Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27123950›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2016

Six alternative proteases for mass spectrometry-based proteomics beyond trypsin.

Piero Giansanti, Liana Tsiatsiani, Teck Yew Low, Albert J R Heck

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 201 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
201citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

201 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Integrating mass spectrometry with Nanopore direct RNA sequencing forbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. RNase 4 improves bottom-up modification mapping ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

141 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Piero GiansantiBiomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Liana TsiatsianiBiomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Teck Yew LowBiomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Albert J R HeckBiomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2405-4404

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein digestion using a dedicated protease represents a key element in a typical mass spectrometry (MS)-based shotgun proteomics experiment. Up to now, digestion has been predominantly performed with trypsin, mainly because of its high specificity, widespread availability and ease of use. Lately, it has become apparent that the sole use of trypsin in bottom-up proteomics may impose certain limits in our ability to grasp the full proteome, missing out particular sites of post-translational modifications, protein segments or even subsets of proteins. To overcome this problem, the proteomics community has begun to explore alternative proteases to complement trypsin. However, protocols, as well as expected results generated from these alternative proteases, have not been systematically documented. Therefore, here we provide an optimized protocol for six alternative proteases that have already shown promise in their applicability in proteomics, namely chymotrypsin, LysC, LysN, AspN, GluC and ArgC. This protocol is formulated to promote ease of use and robustness, which enable parallel digestion with each of the six tested proteases. We present data on protease availability and usage including recommendations for reagent preparation. We additionally describe the appropriate MS data analysis methods and the anticipated results in the case of the analysis of a single protein (BSA) and a more complex cellular lysate (Escherichia coli). The digestion protocol presented here is convenient and robust and can be completed in ∼2 d.

Indexed as

Chromatography, LiquidEscherichia coli ProteinsIsotope LabelingMass SpectrometryPeptide HydrolasesPeptidesProteomicsQuality ControlTandem Mass SpectrometryTrypsinEscherichia coli ProteinsPeptide HydrolasesPeptidesTrypsin

Identifiers

PMID27123950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.