Back

Localization and Quantification of Post-Translational Modifications of Proteins Using Electron Activated Dissociation Fragmentation on a Fast-Acquisition Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometer

Bons, J.; Hunter, C. L.; Chupalov, R.; Causon, J.; Antonoplis, A.; Rose, J. P.; MacLean, B.; Schilling, B.

2023-04-29 biochemistry
10.1101/2023.04.29.538826 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Protein post-translational modifications (PTMs) are crucial and dynamic players in a large variety of cellular processes and signaling, and proteomic technologies have emerged as the method of choice to profile PTMs. However, these analyses remain challenging due to potential low PTM stoichiometry, the presence of multiple PTMs per proteolytic peptide, PTM site localization of isobaric peptides, and labile PTM groups that lead to neutral losses. Collision-induced dissociation (CID) is commonly used for to characterize PTMs, but the application of collision energy can lead to neutral losses and incomplete peptide sequencing for labile PTM groups. In this study, we compared CID to an alternative fragmentation, electron activated dissociation (EAD), operated on a recently introduced fast-acquisition quadrupole-time-of-flight (QqTOF) mass spectrometer. We analyzed a series of synthetic modified peptides, featuring phosphorylated, succinylated, malonylated, and acetylated peptides. We performed targeted, quantitative parallel reaction monitoring (PRM or MRMHR) assays to assess the performances of EAD to characterize, site-localize and quantify peptides with labile modifications. The tunable EAD kinetic energy allowed the preservation of labile modifications and provided better peptide sequence coverage with strong PTM-site localization fragment ions. Zeno trap activation provided significant MS/MS sensitivity gains by an average of 6-11-fold for EAD analyses, regardless of modification type. Evaluation of the quantitative EAD PRM workflows revealed high reproducibility with coefficients of variation of typically [~]2%, as well as very good linearity and quantification accuracy. This novel workflow, combining EAD and Zeno trap, offers confident, accurate, and robust characterization and quantification of PTMs.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Analytical Chemistry
205 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
38.0%
2
Molecular & Cellular Proteomics
158 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
9.2%
3
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
50% of probability mass above
4
Journal of Proteome Research
215 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.2%
5
Analytica Chimica Acta
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
6
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
7
The Analyst
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
8
Journal of Proteomics
27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
9
JACS Au
35 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.5%
11
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.5%
12
PROTEOMICS
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
13
Angewandte Chemie International Edition
81 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
14
Talanta
12 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
15
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
16
ACS Central Science
66 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
17
Clinical Proteomics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
18
Chemical Communications
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
19
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.6%
20
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 80%
0.5%
21
Communications Chemistry
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
22
Analytical Biochemistry
26 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
23
ACS Omega
90 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
24
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%