker targets for conventional and biological drug discovery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Articular cartilage; Triton X-114; chondrocyte; equine; mass spectrometry; membrane protein extraction; membranome; proteomics

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26864288      PMCID: PMC4819840          DOI: 10.3109/1354750X.2015.1130191

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biomarkers        ISSN: 1354-750X            Impact factor:   2.658


Introduction

Proteins that are embedded in or associated with biological membranes play critically important roles in a wide range of vital cellular functions including transport, cell–cell communication and signalling processes. As the plasma membrane (PM) acts as the first barrier to the extracellular environment, PM proteins enable cells to sense and respond to external stimuli in a specific manner – they include receptors; cell recognition, cell–cell or cell–matrix adhesion sites; enzymes; as well as channels, pores and transporters for ions, small molecules and nutrients (Cordwell & Thingholm, 2010). Based on domain predictions by different methods, membrane proteins comprise approx. 15–30% of the human proteome (Almen et al., 2009; Kabbani, 2008), highlighting the fundamental importance of membrane-associated physiological processes. PM proteins are also the primary targets of many of the drugs that are currently in our pharmaceutical arsenal; indeed, the majority (over 70%) of currently marketed drugs act on PM proteins (Almen et al., 2009; Rabilloud, 2003). The qualitative and quantitative composition of the PM proteome is known to be significantly altered during cellular differentiation and disease. Membrane proteins have the potential to be selective and sensitive biomarkers for disease progression and prognosis. Furthermore, membrane proteins that exhibit altered expression in disease states could be suitable candidates for the development of sensitive receptor-targeted imaging agents for non-invasive monitoring of biological and inflammatory processes (Dissoki et al., 2015; Samkoe et al., 2014; Sega & Low, 2008). Therefore, there is a critical need for the development of tools and technologies for identification and characterisation of membrane proteins to complement physiological methods for elucidating their functions. This combined approach will promote the discovery of new and better drugs, and the development of novel treatment strategies of diseases. Integral membrane proteins have an amphiphilic structure; apart from hydrophilic domains located on the external cytosolic or organellar surfaces, they also contain hydrophobic (membrane-spanning) regions that directly interact with the lipid bilayer of the membranes in which they are embedded. High-resolution and high-throughput proteomic techniques have been widely applied to study the PM proteome of various cell types [for a review please see Cordwell & Thingholm (2010)]. However, there are serious (mainly technical) limitations that currently hinder advances in this field. In addition to their very low relative abundance, their amphiphilic nature and poor solubility makes membrane proteins challenging to purify, identify and characterise on a proteomic scale. The use of non-ionic detergents (e.g. the Triton X series in which the number of hydrophilic oxyethylene units attached to the hydrophobic octylphenyl residue determines the specific physicochemical properties) has enabled the solubilisation and characterisation of these proteins. Their use is based on the principle that water-soluble proteins, unlike amphiphilic membrane proteins, show little or no interaction with these compounds; consequently, only integral membrane proteins form mixed micelles with non-ionic detergents (Bordier, 1981). The cloud point, the temperature at which phase separation occurs between the detergent and the aqueous phase, is at approximately 20 °C for Triton X-114, which makes its application particularly convenient in studies aimed at analysing integral membrane proteins (Bordier, 1981; English et al., 2012; Mathias et al., 2011). In addition to the application of non-ionic detergents, a number of other approaches have been developed over the past decades for the selective enrichment of membrane proteins including precipitation and gradient centrifugation, biotinylation and affinity enrichment or the application of glycoproteomics [reviewed in Cordwell & Thingholm (2010)]. The main technical challenge remaining in the analysis of integral membrane subproteomes, however, is the ability to obtain high purity membrane protein samples without the presence of high abundance contaminating proteins from the cytoplasm or other intracellular organelles. Comprehensive analyses of the membrane protein complement (also known as the membranome) of distinct cell types are relatively scarce; this can at least partially be attributed to the challenges and limitations described above. It is particularly true for chondrocytes, the single cell type in articular cartilage that serves as a specialised load-bearing tissue with unique tribological properties such as a low-friction gliding surface and peculiar rheology in synovial joints. The extracellular matrix (ECM) of hyaline cartilage, in which chondrocytes are embedded, primarily consists of a meshwork of type II collagen fibres and other minor collagens (types VI, IX and XI); large aggregating proteoglycans (e.g. aggrecan) and their constituent glycosaminoglycans (GAGs); as well as high quantities of osmotically bound water (approx. 70% of the net weight of ECM) and counteracting cations attracted by the net negative charge of GAGs (Archer & Francis-West, 2003). Because of its avascular nature and the inability of mature chondrocytes to divide in situ, once damaged, articular cartilage seldom regenerates on its own. Therefore, lesions due to either osteoarthritis (OA) or traumatic injuries are associated with progressive degeneration of articular cartilage, pain and disability. OA is still an unresolved clinical problem, and developing novel therapies or drug targets poses a major challenge (Mobasheri, 2013). In order to identify proteins involved in pathological processes affecting the structure and function of articular cartilage such as OA, it is first necessary to characterise the normal protein complement of chondrocytes in healthy tissues. For proteomic studies, cartilage is very challenging as the chondrocyte, its sole cell type, forms only 1–2% of the volume of the tissue (Lambrecht et al., 2010). Although the proteome of healthy (Lambrecht et al., 2010; Ruiz-Romero et al., 2005) and OA-affected chondrocytes (Lambrecht et al., 2008; Ruiz-Romero et al., 2008; Tsolis et al., 2015), as well as the secretory profile (secretome) of a cartilage tissue explant model of OA (Williams et al., 2013) has been published, the “hidden” proteome, i.e. low-abundance membrane proteins or other poorly soluble proteins may have remained undiscovered in those studies. Here, we report a technique for profiling integral membrane proteins in primary equine articular chondrocytes using an optimised Triton X-114 phase partitioning technique and LC-MS/MS analysis for protein identification. To the best of our knowledge, this work represents the first and most comprehensive analysis of the integral membrane subproteome in chondrocytes reported. This technique allowed us to establish CD276, S100-A6 (calcyclin) and three VDAC isoforms as key components of the chondrocyte membranome.

Materials and methods

Isolation and culture of primary equine articular chondrocytes

Articular chondrocytes were isolated from equine articular cartilage. The animal used in this study was euthanized in a UK-based abattoir for research-unrelated purposes, and stunned before slaughter in accordance with Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995. Ethical approval for the use of abattoir-derived animal tissues was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the School of Veterinary Science and Medicine, University of Nottingham, with input from members of the University of Nottingham Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Body (AWERB). After opening the metacarpophalangeal joint cavity under aseptic conditions and rinsing the articular cartilage surface with sterile physiological saline, articular cartilage shavings were taken from the distal end of the metacarpal bone using a sterile surgical blade and placed in serum-free DMEM (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Waltham, MA) supplemented with 4% Penicillin/Streptomycin solution (P/S, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) pre-warmed to 37 °C as described previously (Williams et al., 2013). The shavings (∼100 μm thick, ∼5 mm in diameter) were taken from the superficial part of macroscopically normal cartilage areas without any visible signs of degeneration, including discolouration, fibrillation and surface irregularities, to avoid the deep (calcified) layers of articular cartilage or the cartilage–bone interface. The surface of articular cartilage did not receive treatment prior to sampling to preserve the lamina splendens (the uppermost surface layer of articular cartilage) (Dunham et al., 1988). Cartilage shavings were washed three times with sterile PBS containing 10% P/S. Articular chondrocytes were isolated by overnight incubation with 0.1% type II collagenase (from Clostridium histolyticum; Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) dissolved in serum-free DMEM containing 4% P/S solution at 37 °C. Following dissociation of cartilage shavings by trituration the solution was filtered through a 70-μm nylon mesh filter to yield a single cell suspension, and centrifuged at 800 ×g for 5 min at room temperature. After washing twice in serum-free DMEM, cells were resuspended in DMEM containing 10% foetal calf serum (FCS; Invitrogen) and 2% P/S solution, seeded into tissue culture flasks (Nunc; Thermo Fisher Scientific), and cultured in a CO2 incubator at 37 °C. Cells were subcultured when they reached approx. 80% confluency. The media was changed on every second day. Cells from the second passage were used for further experiments. A schematic overview of the experimental design is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Schematic overview of the experimental design used in this study.

Schematic overview of the experimental design used in this study.

