4.7 Article

Proteome Profiling of PMJ2-R and Primary Peritoneal Macrophages

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22126323

Keywords

PMJ2-R; peritoneal macrophages; phagocytosis; proteome; LC-MS; MS

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation [14.616.21.0094, RFMEFI61618X0094]
  2. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic INTER-ACTION project [LTARF 18021]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study compared the proteomic profiles of immortalized cell lines and primary cells, finding significant differences in the abundances of various proteins associated with phagocytosis. This suggests that validation of results using PMJ2-R cells as a model for peritoneal macrophages should be carefully conducted.
In vitro models are often used for studying macrophage functions, including the process of phagocytosis. The application of primary macrophages has limitations associated with the individual characteristics of animals, which can lead to insufficient standardization and higher variability of the obtained results. Immortalized cell lines do not have these disadvantages, but their responses to various signals can differ from those of the living organism. In the present study, a comparative proteomic analysis of immortalized PMJ2-R cell line and primary peritoneal macrophages isolated from C57BL/6 mice was performed. A total of 4005 proteins were identified, of which 797 were quantified. Obtained results indicate significant differences in the abundances of many proteins, including essential proteins associated with the process of phagocytosis, such as Elmo1, Gsn, Hspa8, Itgb1, Ncf2, Rac2, Rack1, Sirpa, Sod1, C3, and Msr1. These findings indicate that outcomes of studies utilizing PMJ2-R cells as a model of peritoneal macrophages should be carefully validated. All MS data are deposited in ProteomeXchange with the identifier PXD022133.

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