4.7 Article

N-glycosylation site occupancy in serum glycoproteins using multiple reaction monitoring liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

期刊

MOLECULAR & CELLULAR PROTEOMICS
卷 6, 期 12, 页码 2132-2138

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/mcp.M700361-MCP200

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDGs) are a family of N-linked glycosylation defects associated with severe clinical manifestations. In CDG type-I, deficiency of lipid-linked oligosaccharide assembly leads to the underoccupancy of N-glycosylation sites on glycoproteins. Although the level of residual glycosylation activity is known to correlate with the clinical phenotype linked to individual CDG mutations, it is not known whether the degree of N-glycosylation site occupancy by itself correlates with the severity of the disease. To quantify the extent of underglycosylation in healthy control and in CDG samples, we developed a quantitative method of N-glycosylation site occupancy based on multiple reaction monitoring LC-MS/MS. Using isotopically labeled standard peptides, we directly quantified the level of N-glycosylation site occupancy on selected serum proteins. In healthy control samples, we determined 98-100% occupancy for all N-glycosylation sites of transferrin and alpha(1)-antitrypsin. In CDG type-I samples, we observed a reduction in N-glycosylation site occupancy that correlated with the severity of the disease. In addition, we noticed a selective underglycosylation of N-glycosylation sites, indicating preferential glycosylation of acceptor sequons of a given glycoprotein. In transferrin, a preferred occupancy for the first N-glycosylation site was observed, and a decreasing preference for the first, third, and second N-glycosylation sites was observed in alpha(1)-antitrypsin. This multiple reaction monitoring LC-MS/MS method can be extended to multiple glycoproteins, thereby enabling a glycoproteomics survey of N-glycosylation site occupancies in biological samples.

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