Sample preparation, phase partitioning using triton X-114, and methanol/chloroform extraction

Approximately 80% confluent cultures of primary equine articular chondrocytes from passage 2 were washed with PBS, then 2 mL of PBS containing 80 μL of protease inhibitor cocktail (25×, Sigma-Aldrich) was added to the flasks. The flasks were placed on ice, and cells were liberated using a cell scraper (Greiner, Stonehouse, UK). The solution was centrifuged (at 850 ×g for 2 min, room temperature), and the pellet was resuspended in 600 μL of PBS containing 24 μL of 25 × protease inhibitor cocktail. After incubating on ice for 15 min, the suspension was transferred into a glass homogeniser and the cells were lysed. Following the addition of Triton X-114 (Sigma-Aldrich) at a final concentration of 0.75%, the lysate was incubated on ice for 30 min with vortexing every 5 min. After centrifugation (30 min, 10 000 ×g, 4 °C) the supernatant was retained and incubated at 37 °C for 5 min, and then on ice for 15 min. The sample was centrifuged again (30 min, 10 000 ×g, 4 °C) and the supernatant was incubated at 37 °C for 5 min. Following centrifugation for 3 min (1000 ×g, room temperature), two layers appeared. The upper layer (aqueous phase) contained the hydrophilic proteins, the lower layer (detergent phase) contained the hydrophobic proteins. To maximise the recovery of membrane proteins, the upper layer was extracted further by adding Triton X-114 at a final concentration of 0.75% and the phase partitioning procedure was repeated. Finally, the two lower layers were combined together to constitute the hydrophobic fraction, and the upper layer was treated as the hydrophilic fraction. To remove Triton X-114 from the samples, four times the sample volume of methanol (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was added to both fractions. After centrifugation at 15 000 ×g for 10 s at room temperature, two times the original sample volume of chloroform (Sigma-Aldrich) was added. The mixture was centrifuged again, and after adding three times the original sample volume of HPLC grade water, the sample was centrifuged for 5 min (15 000 ×g, room temperature). The proteins accumulated at the interface between the two layers formed during the last centrifugation step. Following removal of the upper layer, three times the sample volume of methanol was added, and after spinning for 5 min (15 000 ×g, 4 °C), the pellet containing the proteins was retained and air-dried.

Quantification of proteins

After methanol/chloroform extraction, the pellets were dissolved in sample resuspension buffer containing 4% SDS (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc., Hercules, CA), 0.2 M Tris pH 7.4 (Bio-Rad) and 0.15 M NaOH (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Protein concentration in the samples was determined using the Bio-Rad DC Protein Assay Kit according to the manufacturer’s protocol (Bio-Rad). The absorbance of the assayed samples at 655 nm was read using a Bio-Rad Benchmark Microplate Reader.

Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS–PAGE)

Loading buffer containing 4 × Laemmli buffer and 3 M dithiothreitol (DTT; Bio-Rad) was added to each sample (typically, 4.8 μL 4 × Laemmli buffer and 1.2 μL 3M DTT was added to 18 μL sample resuspension buffer), and then proteins were fractionated by SDS–PAGE on a 12% polyacrylamide gel. Proteins were initially run at 32 mA constant current, and once the dye front reached the bottom of the stacking gel, the current was increased to 45 mA. Protein bands were visualised by silver staining using a Hoefer Processor Plus automated gel stainer (Amersham, GE Healthcare Life Sciences, UK). The protocol for silver staining was performed as described previously (Yan et al., 2000).

Preparation and trypsin digestion of proteins for LC-MS/MS analysis: in-solution digestion

The protein pellets from the methanol/chloroform extraction step were resuspended in a solution of 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate (AMBIC) (Sigma-Aldrich) and 10 mM DTT (Bio-Rad), and incubated at 37 °C for 30 min, vortexing every 10 min. Following the addition of iodoacetamide (IAA, Bio-Rad) at a final concentration of 55 mM, samples were incubated at 37 °C for 45 min in dark. Then, 1.2 mL of –20 °C acetone was added to each sample, and after mixing, the samples were incubated at 4 °C overnight. Protein precipitates were pelleted by centrifugation at 15 000 ×g for 5 min at 4 °C. Pellets were air-dried for 1 min, and then resuspended in 20 μL of trypsin buffer including 50 mM AMBIC and 10 ng/μL Trypsin Gold (Promega, Madison, WA). Samples were vortexed until the pellets were fully dissolved and then incubated at 37 °C for 16 h. Finally, 1 μL of formic acid (1%) was added to each sample to stop the reaction. Samples were stored at –80 °C until analysis.

LC-MS/MS analysis

Samples were injected into a 15 cm C18 Pepmap column using a Bruker Easy-nanoLC UltiMate® (Bruker, Coventry, UK) 3000 RSLCnano chromatography platform with a flow rate of 300 nL/min to separate peptides. Three microlitres of each sample was injected into the HPLC column. After peptide binding and washing processes on the column, the complex peptide mixture was separated and eluted by a gradient of solution A (100% water + 0.1% formic acid) and solution B (100% ACN + 0.1% formic acid) over 115 min, followed by column washing and re-equilibration. The peptides were delivered to a Bruker amaZon ETD ion trap instrument (Bruker, Coventry, UK). The top five most intense ions from each MS scan were selected for fragmentation. The nanoLC-MS/MS analysis was performed three times on the samples (all triplicates).

Peptide and protein identification, data analysis and bioinformatics

Processed data were compiled into *.MGF files and submitted to the Mascot search engine (version: 2.4.1) and compared to mammalian entries in the SwissProt and NCBInr databases. The data search parameters were as follows: two missed trypsin cleavage sites; peptide tolerance, ±0.3 Da; number of C13 = 1; peptide charge, 1+, 2 + and 3 + ions. Carbamidomethyl cysteine was specified as a fixed modification, and oxidised methionine and deamidated asparagine and glutamine residues were specified as variable modifications. Individual ions Mascot scores above 50 indicated identity or extensive homology. Only protein identifications with probability-based protein family Mascot MOWSE scores above the significant threshold of  >50 (p < 0.05) were accepted. After mass spectrometric identification, 315 proteins were classified manually using the UniProt (http://www.uniprot.org/) database, considering homologous proteins and further literature information. For many proteins, assigning a definitive cellular compartment and/or function was a difficult task because of the limitations in accurate predictions and lack of experimental evidence. Also, many proteins may actually reside in multiple cellular compartments. To assign identified proteins to specific organelles, the references to subcellular localisations in the UniProt database, as well as gene ontology (GO) annotations were used.

Validation of selected membrane proteins by western blotting

Hydrophobic and hydrophilic protein samples were loaded onto Mini-Protean 3 gels. Approximately 20 μg protein per lane was separated by 7.5% SDS–PAGE gel for immunological detection of selected proteins. Proteins were transferred to PVDF membranes (Immun-Blot™ PVDF Membrane, Bio-Rad). After blocking in 5% non-fat dry milk in PBST, membranes were incubated with the anti-Na+, K+-ATPase primary antibody (diluted 1:100) in blocking solution at 4 °C overnight, with gentle rotation. Membranes were then incubated with the secondary antibody (anti-mouse labelled polymer HRP, DakoCytomation, 1:1000 dilution) in blocking solution at room temperature for 1 h. Membranes were developed by enhanced chemiluminescence reaction (Amersham) according to the instructions of the manufacturer and using auto-radiographic films (Hyperfilm, Amersham). Films were scanned on a calibrated densitometer (Bio-Rad GS800) operated by Quantity One version 4.4.1 software (Bio-Rad). Optical density of bands was determined using ImageJ version 1.47 (ImageJ, Bethesda, MD; http://imagej.nih.gov/ij); data were normalised to the value detectable in the hydrophilic fraction.

Results

Triton X-114 phase separation efficiently enriches membrane proteins from primary chondrocyte cultures

To confirm whether the Triton X-114 phase separation method was able to efficiently extract and enrich lipid-soluble membrane proteins from primary articular chondrocytes cultured in vitro, equal amounts of proteins (25 μg) from the hydrophobic and the hydrophilic fractions were loaded onto polyacrylamide gels. Following SDS–PAGE and silver staining, protein bands with clearly different patterns appeared in the gels with several strong bands present in the hydrophobic fraction only (Figure 2A). To validate the effectiveness of the Triton X-114 extraction method, western blot experiments were performed on both fractions to probe for the presence and relative abundance of a membrane-bound Na+, K+-ATPase. As seen in Figure 2B, the band for this protein in the hydrophobic pool was more than 2.6-fold stronger than that in the hydrophilic pool, demonstrating that lipid-soluble proteins were extracted and enriched in the hydrophobic fraction.
Figure 2.

