Optimized Proteome Reduction for Integrative Top–Down Proteomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrative top-down proteomics is an analytical approach that fully addresses the breadth and complexity needed for effective and routine assessment of proteomes. Nonetheless, any such assessments also require a rigorous review of methodology to ensure the deepest possible quantitative proteome analyses. Here, we establish an optimized general protocol for proteome extracts to improve the reduction of proteoforms and, thus, resolution in 2DE. Dithiothreitol (DTT), tributylphosphine (TBP), and 2-hydroxyethyldisulfide (HED), combined and alone, were tested in one-dimensional SDS-PAGE (1DE), prior to implementation into a full 2DE protocol. Prior to sample rehydration, reduction with 100 mM DTT + 5 mM TBP yielded increased spot counts, total signal, and spot circularity (i.e., decreased streaking) compared to other conditions and reduction protocols reported in the literature. The data indicate that many widely implemented reduction protocols are significantly 'under-powered' in terms of proteoform reduction and thus, limit the quality and depth of routine top-down proteomic analyses.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".