ArticleMolecular and cellular probes
Reprint of "Assessment of marker proteins identified in whole cell extracts for bacterial speciation using liquid chromatography electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry".
Article in Molecular and cellular probes. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Republished from
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Staphylococcal strains (CoNS) were speciated in this study. Digests of proteins released from whole cells were converted to tryptic peptides for analysis. Liquid chromatography electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry (LC-ESI MS/MS, Orbitrap) was employed for peptide analysis. Data analysis was performed employing the open-source software X!Tandem which uses sequenced genomes to generate a virtual peptide database for comparison to experimental data. The search database was modified to include the genomes of the 11 Staphylococcus species most commonly isolated from man. The number of total peptides matching each protein along with the number of peptides specifically matching to the homologue (or homologues) for strains of the same species were assessed. Any peptides not matching to the species examined were considered conflict peptides. The proteins typically identified with the largest percentage of sequence coverage, number of matched peptides and number of peptides corresponding to only the correct species were elongation factor Tu (EF Tu) and enolase (Enol). Additional proteins with consistently observed peptides as well as peptides matching only homologues from the same species were citrate synthase (CS) and 1-pyrroline-5-carboxylate dehydrogenase (1P5CD). Protein markers, previously identified from gel slices, (aconitate hydratase and oxoglutarate dehydrogenase) were found to provide low confidence scores when employing whole cell digests. The methodological approach described here provides a simple yet elegant way of identification of staphylococci. However, perhaps more importantly the technology should be applicable universally for identification of any bacterial species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24486519What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.