4.7 Article

Comparison of In-Solution, FASP, and S-Trap Based Digestion Methods for Bottom-Up Proteomic Studies

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
卷 17, 期 7, 页码 2480-2490

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00235

关键词

sample preparation techniques; bottom-up proteomics; suspension trap; filter-aided sample preparation; sodium dodecyl sulfate; label-free quantification; digestion comparison; tandem mass spectrometry; quantitative proteomics

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01GM110406]
  2. National Institutes of Health Training Grant-Chemistry Biochemistry Biology Interface Program [T32GM075762]
  3. National Science Foundation (CAREER Award) [CHE-1351595]
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [R01GM110406, T32GM075762] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bottom-up proteomic strategies rely on efficient digestion of proteins into peptides for mass spectrometry analysis. In-solution and filter-based strategies are commonly used for proteomic analysis. In recent years, filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) has become the dominant filter-based method due to its ability to remove SDS prior to mass spectrometry analysis. However, the time-consuming nature of FASP protocols have led to the development of new filter-based strategies. Suspension traps (S-Traps) were recently reported as an alternative to FASP and in-solution strategies as they allow for high concentrations of SDS in a fraction of the time of a typical FASP protocol. In this study, we compare the yields from in-solution, FASP, and S-Trap based digestions of proteins extracted in SDS and urea-based lysis buffers. We performed label-free quantification to analyze the differences in the portions of the proteome identified using each method. Overall, our results show that each digestion method had a high degree of reproducibility within the method type. However, S-Traps outperformed FASP and in-solution digestions by providing the most efficient digestion with the greatest number of unique protein identifications. This is the first work to provide a direct quantitative comparison of two filter-based digestion methods and a traditional in solution approach to provide information regarding the most efficient proteomic preparation.

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