Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 379

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Chromatographic and Electrophoretic Fractionation of Soluble Proteins of Brain and Liver

Open access
Moore, Blake W., McGregor, D.·1965·Journal of Biological Chemistry

Abstract

The aim of the work the first stage of which is described here is to fractionate proteins of nervous tissue in order to compare these proteins with those of other organs to find specific qualitative differences, and to compare nervous tissue proteins of different species to find similarities. If unique proteins can be found which are common to nervous tissue of all species, then they may have some relation to function in the nervous system. This paper describes methods for fractionating proteins which are water-soluble. The general plan is to use the gentlest method of extraction first, followed by more drastic methods on the water-insoluble proteins. In a previous paper (1) a method was described for fractionation of water-soluble proteins from liver by chromatography on diethylaminoethyl cellulose by elution with a parabolic gradient to 1 M chloride. The validity of the method was shown in several ways. (a) Total protein recovery was high, and the protein chromatographic patterns were consistent from liver to liver. (5) A number of enzyme activities appeared as sharp peaks with high recoveries, indicating that different proteins were separated from each other with little loss. (c) Separate fractions, when rechromatographed under the same conditions, gave peaks of protein and enzyme activities at the expected positions with high recoveries. It is recognized that the efficiency of fractionation of a protein mixture by chromatography depends on the shape of the gradient used for elution. Since a given protein is adsorbed or desorbed on a cellulose ion exchange agent within a narrow range of pH or ionic strength, separation of similarly bound proteins is particularly sensitive to changes in slope of gradient. A defect of the parabolic gradient was that much of the protein appeared as a large, broad peak and a number of enzyme activities overlapped in the region of 0.1 M chloride during the elution. It would seem reasonable that a gradient more efficient in separating individual proteins should have a lower slope in the 0.1 M region than that in the parabolic gradient. We describe here a method for fractionation of soluble proteins from liver and brain with an improved gradient elution. The degree of resolution was indicated by the fact that a given protein during the chromatography was eluted in l/15 to l/25 of the

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0021-9258(18)97483-1

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 379

Metadata

Authors
Moore, B. W., & McGregor, D.
Venue
Journal of Biological Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1965-04
Volume
240
Issue
4
Pages
1647-1653
ISSN
0021-9258 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1590744179
Cited by
379
References
0
FWCI
11.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Chromatographic and Electrophoretic Fractionation of Soluble Proteins of Brain and Liver. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0021-9258(18)97483-1
The paper
Moore, B. W., & McGregor, D. (1965). Chromatographic and Electrophoretic Fractionation of Soluble Proteins of Brain and Liver. Journal of Biological Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9258(18)97483-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.