4.8 Article

Nontargeted Modification-Specific Metabolomics Study Based on Liquid Chromatography High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 86, 期 18, 页码 9146-9153

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac502045j

关键词

-

资金

  1. State Key Science & Technology Project for Infectious Diseases [2012ZX10002011, 2012ZX10002009]
  2. foundation and the creative research group project from National Natural Science Foundation of China [21175132, 21321064]
  3. Sino-German Center for Research Promotion (NSFC) [GZ 753]
  4. Sino-German Center for Research Promotion (DFG)
  5. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (DZD e.V.) [01GI0925]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Modifications of genes and proteins have been extensively studied in systems biology using comprehensive analytical strategies. Although metabolites are frequently modified, these modifications have not been studied using -omics approaches. Here a general strategy for the nontargeted profiling of modified metabolites, which we call nontargeted modification-specific metabolomics, is reported. A key aspect of this strategy was the combination of in-source collision-induced dissociation liquid chromatographymass spectrometry (LC-MS) and global nontargeted LC-MS-based metabolomics. Characteristic neutral loss fragments that are specific for acetylation, sulfation, glucuronidation, glucosidation, or ribose conjugation were reproducibly detected using human urine as a model specimen for method development. The practical application of this method was demonstrated by profiling urine samples from liver cirrhosis patients. Approximately 900 features were identified as modified endogenous metabolites and xenobiotics. Moreover, this strategy supports the identification of compounds not included in traditional metabolomics databases (HMDB, Metlin, and KEGG), which are currently referred to as unknowns in metabolomics projects. Nontargeted modification-specific metabolomics opens a new perspective in systems biology.

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

4.8
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