4.7 Article

Higher Energy Collisional Dissociation Mass Spectrometry of Sulfated O-Linked Oligosaccharides

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
卷 17, 期 9, 页码 3259-3267

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00376

关键词

glycosylation; sulfation; Orbitrap; mucin; fragmentation; sulfoglycomics; glycomics; O-linked oligosaccharides; graphitized carbon; LC-MS

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council [621-2013-5895, 342-2004-4434]
  2. Kung Gustav V:s 80-ars foundation
  3. Petrus and Augusta Hedlund's foundation
  4. AFA insurance research fund [150150]
  5. Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation [KAW2007.0118]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sulfation is the final decoration of mucin-type O-linked oligosaccharides before mucins are released into the lumen of the gastrointestinal, respiratory, and genital tracts. Because only a fraction of oligosaccharides undergo this type of modifications in the Golgi apparatus, sometimes also only by dedicated cells, the glycobiology of these low abundant sulfated oligosaccharides is often overlooked. At the same time, the technology to consistently identify and characterize them has been lagging. We adopted higher energy collisional dissociation to characterize sulfated oligosaccharides from porcine gastric and human salivary MUC5B mucins. With this approach we could generate conclusive spectra up to nonasaccharides. Both singly and doubly sulfated oligosaccharides were characterized. By comparing the fragmentation of low-mass fragments of m/z 100-320 with standards for six-linked and three linked sulfate, it could be shown that characteristic fragmentation exists, verifying that porcine gastric mucin contains mostly six linked sulfate to GlcNAc, whereas human MUC5B contains mostly three-linked Gal. When performing ion-trap MS2 fragmentation, these low-molecular-mass fragments are usually not detected. Hence it can be concluded that to be able to address biological questions of sulfation low-mass fragments are important for the assignment of sulfate position.

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