Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Electrophoresisarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Electrophoresis
Article . 1997 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
Electrophoresis
Article . 1997
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Peptide‐mass fingerprinting and the ideal covering set for protein characterisation

Authors: Timothy G. Littlejohn; Ian Humphery-Smith; Michael J. Wise;

Peptide‐mass fingerprinting and the ideal covering set for protein characterisation

Abstract

AbstractThe rules that govern the dynamics of protein characterisation by peptide‐mass fingerprinting (PMF) were investigated through multiple interrogations of a nonredundant protein database. This was achieved by analysing the efficiency of identifying each entry in the entire database via perfect in silico digestion with a series of 20 pseudo‐endoproteinases cutting at the carboxy terminal of each amino acid residue, and the multiple cutters: trypsin, chymotrypsin and Glu‐C. The distribution of peptide fragment masses generated by endoproteinase digestion was examined with a view to designing better approaches to protein characterisation by PMF. On average, and for both common and rare cutters, the combination of approximately two fragments was sufficient to identify most database entries. However, the rare cutters left more entries unidentified in the database. Total coverage of the entire database could not be achieved with one enzymatic cutter alone, nor when all 23 cutters were used together. Peptide fragments of > 5000 Da had little effect on the outcome of PMF to correctly characterise database entries, while those with low mass (near to 350 Da in the case of trypsin) were found to be of most utility. The most frequently occurring fragments were also found in this lower mass region. The maximum size of uncut database entries (those not containing a specific amino acid residue) ranged from 52 908 Da to 258 314 Da, while the failure rate for a single cutter in identifying database entries varied from 10 865 (8.4%) to 23 290 (18.1 %). PMF is likely to be a mainstay of any high‐throughput protein screening strategy for large‐scale proteome analysis. A better understanding of the merits and limitations of this technique will allow researchers to optimise their protein characterisation procedures.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Databases, Factual, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Endopeptidases, Molecular Sequence Data, Proteins, Amino Acid Sequence, Peptide Mapping, Mass Spectrometry, Peptide Fragments

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    26
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
26
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!