ArticleThe Journal of membrane biology2019
Comparative Proteomics Analysis of Four Commonly Used Methods for Identification of Novel Plasma Membrane Proteins.
Article in The Journal of membrane biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping the membrane-enriched proteome of recombinant Chinese hamster ovary cells following induction of endoplasmic reticulum stress.Biotechnology letters · 2026Article
- Streamlined Biotinylation, Enrichment and Analysis for Enhanced Plasma Membrane Protein Identification Using TurboID and TurboID-Start Biotin Ligases.The Journal of membrane biology · 2024Article
- Mass Spectrometry-Based Proteomic Technology and Its Application to Study Skeletal Muscle Cell Biology.Cells · 2023Review
- Fiber-Type Shifting in Sarcopenia of Old Age: Proteomic Profiling of the Contractile Apparatus of Skeletal Muscles.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Search for Novel Plasma Membrane Proteins as Potential Biomarkers in Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells Derived from Dental Pulp, Adipose Tissue, Bone Marrow, and Hair Follicle.The Journal of membrane biology · 2021Article
- Article
- Unveiling the potential: Extracellular vesicles from plant cell suspension cultures as a promising source.BioFactors (Oxford, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Plasma membrane proteins perform a variety of important tasks in the cells. These tasks can be diverse as carrying nutrients across the plasma membrane, receiving chemical signals from outside the cell, translating them into intracellular action, and anchoring the cell in a particular location. When these crucial roles of plasma membrane proteins are considered, the need for their characterization becomes inevitable. Certain characteristics of plasma membrane proteins such as hydrophobicity, low solubility, and low abundance limit their detection by proteomic analyses. Here, we presented a comparative proteomics study in which the most commonly used plasma membrane protein enrichment methods were evaluated. The methods that were utilized include biotinylation, selective CyDye labeling, temperature-dependent phase partition, and density-gradient ultracentrifugation. Western blot analysis was performed to assess the level of plasma membrane protein enrichment using plasma membrane and cytoplasmic protein markers. Quantitative evaluation of the level of enrichment was performed by two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) and benzyldimethyl-n-hexadecylammonium chloride/sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (16-BAC/SDS-PAGE) from which the protein spots were cut and identified. Results from this study demonstrated that density-gradient ultracentrifugation method was superior when coupled with 16-BAC/SDS-PAGE. This work presents a valuable contribution and provides a future direction to the membrane sub-proteome research by evaluating commonly used methods for plasma membrane protein enrichment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31346646What 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.