Validation of the efficacy of the Triton X-114 phase separation method. (A) Distribution of protein bands in the hydrophobic (1) and hydrophilic (2) fractions following phase partitioning in total lysates from primary equine articular chondrocyte cultures. After SDS–PAGE, protein bands were visualised using silver staining (M, molecular weight marker). Representative gel image. (B) Western blot experiment performed on both hydrophobic and hydrophilic fractions to probe for the presence and relative abundance of the membrane-bound Na+, K+-ATPase. Numbers below bands represent integrated densities determined by ImageJ freeware. Representative image. (C). The relative distribution of identified proteins following analysis by nanoLC-MS/MS based on their solubility in both hydrophobic and hydrophilic fractions. Numbers outside pie charts represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup.

Validation of the efficacy of the Triton X-114 phase separation method. (A) Distribution of protein bands in the hydrophobic (1) and hydrophilic (2) fractions following phase partitioning in total lysates from primary equine articular chondrocyte cultures. After SDS–PAGE, protein bands were visualised using silver staining (M, molecular weight marker). Representative gel image. (B) Western blot experiment performed on both hydrophobic and hydrophilic fractions to probe for the presence and relative abundance of the membrane-bound Na+, K+-ATPase. Numbers below bands represent integrated densities determined by ImageJ freeware. Representative image. (C). The relative distribution of identified proteins following analysis by nanoLC-MS/MS based on their solubility in both hydrophobic and hydrophilic fractions. Numbers outside pie charts represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup. To investigate the protein content of the two fractions, trypsin-digested protein fractions were analysed by nanoLC-MS/MS using Bruker Easy-nanoLC chromatography and a Bruker amaZon ion trap instrument with shotgun proteomics methodologies. A total of 315 unique proteins were reliably (p < 0.05) identified in this study; 208 proteins were detected in the hydrophobic fraction and 192 proteins in the hydrophilic fraction, with 73 (23%) proteins present in both fractions. According to the subcellular localisation data in the UniProt database entries and gene ontology (GO) annotations, in the hydrophobic pool 115 proteins (55%) were membrane proteins and only the remaining 93 proteins (45%) were non-membrane proteins. In contrast, only 38 proteins (20%) were listed as membrane proteins in the hydrophilic fraction, and the other 154 proteins (80%) were non-membrane proteins (Figure 2C). Based on the distribution of membrane versus non-membrane proteins in the two fractions, using the Triton X-114 phase separation method, we successfully extracted and enriched membrane proteins in lysates of primary articular chondrocytes.

Further analysis of the hydrophobic pool reveals various types of membrane proteins

Proteins identified in the hydrophobic fraction were further analysed according to subcellular localisation based on gene ontology (GO) annotation data in the UniProt database entries (Figure 3). Of the 115 membrane proteins in this pool, PM localisation was indicated for 64 proteins (56%), and the other 51 proteins (44%) were localised in organellar membranes. The PM proteins were further subdivided according to their main functions (Table 1). Eighteen proteins (28%) were transporters or involved in membrane/vesicle traffic; 11 and 10 proteins (17 and 16%) were adhesion molecules and proteins with enzyme functions, respectively; 15 proteins (23%) were receptors, and the remaining 10 PM proteins (16%) could not be assigned to any of the previous groups or their function was unknown.
Figure 3.

Subcellular distribution of the identified membrane proteins in the hydrophobic fraction. PM proteins were further classified according to their main function based on GO annotations. Numbers outside pie charts represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup.

Table 1.

Functional classification of PM proteins in the hydrophobic fraction identified in equine articular chondrocytes based on GO annotations.

#NameAccession No.*Mascot scoreSeq. coverage (%)No. of matched peptides
 Transporters, membrane/vesicle traffic    
1Voltage-dependent anion-selective channel protein 1VDAC138336.78
2Voltage-dependent anion-selective channel protein 2VDAC231325.96
3Voltage-dependent anion-selective channel protein 3VDAC313912.03
4Ras-related protein Rab-5BRAB5B13415.83
5Ras-related protein Rab-5CRAB5C16416.23
6Ras-related protein Rab-8ARAB8A13517.43
7Ras-related protein Rab-8BRAB8B14517.43
8Ras-related protein Rab-9ARAB9A6110.41
9Membrane-associated progesterone receptor component 2PGRC217817.04
10Annexin A1ANXA11259.22
11Dolichyl-diphosphooligosaccharide–protein glycosyltransferase 48 kDa subunitOST48864.62
12Solute carrier family 2, facilitated glucose transporter member 1GTR11186.33
13Solute carrier family 2, facilitated glucose transporter member 3GTR3744.03
14Caveolin-1CAV16911.81
15Monocarboxylate transporter 1MOT1752.41
16PREDICTED: Melanotransferrin (CD228 antigen)MFI2644.52
17PREDICTED: Equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 isoform X1SCL29A1675.52
18PREDICTED: Synaptosomal-associated protein 23SNAP235711.41
 Adhesion molecules    
1Integrin alpha-5 (CD49e antigen, Fibronectin receptor alpha subunit; fragment)ITA5976.52
2Integrin alpha-V (CD51 antigen, Vitronectin receptor alpha subunit)ITAV843.23
3Integrin beta-1 (CD29 antigen, Fibronectin receptor beta subunit)ITB175322.416
4Thrombospondin-1TSP14359.79
5RA175 (Cell adhesion molecule 1)CADM1585.51
6CD151 antigen (Tetraspanin-24)CD151795.92
7CD166 antigen (ALCAM, Fragment)CD1661258.43
8CD107 antigen (Lysosome-associated membrane glycoprotein)LAMP2532.02
9PREDICTED: CD9 antigen (tetraspanin-29)CD98810.42
10PREDICTED: integrin alpha-3 isoform 2 (CD49c antigen)ITA3601.21
11PREDICTED: integrin beta-3 (CD61 antigen)ITB3570.81
 Receptors    
1Protein S100-A6 (Calcyclin)S10A627753.34
2CD44 antigen (Hyaluronan receptor)CD4426015.35
3CD63 antigen (Tetraspanin-30)CD63552.51
4CD81 antigen (Tetraspanin-28)CD81548.51
5Cofilin-1COF123439.85
6Myristoylated alanine-rich C-kinase substrateMARCS1729.03
7Cell division control protein 42 homologueCDC421546.53
8CD71 antigen (Transferrin receptor protein 1)TFR1641.71
9PREDICTED: Thy-1 membrane glycoprotein (CD90 antigen)THY115221.13
10Basigin (CD147 antigen) precursorBSG10013.73
11PREDICTED: disintegrin and metalloproteinase domain-containing protein 9 isoform 1ADAM9831.71
12P48 (Cytokine receptor-like factor 3)CRLF3806.82
13Membrane steroid binding proteingi|768936519129.24
14Mannose receptor, C type 2MRC2690.91
15LactadherinMFGM662.71
 Enzymes    
1Protein disulfide-isomerasePDIA132011.85
2Alpha-enolaseENOA29524.47
3CD73 antigen (5'-nucleotidase)5NTD16012.05
4Ras-related protein Rap-1bRAP1B14619.03
5Prolyl endopeptidase FAPSEPR1305.33
6Transforming protein RhoARHOA14624.94
7TRAF2 and NCK-interacting protein kinaseTNIK610.61
8Thioredoxin-related transmembrane protein 1TMX1674.31
9Rho GTPase-activating protein 21RHG21560.41
10PREDICTED: adipocyte plasma membrane-associated protein isoform X1APMAP623.01
 Miscellaneous    
1Brain acid soluble protein 1BASP122321.14
2Guanine nucleotide-binding protein G(I)/G(S)/G(O) subunit gamma-12GBG129856.93
3Receptor expression-enhancing protein 5REEP58611.62
4CD276 antigenCD2765510.82
5Annexin A5ANXA5543.81
6TuberinTSC2540.41
7PREDICTED: Tetraspanin-6 isoform X1TSPAN61057.82
8PREDICTED: Matrix-remodeling-associated protein 7MXRA77920.31
9PREDICTED: Protein lifeguard 3TMBIM1774.51
10PREDICTED: Proteolipid protein 2PLP27218.42

*UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown.

