ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2016
In-Depth Characterization of Protein Disulfide Bonds by Online Liquid Chromatography-Electrochemistry-Mass Spectrometry.
Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Working with technical purity: simulation of red tattoo pigment metabolism by online-liquid chromatography-electrochemistry-mass spectrometry.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Comprehensive Analysis of Tryptic Peptides Arising from Disulfide Linkages in NISTmAb and Their Use for Developing a Mass Spectral Library.Journal of proteome research · 2021Article
- Characterization of Protein Disulfide Linkages by MS In-Source Dissociation Comparing to CID and ETD Tandem MS.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2019Article
- Recent mass spectrometry-based techniques and considerations for disulfide bond characterization in proteins.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Disulfide bonds are an important class of protein post-translational modifications, yet this structurally crucial modification type is commonly overlooked in mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics approaches. Recently, the benefits of online electrochemistry-assisted reduction of protein S-S bonds prior to MS analysis were exemplified by successful characterization of disulfide bonds in peptides and small proteins. In the current study, we have combined liquid chromatography (LC) with electrochemistry (EC) and mass analysis by Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance (FTICR) MS in an online LC-EC-MS platform to characterize protein disulfide bonds in a bottom-up proteomics workflow. A key advantage of a LC-based strategy is the use of the retention time in identifying both intra- and interpeptide disulfide bonds. This is demonstrated by performing two sequential analyses of a certain protein digest, once without and once with electrochemical reduction. In this way, the "parent" disulfide-linked peptide detected in the first run has a retention time-based correlation with the EC-reduced peptides detected in the second run, thus simplifying disulfide bond mapping. Using this platform, both inter- and intra-disulfide-linked peptides were characterized in two different proteins, ß-lactoglobulin and ribonuclease B. In order to prevent disulfide reshuffling during the digestion process, proteins were digested at a relatively low pH, using (a combination of) the high specificity proteases trypsin and Glu-C. With this approach, disulfide bonds in ß-lactoglobulin and ribonuclease B were comprehensively identified and localized, showing that online LC-EC-MS is a useful tool for the characterization of protein disulfide bonds.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.