ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Evaluating the efficacy of protein quantification methods on membrane proteins.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protein quantification is an important tool for a wide range of biological applications. The most common broadscale methods include the Lowry, bicinchoninic acid (BCA), and Coomassie Bradford assays. Despite their wide applicability, the mechanisms of action imply that these methods may not be ideal for large transmembrane proteins due to the proteins' integration in the plasma membrane. Here, we investigate this problem by assessing the efficacy and applicability of these three common protein quantification methods on a candidate transmembrane protein - the Na,K-ATPase (NKA). We compared these methods to an ELISA, which we newly developed and describe here for the quantification of NKA. The use of a relative standard curve allows this ELISA to be easily adapted to other proteins and across the animal kingdom. Our results revealed that the three conventional methods significantly underestimate the concentration of NKA compared to the ELISA. Further, by applying the protein concentrations determined by the different methods to in vitro assays, we found that variation in the resulting data was consistently low when the assay reactions were prepared based on concentrations determined from the ELISA. Thus, when target protein concentrations vary across samples, the conventional quantification methods cannot produce reliable results in downstream applications. In contrast, the ELISA we describe here consistently provides robust results.
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.