4.7 Article

Immobilized metal affinity chromatography revisited: pH/Acid control toward high selectivity in phosphoproteomics

Journal

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
Volume 7, Issue 9, Pages 4058-4069

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/pr800364d

Keywords

IMAC; SDS-PAGE; phosphoproteomics; mass spectrometry; lung cancer

Funding

  1. Academia Sinica
  2. National Science Council in Taiwan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite recent advances in instrumentation and analytical strategies for identification and quantitation of protein phosphorylation, a highly specific enrichment protocol is still a challenge in large-scale studies. Here, we report a simple pH/acid control method that addresses the poor specificity seriously criticized in IMAC. Detailed evaluation of the capture and release mechanism in IMAC revealed that pH, buffer and salt yield a complex interplay in enrichment of phosphopeptides, yet they play individual roles in recovery and specificity. A revised one-step IMAC method with low sample loss and high specificity can be rationally designed by controlling salt, pH and the structure and concentration of organic acid. Without methyl esterification, the one-step IMAC enrichment with single LC-MS/MS identified 386 phosphoproteins in 550 jig of non-small-cell lung cancer cell lysate with 96% specificity. Additional fractionation by SDS-PAGE from 4 mg of cell lysate revealed the comprehensive proteome map, identifying 2747 phosphorylation sites from 2360 nondegenerate phosphopeptides and 1219 phosphoproteins with a false discovery rate of 0.63%. To our knowledge, this pH/acid-controlled IMAC procedure provides higher specificity than any other one-step IMAC purification procedure. Furthermore, the simple and reproducible IMAC protocol can be adapted to other solid supports, fully automated or manual, for large-scale identification of the vastly under-explored phosphoproteome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available