Subcellular distribution of the identified membrane proteins in the hydrophobic fraction. PM proteins were further classified according to their main function based on GO annotations. Numbers outside pie charts represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup. *UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown. The membrane proteins with other organellar distributions were also subdivided according to their subcellular localisations (Table 2). The majority (23 proteins; 45%) were localised in the membrane of the Golgi complex or the endoplasmic reticulum; 13 proteins (25%) were localised to exosome/lysosome/endosome/other vesicular membranes; another big portion (11 proteins; 22%) were mitochondrial membrane proteins; two proteins (4%) were nuclear membrane proteins; and the remaining two proteins (4%) were ambiguous in terms of specific subcellular localisation.
Table 2.

Subcellular distribution of membrane proteins in the hydrophobic pool identified in equine articular chondrocytes based on GO annotations.

#NameAccession No.*Mascot scoreSeq. coverage (%)No. of matched peptides
 Exosome/lysosome/endosome/vesicle membrane    
1Ras-related protein Rab-7aRAB7A53860.910
2Vesicle-associated membrane protein 3VAMP323938.53
3Ras-related protein Rab-10RAB1016422.54
414-3-3 protein theta1433T20122.05
5Cation-dependent mannose-6-phosphate receptorMPRD15013.33
6Syntaxin-7STX714419.95
7Ras-related protein Rab-11BRB11B17614.23
8Ras-related protein Rab-14RAB1412815.33
9Vesicle-associated membrane protein 5VAMP55411.21
10Lysosome membrane protein 2SCRB21152.71
11Charged multivesicular body protein 6CHMP6516.51
12PRA1 family protein 2PRAF28916.32
13PREDICTED: glucosylceramidase isoform X2GLCM884.92
 Golgi/ER membrane    
1Ras-related protein Rab-1ARAB1A30135.66
2Ras-related protein Rab-1BRAB1B26625.95
3Ras-related protein Rab-2ARAB2A21324.54
4Transmembrane emp24 domain-containing protein 2 (Fragment)TMED28310.72
5Transmembrane emp24 domain-containing protein 5TMED5575.31
6Transmembrane emp24 domain-containing protein 9TMED911614.93
7Transmembrane emp24 domain-containing protein 10TMEDA22822.45
8Membrane-associated progesterone receptor component 1PGRC114911.82
9Membrane-associated progesterone receptor component 2PGRC217817.04
10Transmembrane emp24 domain-containing protein 4TMED412012.32
1178 kDa glucose-regulated proteinGRP781555.53
12Translocon-associated protein subunit deltaSSRD11017.32
13Surfeit locus protein 4SURF4938.22
14Vesicular integral-membrane protein VIP36LMAN2583.41
15CalnexinCALX782.21
16B-cell receptor-associated protein 31BAP31858.12
17Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 5A-1IF5A15310.42
18Vesicle-associated membrane protein-associated protein AVAPA834.81
19Vesicle-trafficking protein SEC22bSC22B535.61
20PREDICTED: PRA1 family protein 3PRAF38916.03
21lanosterol 14-alpha demethylaseCP51A722.41
22PREDICTED: golgin subfamily B member 1GOGA1690.41
23PREDICTED: NADH-cytochrome b5 reductase 3-like isoform 1gi|338721361624.71
 Mitochondrial membrane    
1Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 5A, mitochondrialCOX5A19730.94
2ATP synthase subunit beta, mitochondrialATPB23516.77
3ATP synthase subunit alpha, mitochondrialATPA1446.33
4ATP synthase subunit delta, mitochondrialATPD908.31
5Apoptosis regulator BAXBAX705.71
6Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 4 isoform 1, mitochondrial (Fragment)COX415910.31
7Carbamoyl-phosphate synthase [ammonia], mitochondrialCPSM651.21
8prohibitin-2PHB2634.01
9Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 5B, mitochondrialCOX5B613.32
10cytochrome oxidase subunit 2COX2743.11
11PREDICTED: mitochondrial fission 1 protein-likegi|5581667475810.51
 Nuclear membrane    
1PREDICTED: nesprin-1SYNE1730.11
2PREDICTED: transmembrane protein 109 isoform X1TMEM109604.91
 Miscellaneous    
1Peptidyl-prolyl cis–trans isomerase APPIA24143.35
2PREDICTED: cell cycle progression protein 1 isoform X1CCPG1651.62

*UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown.

*UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown. The majority of the non-membrane proteins in the hydrophobic pool were cytoplasmic/cytoskeletal proteins (46 proteins; 50%) and secreted (extracellular) proteins (19 entries; 20%). Other subcellular localisations included the lysosome/endosome (4 proteins; 4%), the mitochondrion (1 protein; 1%), the Golgi complex or the endoplasmic reticulum lumen (8 proteins; 9%), the nucleus (10 proteins; 11%), and the remaining five proteins were either contaminants or their subcellular localisation was ambiguous (5%; Figure 4 and Table 3).
Figure 4.

Subcellular localisation of the identified non-membrane proteins in the hydrophobic fraction based on GO annotations. Numbers outside pie chart represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup.

Table 3.

Subcellular distribution of non-membrane proteins in the hydrophobic pool identified in equine articular chondrocytes based on GO annotations.

#NameAccession No.*Mascot scoreSeq. coverage (%)No. of matched peptides
 Secreted (extracellular)/exosome    
1Alpha-2-macroglobulinA2MG91415.819
2Transgelin-2TAGL242647.79
3Apolipoprotein DAPOD18824.36
4Alpha-1-antiproteinase (Serpin A1, antitrypsin)A1AT2209.45
5Guanine nucleotide-binding protein G(I)/G(S)/G(T) subunit beta-1GBB1906.22
6Annexin A2ANXA2837.72
7Guanine nucleotide-binding protein subunit beta-4GBB41199.73
8Galectin-1LEG111916.32
9Pancreatic trypsin inhibitorBPT15213.01
10TransthyretinTTHY9519.02
11SPARCSPRC19025.35
12Alpha-S1-caseinCASA17210.32
13Triosephosphate isomeraseTPIS21421.34
14HemopexinHEMO553.52
15Apolipoprotein EAPOE546.52
16Hypothetical protein PANDA_010395 (lipocalin)gi|2813391601525.91
17PREDICTED: cell growth regulator with EF hand domain protein 1 isoformX1gi|14972769011114.13
18Complement component C4CO46311.61
19PREDICTED: ovostatin-likegi|344278152571.11
 Cytoplasm/cytoskeleton    
1Actin, cytoplasmic 1ACTB61041.114
2Tropomyosin alpha-4 chainTPM453832.710
3Myosin light polypeptide 6MYL633752.38
460S acidic ribosomal protein P2RLA233460.05
5Tropomyosin alpha-1 chainTPM133921.57
6Tropomyosin beta chainTPM231918.06
7Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseG3P27115.94
8Tropomyosin alpha-3 chainTPM329821.46
9Tubulin alpha-1B chainTBA1B38119.17
10TransgelinTAGL13616.43
11L-lactate dehydrogenase A chainLDHA21713.34
12Pyruvate kinase PKMKPYM18612.65
13Tubulin alpha-1A chainTBA1A16812.24
14Heat shock protein beta-1 (hsp25, hsp27)HSPB120922.55
15Peroxiredoxin-1PRDX121727.16
1614-3-3 protein zeta/delta1433Z7419.23
17Tubulin beta-5 chainTBB51229.93
18Profilin-1PROF111224.34
19Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase AALDOA17813.73
20Hsc70-interacting proteinF10A1636.82
2114-3-3 protein epsilon1433E5711.42
22Phosphoglycerate kinase 1PGK1836.72
23Myosin-9MYH91000.61
24Far upstream element-binding protein 2FUBP21034.63
25CaldesmonCALD1823.92
2614-3-3 protein beta/alpha1433B8111.82
27Guanine nucleotide-binding protein G(i) subunit alpha-2GNAI2777.92
2860S acidic ribosomal protein P1RLA16414.01
2940S ribosomal protein S12RS126319.72
30Nuclease-sensitive element-binding protein 1YBOX1614.61
31CalmodulinCALM5922.12
32Elongation factor 1-alpha 1EF1A1565.02
33Heat shock cognate 71 kDa proteinHSP7C1346.33
34Metallothionein-1AMT1A5219.71
35Protein S100-A1S10A15016.01
36PREDICTED: protein S100-A11gi|14975146816027.03
37A-kinase anchor protein 9AKAP9820.31
38PREDICTED: plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 RNA-binding protein isoform 1gi|345800374814.11
39PREDICTED: peroxiredoxin-6gi|1497078878017.93
40hsp70A1gi|193983792.72
4140S ribosomal protein S28RPS287930.42
42PREDICTED: phosphatidylethanolamine-binding protein 1gi|1497205637418.73
43G-protein beta subunitgi|511167217.12
44phosphoglycerate mutasegi|189868599.52
45StathminSTMN15915.12
46Tropomyosin 3, gamma isoform 19-like proteingi|52876692826818.67
 Lysosome/melanosome/endosome    
1Cathepsin DCATD21815.67
2ProsaposinSAP1846.54
3Cathepsin KCATK565.22
4CLN2 protein (tripeptidyl peptidase 1)TPP1641.81
 Mitochondrion    
1PREDICTED: Diablo homologue, mitochondrial-likegi|345323079694.11
 Golgi/ER lumen    
1Reticulocalbin-3RCN325212.23
2Glucosidase 2 subunit betaGLU2B1294.32
3Endoplasmin (hsp90beta1)ENPL1232.52
4Glucosidase 2 subunit betaGLU2B1005.82
5CalumeninCALU7310.22
6Serpin H1SERPH733.61
7CalreticulinCALR653.11
8Endoplasmic reticulum resident protein 29ERP29518.42
 Nucleus    
1Far upstream element-binding protein 1FUBP123714.47
2Prothymosin alphaPTMA19821.84
3Neuroblast differentiation-associated protein AHNAKAHNK1660.84
4ThioredoxinTHIO1302.12
5Coiled-coil domain-containing protein 57CCD57670.81
6Small ubiquitin-related modifier 2SUMO25412.61
7PREDICTED: zinc finger protein 764-likegi|558191623662.71
8PREDICTED: Fanconi anaemia group C proteingi|348565316561.61
9PREDICTED: poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase 6 isoformX1gi|5452166572064.92
10Bromodomain adjacent to zinc finger domain protein 2ABAZ2A1982.75
 Contaminants    
1Keratin, type II cytoskeletal 1K2C159221.412
2Serum albuminALBU1957.74
3TrypsinTRYP757.82
 Miscellaneous    
1PREDICTED: leptin receptor gene-related protein-like isoform X1gi|5452180457911.51
2Chain C, Ternary Complex Of A Calcineurin A Fragment, Calcineurin B, Fkbp12 And The Immunosuppressant Drug Fk506 (tacrolimus)gi|19423356512.11

*UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown.

Subcellular localisation of the identified non-membrane proteins in the hydrophobic fraction based on GO annotations. Numbers outside pie chart represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup. *UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown.

The hydrophilic pool contains proteins with different solubility and subcellular distribution

The Triton X-114 phase separation technique effectively extracted and enriched lipid-soluble membrane proteins in the hydrophobic phase, and left comparably few membrane proteins (only 20%) in the hydrophilic fraction (Figure 2C). As in the case of the hydrophobic fraction, the majority of the 38 lipid-soluble membrane proteins were localised in the PM (25 proteins; 66%), whilst the others were localised in various organellar membranes (Golgi complex/endoplasmic reticulum membrane, 16%; mitochondrial membrane, 8%; nuclear membrane, 2%; Figure 5 and Table 4).
Figure 5.

Subcellular localisation of the identified membrane and non-membrane proteins in the hydrophilic fraction based on GO annotations. Numbers outside pie charts represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup.

Table 4.

Functional classification of PM proteins and other membrane proteins in the hydrophilic pool identified in equine articular chondrocytes based on GO annotations.

#NameAccession No.*Mascot scoreSeq. coverage (%)No. of matched peptidesFunction of PM protein
 Plasma membrane/surface proteins     
1Thrombospondin-1TSP181114.314Adhesion
2Protein disulfide-isomerasePDIA161428.113Enzyme
3Alpha-enolaseENOA55732.511Enzyme
4Annexin A1ANXA146839.910Transporter
5Cofilin-1COF130638.65Receptor
6MoesinMOES30315.18Adhesion
7Annexin A5ANXA525819.16Other (receptor)
8Integrin beta-1 (CD29 antigen, Fibronectin receptor beta subunit)ITB11606.34Adhesion
9Protein disulfide-isomerase A6PDIA614714.14Enzyme
10Protein disulfide-isomerase A4PDIA41091.91Enzyme
11Prolow-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1LRP1760.52Receptor
12Annexin A4ANXA4585.62Other (receptor)
1340S ribosomal protein SA (Laminin receptor)RSSA574.41Receptor
14Procollagen-lysine,2-oxoglutarate 5-dioxygenase 2PLOD2531.91Enzyme
15Myristoylated alanine-rich C-kinase substrateMARCS524.51Other
16Cytoskeleton-associated protein 4CKAP4995.03Receptor
17Guanine nucleotide-binding protein subunit beta-2-like 1GBLP667.32Other
18Brain acid soluble protein 1BASP1525.71Other
19Talin-1TLN14183.18Other (receptor)
20PREDICTED: annexin A8 isoform X1gi|14969068812712.83Other
21PREDICTED: alpha-2-macroglobulin receptor-associated proteingi|5452135091167.32Other
22PREDICTED: chloride intracellular channel protein 1gi|1497323446812.42Transporter
23PREDICTED: ADP/ATP translocase 2-likegi|558210559642.71Transporter
24PREDICTED: utrophingi|507925858570.41Other
25Vacuolar protein sorting-associated protein 35VPS35651.61Transporter
 Exosome/lysosome/endosome/vesicle membrane     
 Golgi/ER membrane     
178 kDa glucose-regulated proteinGRP7873430.015 
2Peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase APPIA26843.37 
3Peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase BPPIB17421.34 
414-3-3 protein theta1433T12213.93 
5CalnexinCALX492.21 
6PREDICTED: golgin subfamily B member 1 isoform 1gi|466052157620.31 
 Mitochondrial membrane     
1ATP synthase subunit beta, mitochondrialATPB1204.52 
2ATP synthase subunit alpha, mitochondrialATPA896.12 
3ATP synthase subunit delta, mitochondrialATPD748.31 
 Nuclear membrane     
1Nesprin-1SYNE1570.11 
 Miscellaneous     
1DNA primase small subunitgi|4319140292032.83 
2PREDICTED: calpastatin isoform X5gi|545185308693.42 
3CD209 antigen-like protein CC209C543.41 

*UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown.

Subcellular localisation of the identified membrane and non-membrane proteins in the hydrophilic fraction based on GO annotations. Numbers outside pie charts represent the actual numbers of proteins identified in each subgroup. *UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown. Taken together, we have identified 78 unique PM proteins in equine articular chondrocytes in this work. Among them, 32 proteins possessed receptor/adhesion functions; the most important ones are the cluster of differentiation (CD) proteins and integrins. Furthermore, 21 PM proteins with transporter functions were detected in articular chondrocytes (Tables 1 and 4). The non-membrane protein complement in the hydrophilic fraction comprised 154 proteins, the majority of which (77 proteins; 50%) were cytoplasmic/cytoskeletal proteins. Also in good correlation with the non-membrane protein distribution observed in the hydrophobic samples, the secreted (extracellular) and the nuclear proteins were the second and third largest groups in this fraction (23 proteins, 15%; and 22 proteins, 14%, respectively). Other subcellular localisations included the lysosome/endosome (5 proteins; 3%), the mitochondrion (6 proteins; 4%), the Golgi complex or the endoplasmic reticulum lumen (13 proteins; 9%), and the remaining eight proteins were either contaminants or their subcellular localisation was not determined (5%; Figure 5 and Table 5).
Table 5.

Functional classification of non-membrane proteins in the hydrophilic pool identified in equine articular chondrocytes based on GO annotations.

