4.3 Article

Lipidomic consequences of phospholipid synthesis defects in Escherichia coil revealed by HILIC-ion mobility-mass spectrometry

期刊

CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS OF LIPIDS
卷 219, 期 -, 页码 15-22

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemphyslip.2019.01.007

关键词

Escherichia coli; Ion mobility; Mass spectrometry; Lipidomics; Phospholipids

资金

  1. UW Royalty Research Fund [A128444]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01A1136979]
  3. University of Washington (UW) School of Pharmacy Faculty Innovation Fund
  4. Department of Medicinal Chemistry in the School of Pharmacy at the UW

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Our understanding of phospholipid biosynthesis in Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria is derived from the prototypical Gram-negative organism Escherichia coli. The inner and outer membranes of E. coli are largely composed of phosphatidylethanolamine (PE), minor amounts of phosphatidylglycerol (PG) and cardiolipin (CL). We report here the utility of hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) paired with ion mobility mass spectrometry (IM-MS) for the comprehensive analysis of the E. coli lipidome. Using strains with chromosomal deletions in the PG and CL synthesis genes pgsA and cisABC, respectively, we show that defective phospholipid biosynthesis in E. colt results in fatty-acid specific changes in select lipid classes and the presence of the minor triacylated phospholipids, acylphosphatidyl glycerol (acylPG) and N-acylphosphatidylethanolamine (N-acylPE). Notably, acylPGs were accumulated in the cIsABC-KO strain, but were absent in other mutant strains. The separation of 1-lyso and 2-lyso-phosphatidylethanolamines (lysoPEs) is demonstrated in both the HILIC and IM dimensions. Using our previously validated calibration method, collision cross section values of nearly 200 phospholipids found in E. toll were determined on a traveling wave IM-MS platform, including newly reported values for cardiolipins, positional isomers of lysoPEs, acylPGs and N-acylPEs.

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

4.3
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