Ammonium Dodecyl Sulfate as an Alternative to Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate for Protein Sample Preparation with Improved Performance in MALDI Mass Spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is a strong surfactant that is widely used in protein sample preparation. While protein and peptide samples containing up to approximately 1% SDS can be analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry (MALDI MS) using a two-layer matrix/sample deposition method, the presence of SDS in a protein sample generally degrades mass resolution and mass measurement accuracy. This degradation in performance is found to be related to the formation of sodium-protein adducts in the MALDI process. If the instrument resolving power is insufficient to separate these adduct peaks from the protonated molecular ion peak, peak broadening is observed in the protein molecular ion region, and as a result, the peak centroid shifts to a higher mass. In this work, we present a method using ammonium dodecyl sulfate as a viable alternative to SDS for protein sample preparation with much improved MALDI MS performance. Three non-sodium-based dodecyl sulfate surfactants, ammonium dodecyl sulfate (ADS), hydrogen dodecyl sulfate, and tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane dodecyl sulfate were investigated. Of the three surfactants tested, it is found that ADS gives the best performance in MALDI. For proteins with moderate molecular masses (i.e., up to approximately 25 kDa), the presence of ADS in a protein sample does not result in significant degradation in mass resolution and accuracy, and the protonated molecular ion peak is the dominant peak in the MALDI spectrum. The ammonium adduct ions dominate the MALDI spectra when the protein mass exceeds approximately 25 kDa; however, ADS still gives better results than SDS. The behavior of ADS in gel electrophoresis was also investigated. It is shown that cell extracts dissolved in ADS can be separated by normal SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis by simply mixing them with the SDS sample buffer. The application of ADS as the surfactant for protein solubilization with improved performance in MALDI analysis is demonstrated in the study of a detergent insoluble fraction from a Raji/CD9 B-cell lymphocyte lysate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".