#NameAccession No.*Mascot scoreSeq. coverage (%)No. of matched peptides
 Secreted (extracellular), exosome    
1Alpha-2-macroglobulinA2MG209837.045
2Transgelin-2TAGL247544.27
3Annexin A2ANXA239727.78
4Triosephosphate isomeraseTPIS33730.56
5HemopexinHEMO27017.97
6SerotransferrinTRFE26813.17
7Alpha-1-antiproteinaseA1AT25410.35
8Collagen alpha-1(I) chainCO1A11411.82
9Myosin regulatory light chain RLC-AMRLCA12722.73
10Galectin-1LEG110922.23
11TransthyretinTTHY9119.02
12Macrophage migration inhibitory factorMIF8617.42
13Complement C4 (Fragments)CO4633.62
14Alpha-1-inhibitor 3A1I3590.81
15Pancreatic trypsin inhibitorBPT15113.01
16Connective tissue growth factorCTGF982.91
17SH3 domain-binding glutamic acid-rich-like proteinSH3L1627.91
18Collagen alpha-5(VI) chainCO6A5580.21
19Thrombospondin-2TSP2501.01
20PREDICTED: heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha-like, partialgi|507695623993.82
21PREDICTED: glia-derived nexin (Serpin E2)gi|344268474603.01
22AM2 receptorgi|49942600.42
23Semaphorin-3G precursorgi|9910362571.31
 Cytoplasm/cytoskeleton    
1Tropomyosin alpha-4 chainTPM490247.615
2Tropomyosin beta chainTPM272231.712
3Tropomyosin alpha-3 chainTPM363934.710
4Actin, cytoplasmic 1ACTB61643.513
5Tropomyosin alpha-1 chainTPM158432.411
6Phosphoglycerate kinase 1PGK155542.713
7L-lactate dehydrogenase A chainLDHA49222.66
8Heat shock cognate 71 kDa proteinHSP7C48617.710
9Pyruvate kinase PKMKPYM46323.710
1014-3-3 protein epsilon1433E43337.69
11Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase AALDOA42327.79
12Filamin-A OS = Homo sapiensFLNA4064.38
13Tubulin alpha-1B chainTBA1B35820.27
14TransgelinTAGL35741.38
15Myosin-9MYH93517.29
16Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenaseG3P33522.86
1714-3-3 protein zeta/delta1433Z31924.15
18Tubulin beta-5 chainTBB531020.77
19Phosphoglycerate mutase 1PGAM127127.25
20Myosin light polypeptide 6MYL624952.37
21Protein SETSET22518.34
22Elongation factor 1-alpha 1EF1A122211.36
23Nuclease-sensitive element-binding protein 1YBOX121114.83
24Glutathione S-transferase PGSTP120220.03
25Phosphatidylethanolamine-binding protein 1PEBP119626.23
26Peroxiredoxin-1PRDX119528.15
27Profilin-1PROF119540.76
28Alpha-actinin-4ACTN41936.05
29L-lactate dehydrogenase B chainLDHB1889.93
30CaldesmonCALD11825.75
3114-3-3 protein beta/alpha1433B17418.34
32StathminSTMN115937.65
33LIM and SH3 domain protein 1LASP115313.73
34Elongation factor 2EF21474.74
35L-lactate dehydrogenase C chainLDHC1447.23
36Heat shock 70 kDa protein 1AHS71A1385.33
37Heat shock protein HSP 90-betaHS90B1284.73
3814-3-3 protein gamma1433G1126.12
39Ferritin light chainFRIL10916.02
40VinculinVINC1072.52
41Heat shock protein HSP 90-alphaHS90A1004.93
42CalmodulinCALM9733.64
43Centromere protein FCENPF960.21
44Nascent polypeptide-associated complex subunit alpha, muscle-specific formNACAM950.71
45UbiquitinUBIQ9232.92
46Peroxiredoxin-4PRDX49111.83
47Peroxiredoxin-6PRDX68910.32
48TitinTITIN810.02
49Plastin-3PLST774.92
50Nucleoside diphosphate kinase BNDKB6917.12
5140S ribosomal protein S28RS286917.41
52Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4BIF4B632.81
53Hepatoma-derived growth factorHDGF614.21
54Rho GDP-dissociation inhibitor 1GDIR16015.22
55Fuctinin-3 (Fragment)FUC35984.62
56Peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase FKBP1AFKB1A5912.01
57Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4HIF4H555.21
58Metallothionein-1AMT1A5519.71
59Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein QHNRPQ535.62
60Rab GDP dissociation inhibitor alphaGDIA538.52
6160S ribosomal protein L22RL22528.61
6240S ribosomal protein S21RS2110312.01
63Myosin-10MYH10952.33
6440S ribosomal protein S19RS19816.91
65Ran-specific GTPase-activating proteinRANG655.31
66Peroxiredoxin-2PRDX2578.12
67Plastin-2PLSL561.41
68Prostaglandin E synthase 3TEBP508.11
69Transitional endoplasmic reticulum ATPaseTERA501.61
70Tropomyosin 3, gamma isoform 19-like proteingi|52876692863927.212
71Striated-muscle alpha tropomyosingi|20734959034.212
72PREDICTED: protein S100-A11gi|14975146814827.03
73PREDICTED: hsc70-interacting protein isoform X1gi|1497430581137.32
74PREDICTED: ubiquitin-60S ribosomal protein L40 isoform X1gi|5320558078219.52
75PREDICTED: 60S ribosomal protein L19-likegi|532037025634.71
76Ribosomal protein S3, isoform CRA_fgi|148684444575.41
77PREDICTED: dynein heavy chain 9, axonemalgi|403275402620.11
 Lysosome/melanosome/endosome    
1Myosin-11MYH111662.94
2Cathepsin KCATK10511.53
3Cathepsin DCATD916.82
4ProsaposinSAP814.62
5PREDICTED: cathepsin B isoform X1gi|149698064969.42
 Mitochondrion    
160 kDa heat shock protein, mitochondrialCH6016714.05
2Malate dehydrogenase, mitochondrialMDHM14514.84
310 kDa heat shock protein, mitochondrialCH108729.43
4Arginase-2, mitochondrialARGI2673.41
5Stress-70 protein, mitochondrial (Fragments)GRP75532.41
6Aspartate aminotransferase, mitochondrialAATM672.81
 Golgi/ER lumen    
1Protein disulfide-isomerase A3PDIA357327.514
2CalumeninCALU37440.09
3Serpin H1SERPH36727.39
4EndoplasminENPL34411.17
5CalreticulinCALR25724.78
6Reticulocalbin-3RCN315412.53
7Glucosidase 2 subunit betaGLU2B1147.93
8Endoplasmic reticulum resident protein 29ERP299211.13
9Prolyl 4-hydroxylase subunit alpha-1P4HA1782.61
10Proteasome-associated protein ECM29 homologueECM29580.31
11Thioredoxin domain-containing protein 5TXND5562.31
12PREDICTED: reticulocalbin-1-likegi|334331754728.22
13PREDICTED: hypoxia up-regulated protein 1gi|514466500622.11
 Nucleus    
1Neuroblast differentiation-associated protein AHNAKAHNK4041.37
2NucleolinNUCL2486.74
3Prothymosin alphaPTMA19822.74
4Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins A2/B1ROA216312.64
5Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein A/BROAA16313.03
6Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein D0HNRPD15712.44
7Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein A1ROA113912.83
8ThioredoxinTHIO13521.02
9Plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 RNA-binding proteinPAIRB1326.62
10High mobility group protein B1HMGB112917.73
11ParathymosinPTMS12022.53
12Acidic leucine-rich nuclear phosphoprotein 32 family member AAN32A11511.62
13Peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase FKBP3FKBP3829.82
14Synaptonemal complex protein 1SYCP1821.01
15RNA-binding protein 3RBM37617.82
16Lupus La protein homologueLA692.71
17NucleophosminNPM654.81
18Thyroid hormone receptor-associated protein 3TR150571.81
19DDB1- and CUL4-associated factor 13DCA13571.81
20DNA-binding proteingi|18191415713.44
21Ran/TC4 Binding Proteingi|431422655.41
22PREDICTED: DDB1- and CUL4-associated factor 13gi|348588727591.81
 Contaminants    
1Keratin, type II cytoskeletal 1K2C138013.88
2Serum albuminALBU1685.83
3TrypsinTRYP513.51
 Miscellaneous    
1Coiled-coil domain-containing protein 18CCD18551.82
2Outer dense fiberfibre protein 2-likeODF2L761.61
3Chain C, Ternary Complex Of A Calcineurin A Fragment, Calcineurin B, Fkbp12 And The Immunosuppressant Drug Fk506 (tacrolimus)gi|19423355912.11
4PREDICTED: 28 kDa heat- and acid-stable phosphoproteingi|1497554235911.01
5PREDICTED: LOW QUALITY PROTEIN: 60S ribosomal protein L29-likegi|513000456605.21

*UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown.

