4.6 Article

Simple Peptide Quantification Approach for MS-Based Proteomics Quality Control

期刊

ACS OMEGA
卷 5, 期 12, 页码 6754-6762

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.0c00080

关键词

-

资金

  1. VIB Tech Watch Fund
  2. EPIC-XS consortium - Horizon 2020 programme of the European Union [823839]
  3. FWO-SBO Project [S006617N]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite its growing popularity and use, bottom-up proteomics remains a complex analytical methodology. Its general workflow consists of three main steps: sample preparation, liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and computational data analysis. Quality assessment of the different steps and components of this workflow is instrumental to identify technical flaws and avoid loss of precious measurement time and sample material. However, assessment of the extent of sample losses along with the sample preparation protocol, in particular, after proteolytic digestion, is not yet routinely implemented because of the lack of an accurate and straightforward method to quantify peptides. Here, we report on the use of a microfluidic UV/visible spectrophotometer to quantify MS-ready peptides directly in the MS-loading solvent, consuming only 2 mu L of sample. We compared the performance of the microfluidic spectrophotometer with a standard device and determined the optimal sample amount for LC-MS/MS analysis on a Q Exactive HF mass spectrometer using a dilution series of a commercial K562 cell digest. A careful evaluation of selected LC and MS parameters allowed us to define 3 mu g as an optimal peptide amount to be injected into this particular LC-MS/MS system. Finally, using tryptic digests from human HEK293T cells and showing that injecting equal peptide amounts, rather than approximate ones, result in less variable LC-MS/MS and protein quantification data. The obtained quality improvement together with easy implementation of the approach makes it possible to routinely quantify MS-ready peptides as a next step in daily proteomics quality control.

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

4.6
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