ArticleThe Analyst2020
Electroblotting through a tryptic membrane for LC-MS/MS analysis of proteins separated in electrophoretic gels.
Article in The Analyst, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Slot Blot- and Electrospray Ionization-Mass Spectrometry/Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization-Mass Spectrometry-Based Novel Analysis Methods for the Identification and Quantification of Advanced Glycation End-Products in the Urine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- In-Membrane Enrichment and Peptic Digestion to Facilitate Analysis of Monoclonal Antibody Glycosylation.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Potential of the Novel Slot Blot Method with a PVDF Membrane for Protein Identification and Quantification in Kampo Medicines.Membranes · 2023Article
- Electroblotting through Enzymatic Membranes to Enhance Molecular Tissue Imaging.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Digestion of proteins separated via sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) remains a popular method for protein identification using mass-spectrometry based proteomics. Although robust and routine, the in-gel digestion procedure is laborious and time-consuming. Electroblotting to a capture membrane prior to digestion reduces preparation steps but requires on-membrane digestion that yields fewer peptides than in-gel digestion. This paper develops direct electroblotting through a trypsin-containing membrane to a capture membrane to simplify extraction and digestion of proteins separated by SDS-PAGE. Subsequent liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) identifies the extracted peptides. Analysis of peptides from different capture membrane pieces shows that electrodigestion does not greatly disturb the spatial resolution of a standard protein mixture separated by SDS-PAGE. Electrodigestion of an Escherichia coli (E. coli) cell lysate requires four hours of total sample preparation and results in only 13% fewer protein identifications than in-gel digestion, which can take 24 h. Compared to simple electroblotting and protein digestion on a poly(vinylidene difluoride) (PVDF) capture membrane, adding a trypsin membrane to the electroblot increases the number of protein identifications by 22%. Additionally, electrodigestion experiments using capture membranes coated with polyelectrolyte layers identify a higher fraction of small proteolytic peptides than capture on PVDF or in-gel digestion.
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.