*UniProt IDs are shown where available. In other cases, NCBInr accession numbers are shown.

Discussion

The application of mass spectrometry (MS) has recently become an important tool in cartilage biology as it offers numerous advantages over more conventional biochemical approaches such as western blotting. To date, a number of proteomic studies have been performed on cartilage tissue and on chondrocytes, confirming that this analytical tool is particularly suitable for high-throughput and large-scale analysis of the protein complement in health and disease [reviewed in Hsueh et al. (2014) and Williams et al. (2011)]. The first proteomic study carried out on normal human knee articular chondrocyte cultures aimed at creating a two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) reference map and generated 93 unique protein identities (Ruiz-Romero et al., 2005). A 1-D SDS–PAGE approach combined with MS/MS resulted in the identification of over 100 different proteins from human knee cartilage supernatants (Garcia et al., 2006). In the first large-scale MS analysis of human articular cartilage, which was designed to extract both extracellular and intracellular proteins from samples depleted of highly abundant ECM proteins such as collagens and aggrecan to allow the detection of less abundant proteins, a total number of 814 distinct proteins were identified (Wu et al., 2007). In a more recent study, the proteome of articular chondrocytes from healthy and OA patients using high resolution label-free MS was analysed, leading to the identification of ∼2400 proteins (Tsolis et al., 2015). Despite these studies and the impressive number of proteins identified, our knowledge about the proteome of cartilage and its resident cell, the chondrocyte, can still be improved. One significant drawback is that at least in some of the studies the identified proteins have not been properly analysed in terms of subcellular locations and/or functions. In addition, the majority of proteins identified in these studies were located in the ECM because of their high abundance relative to cellular proteins in chondrocytes. More specifically, the “hidden” proteome, which comprises low abundance proteins and/or is not accessible by standard methods, is still poorly characterised. In a study that combined extensive pre-fractionation followed by electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry (ESI-MS/MS), 779 unique proteins expressed by cultured chondrocytes were identified, of which 203 were annotated to the membrane (Lambrecht et al., 2010). However, the authors did not carry out a detailed analysis with respect to specific subcellular location and/or function of the identified membrane proteins, making further data interpretation attempts challenging. Therefore, the aim of this study was to extend the current knowledge of the chondrocyte proteome by using the Triton X-114 phase separation technique to discover the membrane subproteome (the membranome). We have chosen to use equine articular chondrocytes in this study, for the horse is widely involved in occupational/sports activities and considered as an excellent animal model for human joint diseases (Aigner et al., 2010) and yet, current knowledge is limited and relates to only the protein complement of equine chondrocytes. The unique features of our study are as follows. First, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first application of LC-MS/MS proteomics to study the membrane protein complement of cultured articular chondrocytes. Second, a large proportion (133 proteins; 42%) of the 315 proteins identified in this work consisted of membrane proteins, and for some of these only ambiguous data were available in chondrocytes [e.g. CD276, S100-A6 (calcyclin), VDACs]. The proportion of membrane proteins was even higher in the hydrophobic phase (55%). As far as the proportion of membrane proteins is concerned, our results are in a good agreement with those reported elsewhere (Hansson et al., 2010). The aim of that study was to characterise the human pancreatic islet membrane proteome by evaluating five different extraction procedures; while the proportion of membrane proteins in the total extracts was 35%, a considerably higher proportion (61%) of membrane proteins was identified following the use of membrane protein-enriching methods. It is also worth noting that the choice of method for extraction of membrane proteins had a strong influence on the number and identity of proteins detected in that analysis, and the hydrophobic phase of Triton X-114 phase separation was found to be the most efficient extraction method (Hansson et al., 2010). These results also underpin that appropriate sample preparation and pre-fractionation methods can increase the amount of identified proteins with specific properties in the MS/MS analysis of proteins in complex biological samples. It was for that reason that we used the Triton X-114 phase separation method in this study. Although a detailed description of the proteins identified in the chondrocyte membranome is beyond the scope of this article, a few important protein classes merit comment due to their potential involvement in chondrocyte homeostasis. We therefore restrict discussing our results to certain protein groups localised in the PM.

CD antigens and integrins

Cluster of differentiation (CD) proteins are four hydrophobic domain-containing cell surface membrane glycoproteins that mediate a range of cellular processes including development, differentiation, activation, growth and motility. Composed of alpha and beta subunits, integrins are integral PM receptors that mediate attachment between a cell and its surroundings. They transduce information from the ECM to the cell and integrin-mediated signalling pathways influence cell shape, mobility, differentiation and the cell cycle. The integrins identified in this study (integrin beta-1 [CD29], integrin alpha-5 [CD49e], integrin alpha-V [CD51], integrin alpha-3 [CD49c] and integrin beta-3 [CD61]) are in a complete agreement with what has been published earlier (Mobasheri et al., 2002a; Shakibaei et al., 2008; Woods et al., 1994). Our data also confirm reports on CD antigen expression in articular chondrocytes (Diaz-Romero et al., 2005). We found that equine articular chondrocytes express tetraspanins (CD9 [tetraspanin-19], CD63 [tetraspanin-30], CD81 [tetraspanin-28] and CD151 [tetraspanin-24]); CD44 (hyaluronan receptor); CD71 (transferrin receptor); CD90 (Thy-1); and CD166 (ALCAM). CD73, an ecto-5′-nucleotidase, which plays a crucial role in extracellular adenosine generation, has been reported to be involved in mechanotransduction pathways following cyclic compressive stimulation (Ode et al., 2013). CD107 (LAMP) expression has been recently reported in murine growth plate cartilage and cartilaginous nodules in embryonic limb bud-derived micromass cultures (Hatakeyama et al., 2014). CD147 (basigin; also known as extracellular matrix metalloproteinase inducer) is known to be extensively expressed by chondrocytes both in normal and OA cartilage (Orazizadeh & Salter, 2008). CD228 (melanotransferrin) has also long been known to facilitate the differentiation of prechondrogenic cells (Suardita et al., 2002). While CD276 has not been identified earlier in chondrocytes, it is known to be expressed in undifferentiated mesenchymal stem cells derived from Wharton’s jelly (WJ-MSCs), even after osteogenic, adipogenic and chondrogenic differentiation (La Rocca et al., 2013).

S100 proteins

Of particular interest is protein S100-A6 (calcyclin) expression in equine articular chondrocytes. The S100 family of proteins consists of 24 members, which show cell-specific expression patterns and are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis, Ca2+ homeostasis, energy metabolism, inflammation and migration/invasion through interactions with a variety of target proteins ranging from enzymes, cytoskeletal subunits, receptors, transcription factors and nucleic acids [reviewed in Donato et al. (2013)]. In particular, S100-A6 may function as a Ca2+ sensor and modulator, contributing to Ca2+ signalling pathways. It is also implicated in cell proliferation and cytoskeletal dynamics, and known to have a potential role in cell responses to different stressors. Calcyclin was reported to be significantly upregulated in serially passaged adipose tissue-derived MSCs (Capra et al., 2012), which may correspond to previous data suggesting that it is frequently upregulated during proliferation and differentiation and it is induced by different growth factors. There are only sporadic data available relating to S100-A6 expression in chondrocytes. Its mRNA transcript has been shown to be downregulated following chondrogenic induction by BMP4 in ATDC5 cells, and it has also been identified in one of the chondrocyte proteome studies discussed earlier (Lambrecht et al., 2010). Other S100 proteins identified in this study include S100-A1 and S100-A11 (Tables 3 and 5). S100-A1 is localised in the cytoplasm where it is associated with cytoskeletal components and mitochondria. It can influence Ca2+  handling in cultured ventricular cardiomyocytes through interaction with the sarcoplasmic reticulum Ca2+-ATPase and RyR2; it also modulates CaV1 channel currents in a PKA-dependent manner. S100-A1 also regulates energy metabolism by stimulating fructose-1,6-biphosphate aldolase and inhibiting phosphoglucomutase and glycogen phosphorylase (Donato et al., 2013). Also localised in the cytoplasm, S100-A11 is reported to modulate cell growth via binding either to nucleolin or Rad54B (Donato et al., 2013). In particular, S100-A11 can activate the p38 MAPK pathway to accelerate chondrocyte hypertrophy and ECM catabolism that may promote OA progression (Cecil & Terkeltaub, 2008). Both S100-A1 and S100-A11 have been reported to be expressed and functional in chondrocytes (Donato et al., 2013; Patti et al., 1999), and both proteins were identified in a previous MS study (Lambrecht et al., 2010).

