4.7 Article

Efficient site-specific Labeling of proteins via cysteines

期刊

BIOCONJUGATE CHEMISTRY
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 786-791

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/bc7002499

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM069709-01A1, R01 GM069709, GM069709-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Methods for chemical modifications of proteins have been crucial for the advancement of proteomics. In particular, site-specific covalent labeling of proteins with fluorophores and other moieties has permitted the development of a multitude of assays for proteome analysis. A common approach for such a modification is solvent-accessible cysteine labeling using thiol-reactive dyes. Cysteine is very attractive for site-specific conjugation due to its relative rarity throughout the proteome and the ease of its introduction into a specific site along the protein's amino acid chain. This is achieved by site-directed mutagenesis, most often without perturbing the protein's function. Bottlenecks in this reaction, however, include the maintenance of reactive thiol groups without oxidation before the reaction, and the effective removal of unreacted molecules prior to fluorescence studies. Here, we describe an efficient, specific, and rapid procedure for cysteine labeling starting from well-reduced proteins in the solid state. The efficacy and specificity of the improved procedure are estimated using a variety of single-cysteine proteins and thiol-reactive dyes. Based on UV/vis absorbance spectra, coupling efficiencies are typically in the range 70-90%, and specificities are better than similar to 95%. The labeled proteins are evaluated using fluorescence assays, proving that the covalent modification does not alter their function. In addition to maleimide-based conjugation, this improved procedure may be used for other thiol-reactive conjugations such as haloacetyl, alkyl halide, and disulfide interchange derivatives. This facile and rapid procedure is well suited for high throughput proteome analysis.

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