ArticleBio-protocol2025
Advancing 2-DE Techniques: High-Efficiency Protein Extraction From Lupine Roots.
Article in Bio-protocol, 2025. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protein isolation combined with two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) is a powerful technique for analyzing complex protein mixtures, enabling the simultaneous separation of thousands of proteins. This method involves two distinct steps: isoelectric focusing (IEF), which separates proteins based on their isoelectric points (pI), and sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), which separates proteins by their relative molecular weights. However, the success of 2-DE is highly dependent on the quality of the starting material. Isolating proteins from plant mature roots is challenging due to interfering compounds and a thick, lignin-rich cell wall. Bacterial proteins and metabolites further complicate extraction in legumes, which form symbiotic relationships with bacteria. Endogenous proteases can degrade proteins, and microbial contaminants may co-purify with plant proteins. Therefore, comparing extraction methods is essential to minimize contaminants, maximize yield, and preserve protein integrity. In this study, we compare two protein isolation techniques for lupine roots and optimize a protein precipitation protocol to enhance the yield for downstream proteomic analyses. The effectiveness of each method was evaluated based on the quality and resolution of 2-DE gel images. The optimized protocol provides a reliable platform for comparative proteomics and functional studies of lupine root responses to stress, e.g., drought or salinity, and symbiotic interactions with bacteria. Key features • Protocol tailored for isolating proteins from lupine roots, including those involved in symbiotic relationships with bacteria. • Our method is suitable for analyzing complex protein mixtures through IEF and SDS-PAGE for high-resolution separation. • Optimized precipitation method increases protein yield for downstream mass spectrometry and comparative proteomic analyses.
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.