Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31685960›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2019

A mass spectrometry workflow for measuring protein turnover rates in vivo.

Mihai Alevra, Sunit Mandad, Till Ischebeck, Henning Urlaub, Silvio O Rizzoli, Eugenio F Fornasiero

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Mihai Alevra *Department of Neuro- and Sensory Physiology & Center for Biostructural Imaging of Neurodegeneration (BIN), University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Sunit Mandad *Department of Neuro- and Sensory Physiology & Center for Biostructural Imaging of Neurodegeneration (BIN), University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Till IschebeckDepartment of Plant Biochemistry, Albrecht-von-Haller-Institute for Plant Sciences and Göttingen Center for Molecular Biosciences (GZMB), University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Henning UrlaubDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Silvio O RizzoliDepartment of Neuro- and Sensory Physiology & Center for Biostructural Imaging of Neurodegeneration (BIN), University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. srizzol@gwdg.de.
Eugenio F FornasieroDepartment of Neuro- and Sensory Physiology & Center for Biostructural Imaging of Neurodegeneration (BIN), University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. efornas@gwdg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7643-4962

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proteins are continually produced and degraded, to avoid the accumulation of old or damaged molecules and to maintain the efficiency of physiological processes. Despite its importance, protein turnover has been difficult to measure in vivo. Previous approaches to evaluating turnover in vivo have required custom labeling approaches, involved complex mass spectrometry (MS) analyses, or used comparative strategies that do not allow direct quantitative measurements. Here, we describe a robust protocol for quantitative proteome turnover analysis in mice that is based on a commercially available diet for stable isotope labeling of amino acids in mammals (SILAM). We start by discussing fundamental concepts of protein turnover, including different methodological approaches. We then cover in detail the practical aspects of metabolic labeling and explain both the experimental and computational steps that must be taken to obtain accurate in vivo results. Finally, we present a simple experimental workflow that enables measurement of precise turnover rates in a time frame of ~4-5 weeks, including the labeling time. We also provide all the scripts needed for the interpretation of the MS results and for comparing turnover across different conditions. Overall, the workflow presented here comprises several improvements in the determination of protein lifetimes with respect to other available methods, including a minimally invasive labeling strategy and a robust interpretation of MS results, thus enhancing reproducibility across laboratories.

Indexed as

Amino AcidsAnimalsIsotope LabelingMaleMass SpectrometryMiceMice, Inbred C57BLProtein BiosynthesisProteinsProteolysisProteomeProteomicsReproducibility of ResultsWorkflowAmino AcidsProteinsProteome

Identifiers

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.