Literature DB >> 35331916

Fe3+-NTA magnetic beads as an alternative to spin column-based phosphopeptide enrichment.

Xinyue Liu1, Valentina Rossio1, Sanjukta Guha Thakurta1, Amarjeet Flora2, Leigh Foster2, Ryan D Bomgarden2, Steven P Gygi1, Joao A Paulo3.   

Abstract

Protein phosphorylation is a central mechanism of cellular signal transduction in living organisms. Phosphoproteomic studies systematically catalogue and characterize alterations in phosphorylation states across multiple cellular conditions and are often incorporated into global proteomics experiments. Previously, we found that spin column-based Fe3+-NTA enrichment integrated well with our workflow but remained a bottleneck for methods that require higher throughput or a scale that is beyond the capacity of these columns. Here, we compare our well-established spin column-based enrichment strategy with one encompassing magnetic beads. Our data show little difference when using either method in terms of the number of identified phosphopeptides as well as their physicochemical properties. In all, we illustrate how the potentially scalable and automation-friendly magnetic Fe3+-NTA beads can seamlessly substitute spin column-based Fe3+-NTA agarose beads for global phosphoproteome profiling. SIGNIFICANCE: Protein phosphorylation plays a key role in regulating a multitude of biological processes and can lead to insights into disease pathogenesis. Methodologies which can efficiently enrich phosphopeptides in a scalable and high-throughput manner are essential for profiling dynamic phosphoproteomes. Here we compare two phosphopeptide enrichment workflows, a well-established spin column-based strategy with agarose Fe3+-NTA beads and a strategy using magnetic Fe3+-NTA beads. Our data suggest that the scalable and automation-friendly magnetic bead-based workflow is an equivalent, but more flexible, enrichment strategy for phosphoproteome profiling experiments.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Automation; IMAC; Phosphopeptide enrichment; Phosphoproteome

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35331916      PMCID: PMC9195054          DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2022.104561

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Proteomics        ISSN: 1874-3919            Impact factor:   3.855


  42 in total

1.  Phosphoproteome analysis by mass spectrometry and its application to Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Scott B Ficarro; Mark L McCleland; P Todd Stukenberg; Daniel J Burke; Mark M Ross; Jeffrey Shabanowitz; Donald F Hunt; Forest M White
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  PTMScan direct: identification and quantification of peptides from critical signaling proteins by immunoaffinity enrichment coupled with LC-MS/MS.

Authors:  Matthew P Stokes; Charles L Farnsworth; Albrecht Moritz; Jeffrey C Silva; Xiaoying Jia; Kimberly A Lee; Ailan Guo; Roberto D Polakiewicz; Michael J Comb
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2012-02-09       Impact factor: 5.911

Review 3.  Evolution of protein phosphatases in plants and animals.

Authors:  Greg B G Moorhead; Veerle De Wever; George Templeton; David Kerk
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 3.857

4.  Highly selective enrichment of phosphopeptides using Zr4+-immobilized Titania nanoparticles.

Authors:  Junyong Dai; Miaode Wang; Hailong Liu
Journal:  Talanta       Date:  2016-11-27       Impact factor: 6.057

5.  SP2: Rapid and Automatable Contaminant Removal from Peptide Samples for Proteomic Analyses.

Authors:  Matthew Waas; Michael Pereckas; Rachel A Jones Lipinski; Christopher Ashwood; Rebekah L Gundry
Journal:  J Proteome Res       Date:  2019-02-28       Impact factor: 4.466

6.  Evaluation of quantitative performance of sequential immobilized metal affinity chromatographic enrichment for phosphopeptides.

Authors:  Zeyu Sun; Karyn L Hamilton; Kenneth F Reardon
Journal:  Anal Biochem       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 3.365

7.  TMTpro reagents: a set of isobaric labeling mass tags enables simultaneous proteome-wide measurements across 16 samples.

Authors:  Jiaming Li; Jonathan G Van Vranken; Laura Pontano Vaites; Devin K Schweppe; Edward L Huttlin; Chris Etienne; Premchendar Nandhikonda; Rosa Viner; Aaron M Robitaille; Andrew H Thompson; Karsten Kuhn; Ian Pike; Ryan D Bomgarden; John C Rogers; Steven P Gygi; Joao A Paulo
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 28.547

Review 8.  Phosphopeptide enrichment for phosphoproteomic analysis - A tutorial and review of novel materials.

Authors:  Wen Qiu; Caroline A Evans; Andrew Landels; Trong Khoa Pham; Phillip C Wright
Journal:  Anal Chim Acta       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 6.558

9.  Fully Automated Sample Processing and Analysis Workflow for Low-Input Proteome Profiling.

Authors:  Yiran Liang; Hayden Acor; Michaela A McCown; Andikan J Nwosu; Hannah Boekweg; Nathaniel B Axtell; Thy Truong; Yongzheng Cong; Samuel H Payne; Ryan T Kelly
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 6.986

Review 10.  Advances in quantitative high-throughput phosphoproteomics with sample multiplexing.

Authors:  Joao A Paulo; Devin K Schweppe
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 3.984

View more
  1 in total

1.  A Ti/Nb-functionalized COF material based on IMAC strategy for efficient separation of phosphopeptides and phosphorylated exosomes.

Authors:  Xiaoya Zhang; Quanshou Feng; Zehu Xie; Fuxing Xu; Yinghua Yan; Chuanfan Ding
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 4.478

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.