Cited by 111Advanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications

Quantitation and Identification of Thousands of Human Proteoforms below 30 kDa

Open access
Durbin, Kenneth R., Fornelli, Luca, Fellers, Ryan T., Doubleday, Peter F., Narita, Masashi, Kelleher, Neil L.·2016·Journal of Proteome Research

Abstract

Top-down proteomics is capable of identifying and quantitating unique proteoforms through the analysis of intact proteins. We extended the coverage of the label-free technique, achieving differential analysis of whole proteins <30 kDa from the proteomes of growing and senescent human fibroblasts. By integrating improved control software with more instrument time allocated for quantitation of intact ions, we were able to collect protein data between the two cell states, confidently comparing 1577 proteoform levels. To then identify and characterize proteoforms, our advanced acquisition software, named Autopilot, employed enhanced identification efficiency in identifying 1180 unique Swiss-Prot accession numbers at 1% false-discovery rate. This coverage of the low mass proteome is equivalent to the largest previously reported but was accomplished in 23% of the total acquisition time. By maximizing both the number of quantified proteoforms and their identification rate in an integrated software environment, this work significantly advances proteoform-resolved analyses of complex systems.

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 · 10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b00997

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Global top-down proteomics using the Orbitrap has enabled identification and quantification of thousands of proteoforms.

    “Moreover, global top-down proteomics using the Orbitrap has enabled the identification and quantification of thousands of proteoforms [84,100].”
  • CAD and HCD are the most prevalent and robust techniques for protein fragmentation, especially for global top-down proteomics studies.

    “Collisionally activated dissociation (CAD) and higher-energy collisional dissociation (HCD) are the most prevalent and robust techniques for protein fragmentation especially for global top-down proteomics studies [100,113].”
  • Top-down proteomics is currently applied mainly to proteoforms smaller than 30 kDa, because high-resolution FTMS performs poorly for larger proteoforms and intact proteomes in the 30-60 kDa range are highly complex.

    “top-down proteomics (TDP) is currently mostly applied to the characterization of proteoforms <30 kDa due to the poor performance of high-resolution FTMS for the analysis of larger proteoforms and the high complexity of intact proteomes in the 30–60 kDa mass range.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [33]Ntai I Kim K Fellers RT Skinner OS Smith A. D. t. Early BP Savaryn JP LeDuc RD Thomas PM Kelleher NL Applying label-free quantitation to top down proteomics Anal. Chem 2014 86 4961 4968 24807621 PMC4033644

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Durbin, K. R., Fornelli, L., Fellers, R. T., Doubleday, P. F., Narita, M., & Kelleher, N. L.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Kelleher, Neil L.
Venue
Journal of Proteome Research
Published
2016-02-11
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
976-982
ISSN
  • 1535-3893 (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-3907
OpenAlex
W2269451983
Cited by
111
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 1
FWCI
9.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Proteome Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (HHSN261200800001E)
  • University of Cambridge
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (P30 DA018310)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM067193, GM108569)
  • Cancer Research UK
  • Office for Research, Northwestern University
  • Swiss National Science Foundation
  • Hutchison Whampoa Limited
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Mass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Advanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications
Keywords
top-down proteomics, proteoforms, label-free quantification, human fibroblasts, cellular senescence, protein identification
MeSH terms
Cells, Cultured, Humans, Software, Cellular Senescence, Protein Isoforms, Proteome, Tandem Mass Spectrometry, Chromatography, Reverse-Phase

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