4.7 Article

A solid phase extraction-based platform for rapid phosphoproteomic analysis

期刊

METHODS
卷 54, 期 4, 页码 379-386

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2011.03.008

关键词

Proteomics; Phosphorylation; Chromatography/methods; Mass spectrometry/methods; Phosphoproteomics

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [HG3456]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Protein phosphorylation is among the most common and intensely studied post-translational protein modification. It plays crucial roles in virtually all cellular processes and has been implicated in numerous human diseases, including cancer. Traditional biochemical and genetic methods for identifying and monitoring sites of phosphorylation are laborious and slow and in recent years have largely been replaced by mass spectrometric analysis. Improved methods for phosphopeptide enrichment coupled with faster and more sensitive mass spectrometers have led to an explosion in the size of phosphoproteomic datasets. However, wider application of these methods is limited by equipment costs and the resultant high demand for instrument time as well as by a technology gap between biologists and mass spectrometrists. Here we describe a modified two-step enrichment strategy that employs lysC digestion and step elution from self-packed strong cation exchange (SCX) solid phase extraction (SPE) columns followed by immobilized metal ion affinity chromatography (IMAC) and LC-MS/MS analysis using a hybrid LTQ Orbitrap Velos mass spectrometer. The SCX procedure does not require an HPLC system, demands little expertise, and because multiple samples can be processed in parallel, can provide a large savings of time and labor. We demonstrate this method in conjunction with stable isotope labeling to quantitate peptides harboring > 8000 unique phosphorylation sites in yeast in 12 h of instrument analysis time and examine the impact of enzyme choice and instrument platform. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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