4.5 Article

Comparison and applications of label-free absolute proteome quantification methods on Escherichia coli

Journal

JOURNAL OF PROTEOMICS
Volume 75, Issue 17, Pages 5437-5448

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2012.06.020

Keywords

Label-free absolute quantitative proteomics; Spectral counting; Precursor ion intensity; APEX; emPAI; iBAQ

Funding

  1. Enterprise Estonia project [EU29994]
  2. Estonian Ministry of Education and Research [SF0140090s08]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Three different label-free proteome quantification methods - APEX, emPAI and iBAQ - were evaluated to measure proteome-wide protein concentrations in the cell. All the methods were applied to a sample from Escherichia coli chemostat culture. A Pearson squared correlation of approximately 0.6 among the three quantification methods was demonstrated. Importantly, the sum of quantified proteins by iBAQ and emPAI corresponded with the Lowry total protein quantification, demonstrating applicability of label-free methods for an accurate calculation of protein concentrations at the proteome level. The iBAQ method showed the best correlation between biological replicates, a normal distribution among all protein abundances, and the lowest variation among ribosomal protein abundances, which are expected to have equal amounts. Absolute quantitative proteome data enabled us to evaluate metabolic cost for protein synthesis and apparent catalytic activities of enzymes by integration with flux analysis. All the methods demonstrated similar ATP costs for protein synthesis for different cellular processes and that costs for expressing biomass synthesis related proteins were higher than those for energy generation. Importantly, catalytic activities of energy metabolism enzymes were an order or two higher than those of monomer synthesis. Interestingly, a staircase-like protein expression was demonstrated for most of the transcription units. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available