Transporters

Ion channels and transporters are essential components of chondrocytes that control the movement of ions and other small molecules across the PM. An increasing number of studies have reported the presence of an ever-expanding list of ion channels and transporters in chondrocytes [reviewed in Barrett-Jolley et al. (2010) and Matta et al. (2015)]. Based on GO annotations, 21 proteins with transporter functions were identified in the PM in this study (Tables 1 and 4). Originally described as being localised in the outer mitochondrial membrane (Benz, 1994), voltage-dependent anion-selective channels (VDACs), also known as mitochondrial porins, form the pores that allow the transport of small hydrophilic solutes across the membrane. However, accumulating evidence support that VDACs can also be expressed in the PM (De Pinto et al., 2010), where they exhibit voltage-gated anion channel activity, and its electrophysiological phenotype is that of a maxi-chloride channel (Lewis et al., 2013). Although VDACs have not been unequivocally reported to be expressed and function in chondrocytes, the anion channel identified in some previous studies was the maxi-chloride channel, which is remarkably similar to the maxi-Cl–/VDAC channel (Sugimoto et al., 1996; Tsuga et al., 2002). Although all three VDAC proteins were identified in chondrocytes in our experiments and also by others (Lambrecht et al., 2010), further studies will need to functionally investigate the physiological and pathophysiological roles of these transporters in the chondrocyte PM. The chloride intracellular channel (CLIC) proteins possess pH-dependent chloride ion channel activity. CLIC1 and CLIC4, in addition to other members of the CLIC family, are often referred to as “p64-related” proteins, and while they may localise to intracellular compartments (e.g. the nucleus), they also appear to be in the PM and could serve a role in secretion (Lewis et al., 2013). Once again, although the CLIC1 protein was identified in chondrocytes in this study and by others (Lambrecht et al., 2010), its presence and function has not been unambiguously demonstrated earlier. In addition to anion channels, glucose transporter (GLUT) proteins (facilitative glucose transporter 1 and 3; GLUT 1 and GLUT3) were also identified in our study. Glucose is a key metabolite and a structural precursor for articular cartilage and its transport has significant consequences for cartilage development and functional integrity. Our results are in a good agreement with previously published data (Mobasheri et al., 2002b), confirming here by proteomic techniques the expression of these two GLUT isoforms in articular chondrocytes.

Conclusion

In summary, studying the membranome profile of equine articular chondrocytes by LC-MS/MS following enrichment using Triton X-114 pre-fractionation has turned out to be an excellent approach to gain insight into proteins involved in a wide range of membrane-bound processes such as signal transduction, adhesion and transport of ions and other molecules. In spite of the significant enrichment of lipid-soluble membrane proteins in the hydrophobic phase, the proteins that are present in an extremely low abundance in chondrocytes such as the majority of ion channels and other transporter molecules in the PM remained undetectable. Although detergent-based phase partitioning enriches PM proteins relative to total soluble proteins, the membrane proteins in the ER, mitochondria and other organelles are also enriched; and the abundance of proteins in the contaminating organelles can interfere with the ability to detect PM proteins (Zhang & Peck, 2011). To mitigate these limitations, a combination of the Triton X-114 phase separation method with other membrane protein enrichment techniques could also be considered. Our study confirms some previous findings and adds further proteins to the proteomic profile of equine articular chondrocytes. Some of the identified proteins including the CD276 antigen, S100-A6 (calcyclin) or VDACs have not been unambiguously reported before to be components of articular chondrocytes. However, there are certain limitations to this work. First and foremost, protein identifications were somewhat aggravated by the fact that our search results listed the same proteins several times but for different species (primarily human or bovine but no horse entries), suggesting that the protein was present in the sample and that the identification was made by virtue of the horse protein sharing homology with several other species. This is one of the disadvantages when “cross species matching” is used to identify proteins. Another possible disadvantage of using equine articular chondrocytes is that there may be subtle differences between the two species and that the entirety of our results may not be directly applicable to human articular chondrocytes. A more detailed and comprehensive insight into the chondrocyte membranome is likely to make a significant contribution to the development of novel drugs for arthritic diseases. The development and refinement of proteomics-based techniques will enable a better understanding of regulatory proteins and enhance the search for new drug targets. It may also help to discover novel cartilage disease-specific biomarkers. Thus, our data represent a significant addition to the comprehensive cartilage proteome database that is essential for understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying cartilage function and OA.
  46 in total

Review 1.  Integrins and stretch activated ion channels; putative components of functional cell surface mechanoreceptors in articular chondrocytes.

Authors:  A Mobasheri; S D Carter; P Martín-Vasallo; M Shakibaei
Journal:  Cell Biol Int       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.612

2.  Chloride conductance determining membrane potential of rabbit articular chondrocytes.

Authors:  K Tsuga; N Tohse; M Yoshino; T Sugimoto; T Yamashita; S Ishii; H Yabu
Journal:  J Membr Biol       Date:  2002-02-05       Impact factor: 1.843

3.  Differential proteome analysis of normal and osteoarthritic chondrocytes reveals distortion of vimentin network in osteoarthritis.

Authors:  S Lambrecht; G Verbruggen; P C M Verdonk; D Elewaut; D Deforce
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2007-07-23       Impact factor: 6.576

4.  Human Wharton's jelly mesenchymal stem cells maintain the expression of key immunomodulatory molecules when subjected to osteogenic, adipogenic and chondrogenic differentiation in vitro: new perspectives for cellular therapy.

Authors:  Giampiero La Rocca; Melania Lo Iacono; Tiziana Corsello; Simona Corrao; Felicia Farina; Rita Anzalone
Journal:  Curr Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.828

5.  Voltage-gated ionic channels in cultured rabbit articular chondrocytes.

Authors:  T Sugimoto; M Yoshino; M Nagao; S Ishii; H Yabu
Journal:  Comp Biochem Physiol C Pharmacol Toxicol Endocrinol       Date:  1996-11

6.  Phase separation of integral membrane proteins in Triton X-114 solution.

Authors:  C Bordier
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1981-02-25       Impact factor: 5.157

7.  Histopathology atlas of animal model systems - overview of guiding principles.

Authors:  T Aigner; J L Cook; N Gerwin; S S Glasson; S Laverty; C B Little; W McIlwraith; V B Kraus
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 6.576

8.  Effects of overexpression of membrane-bound transferrin-like protein (MTf) on chondrogenic differentiation in Vitro.

Authors:  Ketut Suardita; Katsumi Fujimoto; Ryo Oda; Atsushi Shimazu; Kazuko Miyazaki; Takeshi Kawamoto; Yukio Kato
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2002-10-08       Impact factor: 5.157

9.  Transamidation by transglutaminase 2 transforms S100A11 calgranulin into a procatabolic cytokine for chondrocytes.

Authors:  Denise L Cecil; Robert Terkeltaub
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  2008-06-15       Impact factor: 5.422

Review 10.  The chondrocyte.

Authors:  Charles W Archer; Philippa Francis-West
Journal:  Int J Biochem Cell Biol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 5.085

View more
  4 in total

1.  Alterations in the chondrocyte surfaceome in response to pro-inflammatory cytokines.

Authors:  Bernadette Jeremiasse; Csaba Matta; Christopher R Fellows; David J Boocock; Julia R Smith; Susan Liddell; Floris Lafeber; Willem E van Spil; Ali Mobasheri
Journal:  BMC Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2020-06-26

2.  Molecular phenotyping of the surfaceome of migratory chondroprogenitors and mesenchymal stem cells using biotinylation, glycocapture and quantitative LC-MS/MS proteomic analysis.

Authors:  Csaba Matta; David J Boocock; Christopher R Fellows; Nicolai Miosge; James E Dixon; Susan Liddell; Julia Smith; Ali Mobasheri
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Biomarkers of (osteo)arthritis.

Authors:  Ali Mobasheri; Yves Henrotin
Journal:  Biomarkers       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.658

4.  Identification of potential diagnostic gene biomarkers in patients with osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Xinling Wang; Yang Yu; Yong Huang; Mingshuang Zhu; Rigao Chen; Zhanghui Liao; Shipeng Yang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.