4.7 Article

Novel microwave-assisted digestion by trypsin-immobilized magnetic nanoparticles for proteomic analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
卷 7, 期 3, 页码 1297-1307

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/pr700586j

关键词

trypsin immobilized magnetic nanoparticles; microwave-assisted digestion; shotgun; proteome analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a novel microwave-assisted protein digestion method was developed using trypsin-immobilized magnetic nanoparticles (TIMNs). The magnetic nanoparticles worked as not only substrate for enzyme immobilization, but also excellent microwave irradiation absorber and, thus, improved the efficiency of microwave-assisted digestion greatly. Three standard proteins, bovine serum albumin (BSA), myoglobin, and cytochrome c, were used to optimize the conditions of this novel digestion method. With the optimized conditions, peptide fragments produced in very short time (only 15 s) could be identified successfully by MALDI-TOF-MS. When it was compared to the conventional in-solution digestion (12 h), equivalent or better digestion efficiency was observed. Even when protein quantity was as low as micrograms, this novel digestion method still could digest proteins successfully, while the same samples by conventional in-solution digestion failed. Moreover, with an external magnetic field, the enzyme could be removed easily and reused. It was verified that, after 4 replicate runs, the TIMNs still kept high activity. To further confirm the efficiency of this rapid digestion method for proteome analysis, it was applied to the protein extract of rat liver. Without any preparation and prefractionation processing, the entire proteome digested by TIMNs in 15 s went through LC-ESI-MS/MS direct analysis. The whole shotgun proteomic experiment was finished in only 1 h with the identification of 313 proteins (p < 0.01). This new application of TIMNs in microwave-assisted protein digestion really opens a route for large-scale proteomic analysis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据