4.7 Article

Cross-Platform Comparison of Untargeted and Targeted Lipidomics Approaches on Aging Mouse Plasma

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-35807-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH [5U54DK10255603, 5P01GM09913005]
  2. EMBO post-doctoral fellowship
  3. Sweden-America Foundation
  4. Stanford School of Medicine Dean's Postdoctoral fellowship
  5. CEHG fellowship
  6. WennerGren post-doctoral fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lipidomics - the global assessment of lipids - can be performed using a variety of mass spectrometry (MS)-based approaches. However, choosing the optimal approach in terms of lipid coverage, robustness and throughput can be a challenging task. Here, we compare a novel targeted quantitative lipidomics platform known as the Lipidyzer to a conventional untargeted liquid chromatography (LC)-MS approach. We find that both platforms are efficient in profiling more than 300 lipids across 11 lipid classes in mouse plasma with precision and accuracy below 20% for most lipids. While the untargeted and targeted platforms detect similar numbers of lipids, the former identifies a broader range of lipid classes and can unambiguously identify all three fatty acids in triacylglycerols (TAG). Quantitative measurements from both approaches exhibit a median correlation coefficient (r) of 0.99 using a dilution series of deuterated internal standards and 0.71 using endogenous plasma lipids in the context of aging. Application of both platforms to plasma from aging mouse reveals similar changes in total lipid levels across all major lipid classes and in specific lipid species. Interestingly, TAG is the lipid class that exhibits the most changes with age, suggesting that TAG metabolism is particularly sensitive to the aging process in mice. Collectively, our data show that the Lipidyzer platform provides comprehensive profiling of the most prevalent lipids in plasma in a simple and automated manner.

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