Proteome Birthdating: A Single-Sample Approach for Measuring Global Turnover Dynamics and “Protein Age”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within a cell, proteins have distinct and highly variable half-lives. As a result, the molecular ages of proteins can range from seconds to years. How the age of a protein influences its environmental interactions is a largely unexplored area of biology. To facilitate such studies, we recently developed a technique termed "proteome birthdating" that differentially labels proteins based on their time of synthesis. Proteome birthdating enables analyses of age distributions of the proteome by tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and provides a methodology for investigating the protein age selectivity of diverse cellular pathways. Proteome birthdating can also provide measurements of protein turnover kinetics from single, sequentially labeled samples. Here, we provide a practical guide for conducting proteome birthdating in in vitro model systems. The outlined workflow covers cell culture, isotopic labeling, protein extraction, enzymatic digestion, peptide cleanup, mass spectrometry, data processing, and theoretical considerations for interpretation of the resulting data. Key features • Proteome birthdating barcodes the proteome with isotopically labeled precursors based on time of synthesis or "age." • Global protein turnover kinetics can be analyzed from single, sequentially labeled biological samples. • Protein age distributions of subsets of the proteome can be analyzed (e.g., ubiquitinated proteins). • Age selectivity of protein properties, cellular pathways, or disease states can be investigated.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".