| Literature DB >> 29754492 |
Katelyn R Ludwig1,2, Monica M Schroll1,2, Amanda B Hummon2.
Abstract
Bottom-up proteomic strategies rely on efficient digestion of proteins into peptides for mass spectrometry analysis. In-solution and filter-based strategies are commonly used for proteomic analysis. In recent years, filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) has become the dominant filter-based method due to its ability to remove SDS prior to mass spectrometry analysis. However, the time-consuming nature of FASP protocols have led to the development of new filter-based strategies. Suspension traps (S-Traps) were recently reported as an alternative to FASP and in-solution strategies as they allow for high concentrations of SDS in a fraction of the time of a typical FASP protocol. In this study, we compare the yields from in-solution, FASP, and S-Trap based digestions of proteins extracted in SDS and urea-based lysis buffers. We performed label-free quantification to analyze the differences in the portions of the proteome identified using each method. Overall, our results show that each digestion method had a high degree of reproducibility within the method type. However, S-Traps outperformed FASP and in-solution digestions by providing the most efficient digestion with the greatest number of unique protein identifications. This is the first work to provide a direct quantitative comparison of two filter-based digestion methods and a traditional in-solution approach to provide information regarding the most efficient proteomic preparation.Entities:
Keywords: bottom-up proteomics; digestion comparison; filter-aided sample preparation; label-free quantification; quantitative proteomics; sample preparation techniques; sodium dodecyl sulfate; suspension trap; tandem mass spectrometry
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29754492 PMCID: PMC9319029 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00235
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Proteome Res ISSN: 1535-3893 Impact factor: 5.370