ArticleFrontiers in molecular biosciences2021
Development of Methodology to Investigate the Surface SMALPome of Mammalian Cells.
Article in Frontiers in molecular biosciences, 2021. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- From bottom-up to cell surface proteomics: detergents or no detergents, that is the question.Biochemical Society transactions · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Extraction of membrane proteins from biological membranes has traditionally involved detergents. In the past decade, a new technique has been developed, which uses styrene maleic acid (SMA) copolymers to extract membrane proteins into nanodiscs without the requirement of detergents. SMA nanodiscs are compatible with analytical techniques, such as small-angle scattering, NMR spectroscopy, and DLS, and are therefore an attractive medium for membrane protein characterization. While mass spectrometry has also been reported as a technique compatible with copolymer extraction, most studies have focused on lipidomics, which involves solvent extraction of lipids from nanodiscs prior to mass-spectrometry analysis. In this study, mass spectrometry proteomics was used to investigate whether there are qualitative or quantitative differences in the mammalian plasma membrane proteins extracted with SMA compared to a detergent control. For this, cell surface proteins of 3T3L1 fibroblasts were biotinylated and extracted using either SMA or detergent. Following affinity pull-down of biotinylated proteins with NeutrAvidin beads, samples were analyzed by nanoLC-MS. Here, we report for the first time, a global proteomics protocol for detection of a mammalian cell "SMALPome", membrane proteins incorporated into SMA nanodiscs. Removal of SMA from samples prior to processing of samples for mass spectrometry was a crucial step in the protocol. The reported surface SMALPome of 3T3L1 fibroblasts consists of 205 integral membrane proteins. It is apparent that the detergent extraction method used is, in general, quantitatively more efficient at extracting proteins from the plasma membrane than SMA extraction. However, samples prepared following detergent extraction contained a greater proportion of proteins that were considered to be "non-specific" than in samples prepared from SMA extracts. Tantalizingly, it was also observed that proteins detected uniquely or highly preferentially in pull-downs from SMA extracts were primarily multi-spanning membrane proteins. These observations hint at qualitative differences between SMA and detergent extraction that are worthy of further investigation.
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.