4.8 Article

Top-down proteomics for rapid identification of intact microorganisms

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 77, 期 22, 页码 7455-7461

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac051419g

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We apply MAILDI-TOF/TOF mass spectrometry for the rapid and high-confidence identification of intact Bacillus spore species. In this method, fragment ion spectra of whole (undigested) protein biomarkers are obtained without the need for biomarker prefractionation, digestion, separation, and cleanup. Laser-induced dissociation (unimolecular decay) of higher mass (> 5 kDa) precursor ions in the first TOF analyzer is followed by reacceleration and subsequent high-resolution mass analysis of the resulting sequence-specific fragments in a reflectron TOF analyzer. In-house-developed software compares an experimental MS/MS spectrum with in silico-generated tandem mass spectra from all protein sequences, contained in a proteome database, with masses within a preset range around the precursor ion mass. A p-value, the probability that the observed matches between experimental and in silico-generated fragments occur by chance, is computed and used to rank the database proteins to identify the most plausible precursor protein. By inference, the source microorganism is then identified on the basis of the identification of individual, unique protein biomarker(s). As an example, intact Bacillus atrophaeus and Bacillus cereus spores, either pure or in mixtures, were unambiguously identified by this method after fragmenting and identifying individual small, acid-soluble spore proteins that are specific for each species. Factors such as experimental mass accuracy and number of detected fragment ions, precursor ion charge state, and sequence-specific fragmentation have been evaluated with the objective of extending the approach to other microorganisms. MALDI-TOF/TOF-MS in a lab setting is an efficient tool for in situ confirmation/verification of initial microorganism identification.

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