Protein analysis bottom

FIGURE 15.2 Common protein ionization methods used for MS-based proteomics. Two common ionization technologies are currently available for protein analysis. Top ESI volatilizes and ionizes peptides and proteins in solution. Bottom MALDI uses analytes that are co-crystallized in a matrix composed of organic acid on a solid support. A pulse of ultraviolet laser evaporates the matrix and analyte into gas phase, resulting in generation of single charge ions. 

Chapter 5 provides an overview of Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance (FT-ICR) mass spectrometry and its applications in the structural characterization of peptides and proteins. The principles of FT-ICR, that is, ion motion, ion excitation/ detection, and instrumental considerations, are discussed and an explanation of the features of FT-ICR that make it so suitable for peptide/protein analysis is presented. New methods for the fragmentation of peptide and protein ions in FT-ICR mass spectrometry, such as sustained off-resonance irradiation collision-induced dissociation (SORI-CID), infrared multiphoton dissociation (IRMPD), blackbody infrared radiative dissociation (BIRD), surface-induced dissociation (SID), and electron capture dissociation (BCD), are described in detail. Innovative hybrid FT-ICR instruments, which have recently become available, are reviewed. In conclusion, the chapter discusses the applications of FT-ICR in bottom-up and top-down proteomics. 

There are a number of pitfalls in the bottom-up approach to protein analysis ... 

Zhang Y, Fonslow BR, Shan B, Back M-C, Yates JR. Protein analysis by shotgun/bottom-up pro-teomics. Chem Rev. 2013a 113(4) 2343-94. 

Only the peptide subunits of a protein can be efficiently fragmented by CID for tandem MS analysis. Identifying a protein from such a peptide jumble is called bottom-up protein analysis. The corresponding tandem MS of the entire protein... 

The second and most important finding of this sequencing project was that the difference of 14 Da between the two proteins was not because of a methy-lation of the protein isolated from chicken but because of a substitution of valine for leucine. The MS/MS analysis of the tryptic pieces in which the substitution occurred is shown in Figure 10.11. Had this been a bottom-up... 

The combination of this top-down proteomics approach, which generates information on the structure of the intact protein, with a bottom-up approach for protein identification (using MS/MS data of tryptic peptides from the collected fractions) has been particularly useful for identifying posttranslational modifications, cotransla-tional processing, and proteolytic modifications in a number of proteins. Examples from our work will be shown to illustrate this hybrid methodology for proteomics analysis. 

The ability to resolve and characterize complicated protein mixtures by the combination of 2DLC and online mass spectrometry permits the combination of sample fractionation/simplification, top-down protein mass information, and bottom-up peptide level studies. In our lab, the simplified fractions generated by 2D(IEX-RP)LC are digested and analyzed using common peptide-level analysis approaches, including peptide mass fingerprinting (Henzel et al., 1993 Mann et al., 1993), matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) QTOF MS/MS (Millea et al., 2006), and various capillary LC/MS/MS methodologies (e.g., Ducret et al., 1998). 

In recent years, a novel approach to protein identification emerged, called top-down sequencing. Here the entire nondigested protein is analyzed. Apart from accurate MW measurement, the protein ion is fragmented by the electron capture dissociation (ECD) method (see Chapter 3). This provides in-depth information on the sequence of protein. Such analysis can be performed only with FTICR instruments (see Section 2.2.6) that ensure high resolution and accuracy but, at the same time, they are exceptionally expensive. However, as very large ions are analyzed, even the high accuracy of FTICR is sometimes not sufficient, and it is recommended that such analyses are accompanied by more traditional bottom-up approaches. 

However, Thematic Analysis does not require an accurate description of the binding domain only that a consistent consensus binding domain exists. The assumption was made, therefore, that this does exist and is defined, as for Family A, by the upper portions of transmembrane helices. " This is not unreasonable as the transduction mechanisms responsible for the interactions with the G-proteins appear to involve the bottom parts of the helices of all GPCRs. It is presumed that the shape and size of the consensus-binding domain is different between the families but is consistent within a family. 

Fig. 1. Schematic overview of the tumor spheroid-based migration assay. Tumor spheroids (TS) are transferred from their cuiture vessei or piate into a 96-weii fiat-bottomed migration piate pre-coated with an extraceiiuiar matrix (ECM) protein of choice (in this case, geiatin). Digital images of the spheroids are then captured at t=0 and once every 24 h for a period of up to 72 h, exemplified here by CAL spheroids. Image analysis software is used to calculate the spheroid size and extent of migration. Scale bar=100 p.m.

---