4.8 Article

Controlling deuterium isotope effects in comparative proteomics

Journal

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 74, Issue 15, Pages 3662-3669

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac025614w

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM 59996] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper focuses on identifying structural features responsible for resolution of heavy isotope coded peptides during reversed-phase chromatography. This was achieved by using labeled coding agents that varied in structure, number of deuterium atoms, placement of deuterium in the coding agent, and the functional group targeted by the reagent. Six coding agents were examined. Deuterated versions of the coding agents studied included succinic anhydride-H-2(4), acetic acid 2,5-dioxopyrrolidin-1-yl ester-H-2(3), propionic acid 2,5-dioxopyrrolidin-1-yl ester-H-2(5), pentanoic acid 2,5-dioxopyrrolidin-1-yl ester-H-2(9), [3-(2,5-dioxopyrrolidin-1-yloxycarbonyl)-propyl]-trimethylammonium chloride-H-2(9), and the commercial ICAT-H-2(8) reagent. It was found that these labeling agents vary widely in both their absolute and relative contribution to the chromatographic isotope effect. Relative effects were evaluated by normalizing resolution for the number of deuterium atoms in the derivatized peptide. The single, most dominant effect was the placement of deuterium atoms relative to hydrophilic functional groups in the coding agent. It was concluded that the probability of a deuterium atom interacting with the stationary phase of a reversed-phase chromatography (RPC) column and impacting resolution is greatly diminished by placing it adjacent to a hydrophilic group, as explained by solvophobic theory. But peptide size and coding agent size were also seen to correlate inversely with the magnitude of the isotope effect. This effect was explained as being due to the relative size of the coding agent versus that of the coding agent-peptide conjugate.

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