The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Crude subcellular fractionation of cultured mammalian cell lines
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The expression and study of recombinant proteins in mammalian culture systems can be complicated during the cell lysis procedure by contaminating proteins from cellular compartments distinct from those within which the protein of interest resides and also by solubility issues that may arise from the use of a single lysis buffer. Partial subcellular fractionation using buffers of increasing stringency, rather than whole cell lysis is one way in which to avoid or reduce this contamination and ensure complete recovery of the target protein. Currently published protocols involve time consuming centrifugation steps which may require expensive equipment and commercially available kits can be prohibitively expensive when handling large or multiple samples. FINDINGS: We have established a protocol to sequentially extract proteins from cultured mammalian cells in fractions enriched for cytosolic, membrane bound organellar, nuclear and insoluble proteins. All of the buffers used can be made inexpensively and easily and the protocol requires no costly equipment. While the method was optimized for a specific cell type, we demonstrate that the protocol can be applied to a variety of commonly used cell lines and anticipate that it can be applied to any cell line via simple optimization of the primary extraction step. CONCLUSION: We describe a protocol for the crude subcellular fractionation of cultured mammalian cells that is both straightforward and cost effective and may facilitate the more accurate study of recombinant proteins and the generation of purer preparations of said proteins from cell extracts.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
HeLa cells 50 years on: the good, the bad and the ugly
Masters, J. R. (2002) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc775 · Cited by 560
Cited by
Mitochondrial DNA stress primes the antiviral innate immune response
West, A. P., Khoury-Hanold, W., Staron, M., Tal, M. C., Pineda, C. M., Lang, S. M., Bestwick, M., Duguay, B. A., Raimundo, N., MacDuff, D. A., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14156 · Cited by 1,975
Caielli, S., Athale, S., Domic, B., Murat, E., Chandra, M., Banchereau, R., Baisch, J., Phelps, K., Clayton, S., Gong, M., et al. (2016) · Journal of Experimental Medicine · doi:10.1084/jem.20151876 · Cited by 501
MiT/TFE transcription factors are activated during mitophagy downstream of Parkin and Atg5
Nezich, C. L., Wang, C., Fogel, A. I., & Youle, R. J. (2015) · Journal of Cell Biology · doi:10.1083/jcb.201501002 · Cited by 309
Swanson, E., Lord, C., Reading, J., Heubeck, A. T., Genge, P. C., Thomson, Z., Weiss, M. D., Li, X.-J., Savage, A. K., Green, R. R., et al. (2021) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.63632 · Cited by 267
Dengue virus activates cGAS through the release of mitochondrial DNA
Sun, B., Sundström, K. B., Chew, J. J., Bist, P., Gan, E. S., Tan, H. C., Goh, K. C., Chawla, T., Tang, C. K., & Ooi, E. E. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-03932-1 · Cited by 225
Metadata
- Authors
- Holden, P., & Horton, W. A.
- Venue
- BMC Research Notes
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 243
- ISSN
- 1756-0500 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1972387348
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Crude subcellular fractionation of cultured mammalian cell lines. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1756-0500-2-243
- The paper
- Holden, P., & Horton, W. A. (2009). Crude subcellular fractionation of cultured mammalian cell lines. BMC Research Notes. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-2-243
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.