Literature DB >> 29754492

Comparison of In-Solution, FASP, and S-Trap Based Digestion Methods for Bottom-Up Proteomic Studies.

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


  26 in total

Review 1.  Mass spectrometry-based proteomics.

Authors:  Ruedi Aebersold; Matthias Mann
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2003-03-13       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Sample preparation and digestion for proteomic analyses using spin filters.

Authors:  Linda L Manza; Sheryl L Stamer; Amy-Joan L Ham; Simona G Codreanu; Daniel C Liebler
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.984

3.  Systematic comparison of fractionation methods for in-depth analysis of plasma proteomes.

Authors:  Zhijun Cao; Hsin-Yao Tang; Huan Wang; Qin Liu; David W Speicher
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 4.466

4.  Combination of FASP and StageTip-based fractionation allows in-depth analysis of the hippocampal membrane proteome.

Authors:  Jacek R Wiśniewski; Alexandre Zougman; Matthias Mann
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.466

5.  ProteoSign: an end-user online differential proteomics statistical analysis platform.

Authors:  Georgios Efstathiou; Andreas N Antonakis; Georgios A Pavlopoulos; Theodosios Theodosiou; Peter Divanach; David C Trudgian; Benjamin Thomas; Nikolas Papanikolaou; Michalis Aivaliotis; Oreste Acuto; Ioannis Iliopoulos
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2017-07-03       Impact factor: 16.971

6.  Suspension trapping (STrap) sample preparation method for bottom-up proteomics analysis.

Authors:  Alexandre Zougman; Peter J Selby; Rosamonde E Banks
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 3.984

7.  Over 2300 phosphorylated peptide identifications with single-shot capillary zone electrophoresis-tandem mass spectrometry in a 100 min separation.

Authors:  Katelyn R Ludwig; Liangliang Sun; Guijie Zhu; Norman J Dovichi; Amanda B Hummon
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 6.986

8.  Over 4100 protein identifications from a Xenopus laevis fertilized egg digest using reversed-phase chromatographic prefractionation followed by capillary zone electrophoresis-electrospray ionization-tandem mass spectrometry analysis.

Authors:  Xiaojing Yan; Liangliang Sun; Guijie Zhu; Olivia F Cox; Norman J Dovichi
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.984

9.  Accurate proteome-wide label-free quantification by delayed normalization and maximal peptide ratio extraction, termed MaxLFQ.

Authors:  Jürgen Cox; Marco Y Hein; Christian A Luber; Igor Paron; Nagarjuna Nagaraj; Matthias Mann
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 5.911

10.  Critical comparison of sample preparation strategies for shotgun proteomic analysis of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples: insights from liver tissue.

Authors:  Alessandro Tanca; Marcello Abbondio; Salvatore Pisanu; Daniela Pagnozzi; Sergio Uzzau; Maria Filippa Addis
Journal:  Clin Proteomics       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 3.988

View more
  35 in total

1.  Simple Tip-Based Sample Processing Method for Urinary Proteomic Analysis.

Authors:  David J Clark; Yingwei Hu; Michael Schnaubelt; Yi Fu; Sean Ponce; Shao-Yung Chen; Yangying Zhou; Punit Shah; Hui Zhang
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 6.986

2.  A sensitive S-Trap-based approach to the analysis of T cell lipid raft proteome.

Authors:  Cerina Chhuon; Shao-Yu Zhang; Vincent Jung; Daniel Lewandowski; Joanna Lipecka; André Pawlak; Dil Sahali; Mario Ollero; Ida Chiara Guerrera
Journal:  J Lipid Res       Date:  2020-08-07       Impact factor: 5.922

3.  Intermittent fasting from dawn to sunset for 30 consecutive days is associated with anticancer proteomic signature and upregulates key regulatory proteins of glucose and lipid metabolism, circadian clock, DNA repair, cytoskeleton remodeling, immune system and cognitive function in healthy subjects.

Authors:  Ayse L Mindikoglu; Mustafa M Abdulsada; Antrix Jain; Jong Min Choi; Prasun K Jalal; Sridevi Devaraj; Melissa P Mezzari; Joseph F Petrosino; Antone R Opekun; Sung Yun Jung
Journal:  J Proteomics       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 4.044

4.  HYPERsol: High-Quality Data from Archival FFPE Tissue for Clinical Proteomics.

Authors:  Dylan M Marchione; Ilyana Ilieva; Kyle Devins; Danielle Sharpe; Darryl J Pappin; Benjamin A Garcia; John P Wilson; John B Wojcik
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 4.466

Review 5.  Phosphoproteomics: a valuable tool for uncovering molecular signaling in cancer cells.

Authors:  Jacqueline S Gerritsen; Forest M White
Journal:  Expert Rev Proteomics       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 4.250

6.  Reversible Click Chemistry Tag for Universal Proteome Sample Preparation for Top-Down and Bottom-Up Analysis.

Authors:  Stephanie Biedka; Brigitte F Schmidt; Nolan M Frey; Sarah M Boothman; Jonathan S Minden; Amber Lee Wilson
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2021-09-15       Impact factor: 5.370

7.  Ultrafast and Reproducible Proteomics from Small Amounts of Heart Tissue Enabled by Azo and timsTOF Pro.

Authors:  Timothy J Aballo; David S Roberts; Jake A Melby; Kevin M Buck; Kyle A Brown; Ying Ge
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 4.466

8.  Genome-wide CRISPRi screening identifies OCIAD1 as a prohibitin client and regulatory determinant of mitochondrial Complex III assembly in human cells.

Authors:  Maxence Le Vasseur; Jonathan Friedman; Marco Jost; Jiawei Xu; Justin Yamada; Martin Kampmann; Max A Horlbeck; Michelle R Salemi; Brett S Phinney; Jonathan S Weissman; Jodi Nunnari
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 8.140

9.  Affinity-free enrichment and mass spectrometry analysis of the ovarian cancer biomarker CA125 (MUC16) from patient-derived ascites.

Authors:  Naviya Schuster-Little; Roberta Fritz-Klaus; Mark Etzel; Niharika Patankar; Saahil Javeri; Manish S Patankar; Rebecca J Whelan
Journal:  Analyst       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.616

10.  Sequential phosphoproteomics and N-glycoproteomics of plasma-derived extracellular vesicles.

Authors:  Hillary Andaluz Aguilar; Anton B Iliuk; I-Hsuan Chen; W Andy Tao
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 17.021

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.