Back

Comparison of Protein Extraction Methods and Data Analysis Strategies for Complete Metaproteomic Soil Analysis

Mikolitis, A. S.; Mach, P. M.; Kroeger, M. E.; McBride, E. M.; Glaros, T. G.

2024-06-13 biochemistry
10.1101/2024.06.13.598917 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Considerable microbial diversity has been discovered in soil through genomic sequencing. Despite its role in biogeochemical cycling, relatively little is known about the proteomic diversity of the soil microbiome as most commercially available soil kits focus on DNA/RNA extractions. Consequently, a plethora of protein extraction techniques have been developed for soil but have yet to be integrated into simplified, modern sample preparation techniques such as the S-Trap. Furthermore, classical data analysis strategies for soil metaproteomics rely on genomically-informed databases for peptide/protein identification. This assumes that DNA/RNA extracts adequately represent the soil proteome. Within this study, we systematically assess several extraction techniques, developing a data processing pipeline which is driven by both proteomics and genomics to fully characterize the soil microbiome. Both pipelines reveal remarkably complementary data, with [~]60% of the protein identifications coming from Proteomically-derived databases. Sodium dodecyl sulfate-based extractions proved to provide the most unique protein identifications ([~]3000 proteins), and by combining both proteomic and genomic-based results, the total protein identifications increased approximately 2-fold for each extraction. Combining these complementary data pipelines with improved extraction techniques can allow for drastically improved proteomic results (12,307 unique protein identifications), even from minute (50 mg) sample volumes. These enhancements to previous workflows can better describe the microbial diversity within soil and provide a deeper functional understanding of the soil microbiome.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.4%
2
Applied Soil Ecology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.3%
3
Analytical Biochemistry
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
4
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.9%
5
Journal of Proteomics
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
6
Journal of Proteome Research
234 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
7
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 18%
5.3%
8
Environmental DNA
56 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
9
PROTEOMICS
43 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
10
Scientific Data
209 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
11
Soil Biology and Biochemistry
35 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
12
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.5%
13
Frontiers in Microbiology
427 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.4%
14
The Analyst
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
15
mSystems
394 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.2%
16
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
17
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
37 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
18
F1000Research
88 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
19
Plants
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
20
Journal of Hazardous Materials
21 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
21
BioTechniques
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
22
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%