ArticleAnalytical chemistry2020
Open Search Strategy for Inferring the Masses of Cross-Link Adducts on Proteins.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Insights on Chemical Crosslinking Strategies for Proteins.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Mass Spectrometry Structural Proteomics Enabled by Limited Proteolysis and Cross-Linking.Mass spectrometry reviewsReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Development of new reagents for protein cross-linking is constantly ongoing. The chemical formulas for the linker adducts formed by these reagents are usually deduced from expert knowledge and then validated by mass spectrometry. Clearly, it would be more rigorous to infer the chemical compositions of the adducts directly from the data without any prior assumptions on their chemistries. Unfortunately, the analysis tools that are currently available to detect chemical modifications on linear peptides are not applicable to the case of two cross-linked peptides. Here, we show that an adaptation of the open search strategy that works on linear peptides can be used to characterize cross-link modifications in pairs of peptides. We benchmark our approach by correctly inferring the linker masses of two well-known reagents, DSS and formaldehyde, to accuracies of a few parts per million. We then investigate the cross-linking chemistries of two poorly characterized reagents: EMCS and glutaraldehyde. In the case of EMCS, we find that the expected cross-linking chemistry is accompanied by a competing chemistry that targets other amino acid types. In the case of glutaraldehyde, we find that the chemical formula of the dominant linker is C
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.