4.8 Article

Combinatorial Libraries of Synthetic Peptides as a Model for Shotgun Proteomics

Journal

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 82, Issue 15, Pages 6559-6568

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac100910a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [U24 CA126480-01, U24 CA126480] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCRR NIH HHS [R01 RR024236-01A1, R01 RR024236] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM103725] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A synthetic approach to model the analytical complexity of biological proteolytic digests has been developed. Combinatorial peptide libraries ranging in length between 9 and 12 amino acids that represent typical tryptic digests were designed, synthesized, and analyzed. Individual libraries and mixtures thereof were studied by replicate liquid chromatography-ion trap mass spectrometry and compared to a tryptic digest of Deinococcus radiodurans. Similar to complex proteome analysis, replicate study of individual libraries identified additional unique peptides. Fewer novel sequences were revealed with each additional analysis in a manner similar to that observed for biological data. Our results demonstrate a bimodal distribution of peptides sorting to either very low or very high levels of detection. Upon mixing of libraries at equal abundance, a length-dependent bias in favor of longer sequence identification was observed. Peptide identification as a function of site-specific amino acid content was characterized with certain amino acids proving to be of considerable importance. This report demonstrates that peptide libraries of defined character can serve as a reference for instrument characterization. Furthermore, they are uniquely suited to delineate the physical properties that influence identification of peptides, which provides a foundation for optimizing the study of samples with less defined heterogeneity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available