Marcus Katrin, Rabilloud Thierry
Medizinisches Proteom-Center, Medical Faculty & Medical Proteome Analysis, Center for Proteindiagnostics (PRODI) Ruhr-University Bochum Gesundheitscampus, 4 44801 Bochum, Germany.
Laboratory of Chemistry and Biology of Metals, Université Grenoble Alpes UMR 5249, CNRS, CEA 38054 Grenoble, France.
Proteomes. 2020 Sep 3;8(3):23. doi: 10.3390/proteomes8030023.
In this second decade of the 21st century, we are lucky enough to have different types of proteomic analyses at our disposal. Furthermore, other functional omics such as transcriptomics have also undergone major developments, resulting in mature tools. However, choice equals questions, and the major question is how each proteomic strategy is fit for which purpose. The aim of this opinion paper is to reposition the various proteomic strategies in the frame of what is known in terms of biological regulations in order to shed light on the power, limitations, and paths for improvement for the different proteomic setups. This should help biologists to select the best-suited proteomic strategy for their purposes in order not to be driven by raw availability or fashion arguments but rather by the best fitness for purpose. In particular, knowing the limitations of the different proteomic strategies helps in interpreting the results correctly and in devising the validation experiments that should be made downstream of the proteomic analyses.
在21世纪的第二个十年,我们有幸能够使用不同类型的蛋白质组学分析方法。此外,其他功能组学,如转录组学,也取得了重大进展,产生了成熟的工具。然而,选择也带来了问题,主要问题是每种蛋白质组学策略适用于何种目的。这篇观点文章的目的是在已知的生物调控框架内重新定位各种蛋白质组学策略,以便阐明不同蛋白质组学设置的优势、局限性和改进途径。这应该有助于生物学家为其目的选择最合适的蛋白质组学策略,从而不被原始可用性或时尚观点所左右,而是基于最适合目的的原则。特别是,了解不同蛋白质组学策略的局限性有助于正确解释结果,并设计蛋白质组学分析下游应进行的验证实验。