Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32915813›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Computational assessment of the feasibility of protonation-based protein sequencing.

Giles Miclotte, Koen Martens, Jan Fostier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Giles MiclotteIDLab, Ghent University-Imec, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-9212-3440
Koen MartensImec, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan FostierIDLab, Ghent University-Imec, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-9994-8269

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in DNA sequencing methods revolutionized biology by providing highly accurate reads, with high throughput or high read length. These read data are being used in many biological and medical applications. Modern DNA sequencing methods have no equivalent in protein sequencing, severely limiting the widespread application of protein data. Recently, several optical protein sequencing methods have been proposed that rely on the fluorescent labeling of amino acids. Here, we introduce the reprotonation-deprotonation protein sequencing method. Unlike other methods, this proposed technique relies on the measurement of an electrical signal and requires no fluorescent labeling. In reprotonation-deprotonation protein sequencing, the terminal amino acid is identified through its unique protonation signal, and by repeatedly cleaving the terminal amino acids one-by-one, each amino acid in the peptide is measured. By means of simulations, we show that, given a reference database of known proteins, reprotonation-deprotonation sequencing has the potential to correctly identify proteins in a sample. Our simulations provide target values for the signal-to-noise ratios that sensor devices need to attain in order to detect reprotonation-deprotonation events, as well as suitable pH values and required measurement times per amino acid. For instance, an SNR of 10 is required for a 61.71% proteome recovery rate with 100 ms measurement time per amino acid.

Indexed as

Amino AcidsFluorescent DyesPeptidesProteinsProteomeProtonsSequence Analysis, DNASequence Analysis, ProteinSignal-To-Noise RatioAmino AcidsFluorescent DyesPeptidesProteinsProteomeProtons

Identifiers

PMID32915813
PMCPMC7485799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.