ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2022
Complementary proteome and glycoproteome access revealed through comparative analysis of reversed phase and porous graphitic carbon chromatography.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inclusion of Porous Graphitic Carbon Chromatography Yields Greater Protein Identification and Compartment and Process Coverage and Enables More Reflective Protein-Level Label-Free Quantitation.Journal of proteome research · 2023Article
- Higher Temperature Porous Graphitic Carbon Separations Differentially Impact Distinct Glycopeptide Classes.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Continual developments in instrumental and analytical techniques have aided in establishing rigorous connections between protein glycosylation and human illness. These illnesses, such as various forms of cancer, are often associated with poor prognoses, prompting the need for more comprehensive characterization of the glycoproteome. While innovative instrumental and computational strategies have largely benefited glycoproteomic analyses, less attention is given to benefits gained through alternative, optimized chromatographic techniques. Porous graphitic carbon (PGC) chromatography has gained considerable interest in glycomics research due to its mobile phase flexibility, increased retention of polar analytes, and improved structural elucidation at higher temperatures. PGC has yet to be systematically compared against or in tandem with standard reversed phase liquid chromatography (RPLC) in high-throughput bottom-up glycoproteomic experiments, leaving the potential benefits unexplored. Performing comparative analysis of single and biphasic separation regimes at a range of column temperatures illustrates complementary advantages for each method. PGC separation is shown to selectively retain shorter, more hydrophilic glycopeptide species, imparting higher average charge, and exhibiting greater microheterogeneity coverage for identified glycosites. Additionally, we demonstrate that liquid-phase separation of glycopeptide isomers may be achieved through both single and biphasic PGC separations, providing a means towards facile, multidimensional glycopeptide characterization. Beyond this, we demonstrate how utilization of multiple separation regimes and column temperatures can aid in profiling the glycoproteome in tumorigenic and aggressive prostate cancer cells. RAW MS proteomic and glycoproteomic datasets have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD024196 (10.6019/PXD024196) and PXD024195, respectively.
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.