Increased quantitative proteome coverage with <sup>13</sup>C/<sup>12</sup>C‐based, acid‐cleavable isotope‐coded affinity tag reagent and modified data acquisition scheme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quantitative protein profiling using the isotope-coded affinity tag (ICAT) method and tandem mass spectrometry (MS) enables the pair-wise comparison of protein expression levels in biological samples. A new version of the ICAT reagent with an acid-cleavable bond, which allows removal of the biotin moiety prior to MS and which utilizes (13)C substitution for (12)C in the heavy-ICAT reagent rather than (2)H (for (1)H) as in the original reagent, was investigated. We developed and validated an MS data acquisition strategy using this new reagent that results in an increased number of protein identifications per experiment, without losing the accuracy of protein quantification. This was achieved by following a single survey (precursor) ion scan and serial collision induced dissociations (CIDs) of four different precursor ions observed in the prior survey scan. This strategy is common to many high-performance liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization (HPLC-ESI)-MS shotgun proteomic strategies, but heretofore not to ICAT experiments. This advance is possible because the new ICAT reagent uses (13)C as the "heavy" element rather than (2)H, thus, eliminating the slight delay in retention time of ICAT-labeled "light" peptides on a C18-based HPLC separation that occurs with (2)H and (1)H. Analyses using this new scheme of an ICAT-labeled trypsin-digested six protein mixture as well as a tryptic digest of a total yeast lysate, indicated that about two times more proteins were identified in a single analysis, and that there was no loss in accuracy of quantification.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".