Variability in Streptavidin–Sepharose Matrix Quality Can Significantly Affect Proximity-Dependent Biotinylation (BioID) Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to their ease of use and high binding affinity, streptavidin-based purification tools have become widely used for isolating biotinylated compounds from complex mixtures. We and others routinely use streptavidin-sepharose matrices to isolate biotinylated polypeptides generated in proximity-dependent biotinylation approaches, such as BioID or APEX. However, we noted sporadic, substantial variation in the quality of BioID experiments performed in the same laboratories over time, using seemingly identical protocols. Identifying the source of this problem, here, we highlight considerable variability in streptavidin contamination derived from different production lots of streptavidin-sepharose beads from the same manufacturer and demonstrate that high levels of streptavidin peptide contamination can have detrimental effects on BioID data. We also describe two simple, rapid approaches to assess the degree of streptavidin "shedding" from individual lots of the sepharose matrix before use to avoid the use of lower quality reagent.
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 | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".