Uitto Pauliina M, Lance Braddon K, Wood Graham R, Sherman James, Baker Mark S, Molloy Mark P
Department of Chemistry and Biomolecular Sciences, Macquarie University, 2109, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
J Proteome Res. 2007 Jun;6(6):2105-12. doi: 10.1021/pr060638v. Epub 2007 May 2.
Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) image analysis is conventionally used for comparative proteomics. However, there are a number of technical difficulties associated with 2-DE protein separation that limit the depth of proteome coverage, and the image analysis steps are typically labor-intensive and low-throughput. Recently, mass spectrometry-based quantitation strategies have been described as alternative differential proteome analysis techniques. In this study, we investigated changes in protein expression using an ovarian cancer cell line, OVMZ6, 24 h post-stimulation with the relatively weak agonist, urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA). Quantitative protein profiles were obtained by MALDI-TOF/TOF from stable isotope-labeled cells in culture (SILAC), and these results were compared to the quantitative ratios obtained using 2-DE gel image analysis. MALDI-TOF/TOF mass spectrometry showed that differential quantitation using SILAC was highly reproducible (approximately 8% coefficient of variation (CV)), and this variance was considerably lower than that achieved using automated 2-DE image analysis strategies (CV approximately 25%). Both techniques revealed subtle alterations in cellular protein expression following uPA stimulation. However, due to the lower variances associated with the SILAC technique, smaller changes in expression of uPA-inducible proteins could be found with greater certainty.
二维凝胶电泳(2-DE)图像分析传统上用于比较蛋白质组学。然而,2-DE蛋白质分离存在许多技术难题,限制了蛋白质组覆盖的深度,并且图像分析步骤通常劳动强度大且通量低。最近,基于质谱的定量策略已被描述为替代的差异蛋白质组分析技术。在本研究中,我们使用卵巢癌细胞系OVMZ6,在用相对较弱的激动剂尿激酶型纤溶酶原激活剂(uPA)刺激24小时后,研究蛋白质表达的变化。通过基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间/串联飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF/TOF)从培养中的稳定同位素标记细胞(SILAC)获得定量蛋白质谱,并将这些结果与使用2-DE凝胶图像分析获得的定量比率进行比较。MALDI-TOF/TOF质谱显示,使用SILAC的差异定量具有高度可重复性(变异系数(CV)约为8%),并且这种差异远低于使用自动化2-DE图像分析策略所达到的差异(CV约为25%)。两种技术均揭示了uPA刺激后细胞蛋白质表达的细微变化。然而,由于与SILAC技术相关的差异较低,uPA诱导蛋白表达中较小的变化能够更确定地被发现。