Department of Analytical Biochemistry, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy , University of Groningen , 9713 AV Groningen , The Netherlands.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery , University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen , Hanzeplein 1 , 9713 GZ Groningen , The Netherlands.
Anal Chem. 2018 Apr 17;90(8):5405-5413. doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.8b00600. Epub 2018 Apr 6.
For mass spectrometry-based proteomics, the selected sample preparation strategy is a key determinant for information that will be obtained. However, the corresponding selection is often not based on a fit-for-purpose evaluation. Here we report a comparison of in-gel (IGD), in-solution (ISD), on-filter (OFD), and on-pellet digestion (OPD) workflows on the basis of targeted (QconCAT-multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) method for mitochondrial proteins) and discovery proteomics (data-dependent acquisition, DDA) analyses using three different human head and neck tissues (i.e., nasal polyps, parotid gland, and palatine tonsils). Our study reveals differences between the sample preparation methods, for example, with respect to protein and peptide losses, quantification variability, protocol-induced methionine oxidation, and asparagine/glutamine deamidation as well as identification of cysteine-containing peptides. However, none of the methods performed best for all types of tissues, which argues against the existence of a universal sample preparation method for proteome analysis.
对于基于质谱的蛋白质组学,所选的样品制备策略是决定可获得信息的关键因素。然而,相应的选择通常不是基于针对性的评估。在这里,我们报告了基于胶内(IGD)、溶液内(ISD)、滤器上(OFD)和颗粒上(OPD)消化方法的比较,使用三种不同的人类头颈部组织(即鼻息肉、腮腺和腭扁桃体)进行靶向(QconCAT-多重反应监测(MRM)方法用于线粒体蛋白质)和发现蛋白质组学(数据依赖采集,DDA)分析。我们的研究揭示了样品制备方法之间的差异,例如,在蛋白质和肽的损失、定量变异性、方法诱导的蛋氨酸氧化、天冬酰胺/谷氨酰胺脱酰胺以及半胱氨酸肽的鉴定方面。然而,没有一种方法对所有类型的组织都表现最好,这表明不存在用于蛋白质组分析的通用样品制备方法。