Quantitative measurement of deamidation in lens betaB2-crystallin and peptides by direct electrospray injection and fragmentation in a Fourier transform mass spectrometer.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: Deamidation of lens crystallins and specific deamidation sites have been suggested to be associated with aging and cataracts. However, these studies have been hindered by the lack of suitable quantitative methods of measurement of protein deamidation. We demonstrate herein a method to quantitatively measure deamidation of proteins and peptides without prior sample preparation or separation in order to directly compare the amidated and deamidated forms. We have tested the hypothesis that the 19 mDa mass defect that distinguishes deamidated peptides and proteins from the ordinary natural isotopic species can be utilized for quantitative measurement of their rate and extent of deamidation. The measurement technique used was ion cyclotron resonance Fourier transform mass spectrometry (FTMS), alone with no prior sample preparation or separation. The amidated and deamidated species were recombinantly expressed human eye lens betaB2-crystallins and the peptides GlyIleAsnAlaGly and GlyAsnAsnAsnGly. FTMS measurements of lens proteins from a 1-month-old human donor were also carried out. METHODS: Wild type and mutant human eye lens betaB2-crystallins with Gln162 replaced by Glu162 were produced in bacteria, and GlyIleAsnAlaGly and GlyAsnAsnAsnGly were synthesized by Merrifield solid-phase peptide synthesis. The peptides were deamidated in pH 7.4, 37.00 degrees C, 0.15 M Tris-HCl aqueous solution for 18 successive time intervals before analysis. Mutant and wildtype betaB2-crystallin solutions at various compositional percentages were mixed and analyzed. The peptides were introduced by electrospray ionization and immediately analyzed in the ion cyclotron resonance (ICR) Fourier transform mass analyzer. Two mass defect analysis procedures were demonstrated for the proteins. In the first, betaB2-crystallin was introduced into the mass spectrometer by electrospray ionization and the +29 isotopic group was selectively introduced into the ICR mass analyzer, where 14 residue and 18 residue laser-induced fragments were separated and the extent of deamidation determined by mass defect analysis. In the second, betaB2-crystallin was introduced into the mass spectrometer by electrospray ionization and the entire sample was fragmented by collision ionization before introduction into the ICR mass analyzer, where 14 residue fragments were separated and the extent of deamidation determined by mass defect analysis. RESULTS: The betaB2-crystallin mass spectra showed a good quantitative dependence upon extent of deamidation. Direct injection by electrospray ionization followed by ion selection and laser fragmentation or by collision fragmentation produced fragments of amidated and deamidated betaB2-crystallin that were appropriate for FTMS quantitative analysis. The two peptides exhibited the expected four deamidation rate curves with acceptable precision. CONCLUSIONS: Mass defect FTMS quantitative analysis of protein deamidation, as reported for the first time herein and illustrated with betaB2-crystallin, should prove quite useful. This procedure omits gel separation, chromatography, enzymatic digestion, derivatization, and other procedures that currently add cost and time while degrading quantitative comparison of the amidated and deamidated forms. Mass defect FTMS is also well suited to quantitative deamidation rate studies of peptides. The substantial potential significance of this technique is evident, as example, for lens crystallins where it makes possible quantitative studies of age and disease-dependent deamidation that have heretofore been very difficult. This technique should allow convenient and reliable identification and quantitative measurement of specific deamidation sites that may play a role in aging and cataracts.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».