1 / 12

Comparative Proteome Analysis

Comparative Proteome Analysis. Gagne et al. Proteome Sci. 2007. Main Goal: Compare proteomics for two human epithelial ovarian cell lines in search for cancer biomarkers. Morphology of the two human epithelial ovarian cell lines.

noam
Télécharger la présentation

Comparative Proteome Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparative Proteome Analysis Gagne et al. Proteome Sci. 2007

  2. Main Goal: Compare proteomics for two human epithelial ovarian cell lines in search for cancer biomarkers

  3. Morphology of the two human epithelial ovarian cell lines TOV-81D cells (low malignant) show a flat morphology similar to normal human ovarian epithelium (A) TOV-112D cells (extremely aggressive) show a highly rounded morphology characteristic of highly transformed cell lines (B)

  4. Traditional 2D-GE Proteomics Technique • Obtain cell lysates • Run 2D-GE for each sample (in triplicates) • Compare the gels and spot over-expressed and/or under-expressed proteins • Identify those proteins (for each spot): • Cut the spot and trypsinaze the protein • Run LS-MS • Identify at least two unique peptides

  5. Advantages: • Well established technique • Visualization of the protein spots • Detection of modified proteins Disadvantages: • Laborious and time consuming • MW cut-off (6 – 250 kDa)

  6. Detection of carbonylated (oxidized) proteins A – 2D gel of total proteins from wild-type Arabidopsis seeds B – The indicated portion of the gel C, D, E – Revelation of carbonylated proteins with the anti-DNP immunoassay: C, Dry mature seeds; D, Seeds incubated in water; E, Seeds incubated with salicylic acid (Job et al., 2005; Rajjou et al., 2006)

  7. “Full digest” Proteomics Technique with iTRAQ Labeling • Obtain cell lysates • Trypsinaze each lysate • Label each lysate with one iTRAQ reagent • Combine samples (up to 4 lysates) • Perform pre-fractionation (IEF, IEC) • Run LC-MS (10-20 fractions) • Identify and simultaneously quantify peptides and parent proteins

  8. Analysis of iTRAQ-labeled Peptides • 114 • 115 • 116 • 117 • 116 • 117 • 115 • 114

  9. Advantages: • No 2D gels, no MW cut-off • Combine up to 4 digested samples • Reliable quantitation Disadvantages: • Complex peptide mixtures • Additional in vitro labeling step • Additional pre-fractionation step

  10. Representative 2D gel images for the two ovarian cell lines

  11. Final Score: • 2D GE/LC-MS – 65 (51) proteins • iTRAQ LC-MS – 37 (32) proteins • Crossover – 10 proteins

  12. Conclusions: • Both approaches were successful in the biomarker search • Each approach has specific advantages and limitations • There is no easy way for proteomics studies…

More Related