4.7 Article

Application of the accurate mass and time tag approach to the proteome analysis of sub-cellular fractions obtained from Rhodobacter sphaeroides 2.4.1. aerobic and photosynthetic cell cultures

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
卷 5, 期 8, 页码 1940-1947

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/pr060050o

关键词

Rhodobacter sphaeroides; comparative proteomics; Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FTICR MS); localization

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM075273-01A1, GM15590, R01 GM075273, R01 GM015590] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The high-throughput accurate mass and time (AMT) tag proteomic approach was utilized to characterize the proteomes for cytoplasm, cytoplasmic membrane, periplasm, and outer membrane fractions from aerobic and photosynthetic cultures of the gram-nagtive bacterium Rhodobacter sphaeroides 2.4.1. In addition, we analyzed the proteins within purified chromatophore fractions that house the photosynthetic apparatus from photosynthetically grown cells. In total, 8300 peptides were identified with high confidence from at least one subcellular fraction from either cell culture. These peptides were derived from 1514 genes or 35% percent of proteins predicted to be encoded by the genome. A significant number of these proteins were detected within a single subcellular fraction and their localization was compared to in silico predictions. However, the majority of proteins were observed in multiple subcellular fractions, and the most likely subcellular localization for these proteins was investigated using a Z-score analysis of estimated protein abundance along with clustering techniques. Good (81%) agreement was observed between the experimental results and in silico predictions. The AMT tag approach provides localization evidence for those proteins that have no predicted localization information, those annotated as putative proteins, and/or for those proteins annotated as hypothetical and conserved hypothetical.

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