ArticleJournal of chromatographic science2016
Improvement of Mitochondria Extract from Saccharomyces cerevisiae Characterization in Shotgun Proteomics Using Sheathless Capillary Electrophoresis Coupled to Tandem Mass Spectrometry.
Article in Journal of chromatographic science, 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The hidden treasures in endophytic fungi: a comprehensive review on the diversity of fungal bioactive metabolites, usual analytical methodologies, and applications.Archives of microbiology · 2024Review
- Preparative capillary electrophoresis (CE) fractionation of protein digests improves protein and peptide identification in bottom-up proteomics.Analytical methods : advancing methods and applications · 2022Article
- Comparative mitochondrial proteomics of Leishmania tropica clinical isolates resistant and sensitive to meglumine antimoniate.Parasitology research · 2020Article
- Capillary Electrophoresis: Trends and Recent Advances.Analytical chemistry · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, we describe the characterization of a quantity-limited sample (100 ng) of yeast mitochondria by shotgun bottom-up proteomics. Sample characterization was carried out by sheathless capillary electrophoresis, equipped with a high sensitivity porous tip and coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (CESI-MS-MS) and concomitantly with a state-of-art nano flow liquid chromatography coupled to a similar mass spectrometry (MS) system (nanoLC-MS-MS). With single injections, both nanoLC-MS-MS and CESI-MS-MS 60 min-long separation experiments allowed us to identify 271 proteins (976 unique peptides) and 300 proteins (1,765 unique peptides) respectively, demonstrating a significant specificity and complementarity in identification depending on the physicochemical separation employed. Such complementary, maximizing the number of analytes detected, presents a powerful tool to deepen a biological sample's proteomic characterization. A comprehensive study of the specificity provided by each separating technique was also performed using the different properties of the identified peptides: molecular weight, mass-to-charge ratio (m/z), isoelectric point (pI), sequence coverage or MS-MS spectral quality enabled to determine the contribution of each separation. For example, CESI-MS-MS enables to identify larger peptides and eases the detection of those having extreme pI without impairing spectral quality. The addition of peptides, and therefore proteins identified by both techniques allowed us to increase significantly the sequence coverages and then the confidence of characterization. In this study, we also demonstrated that the two yeast enolase isoenzymes were both characterized in the CESI-MS-MS data set. The observation of discriminant proteotypic peptides is facilitated when a high number of precursors with high-quality MS-MS spectra are generated.
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.