4.5 Article

Proteomic analysis by mass spectrometry of postmortem muscle protein degradation for PMI estimation: A pilot study

期刊

FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL
卷 349, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2023.111774

关键词

Muscle; Protein; Degradation; PMI; Mass spectrometry; Forensic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, skeletal muscle tissue from pigs was degraded at different temperatures to identify proteins useful for postmortem interval estimation. PDLIM7, TPM1, and ATP2A2 were validated as potential markers for PMI assessment. The use of mass spectrometry analysis increased the number of identified protein species, expanding the panel for PMI evaluation.
The determination of the postmortem interval is a topic of great forensic interest. The possibility of using new technologies has allowed the study of postmortem decay of biomolecules in the determination of PMI. Skeletal muscle proteins are promising candidates because skeletal muscle exhibits slower postmortem decay compared to other internal organs and nervous tissues, while its degradation is faster than cartilage and bone. In this pilot study, skeletal muscle tissue from pigs was degraded at two different controlled temperatures, 21 degrees C and 6 degrees C, and analysed at predefined times points: 0, 24, 48, 72, 96, and 120 h. The obtained samples were analysed by mass spectrometry proteomics approach for qualitative and quantitative evaluation of proteins and peptides. Immunoblotting validation was performed for the candidate proteins. The results obtained appeared significant and identified several proteins useful for possible postmortem interval estimation. Of these proteins, PDLIM7, TPM1, and ATP2A2 were validated by immunoblotting at a larger number of experimental points and at different temperatures. The results obtained are in agreement with those observed in similar works. In addition, the use of a mass spectrometry approach increased the number of protein species identified, providing a larger panel of proteins for PMI assessment.

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