4.5 Article

Tandem Mass Spectrometry Investigation of ADP-ribosylated Kemptide

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jasms.2008.10.025

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health for Pharmacological Sciences Training [T32 GM07750]
  2. National Center for Research Resources [1S10RR-017262-01]
  3. University of Washington's Proteomics Resource [UWPR95794]
  4. Directorate For Geosciences
  5. Division Of Ocean Sciences [0825790] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacterial adenosine diphosphate-ribosyltransferases (ADPRTs) are toxins that play a significant role in pathogenicity by inactivating host proteins through covalent addition of ADPribose. In this study we used ADP-ribosylated Kemptide (LRRASLG) as a standard to examine the effectiveness of three common tandem mass spectrometry fragmentation methods for assignment of amino acid sequence and site of modification. Fragmentation mechanisms investigated include low-energy collision-induced dissociation (CID), infrared multiphoton dissociation (IRMPD), and electron-capture dissociation (ECD); all were performed on a hybrid linear ion trap Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometer. We show that ECD, but neither CID nor IRMPD, of ADP-ribosylated Kemptide produces tandem mass spectra that are interpretable with regard to amino acid sequence assignment and site of modification. Examination of CID and IRMPD tandem mass spectra of ADP-ribosylated Kemptide revealed that fragmentation was primarily focused to the ADP-ribose region, generating several potential diagnostic ions for use in discovery of ADP-ribosylated proteins. Because of the lower relative sensitivity of ECD during data-dependent acquisition to CID, we suggest a 2-fold strategy where CID and IRMPD are first used to detect ADP-ribosylated peptides, followed by sequence assignment and location of modification by ECD analysis. (J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 2009, 20, 477-483) (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Mass Spectrometry

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

4.5
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