Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 158

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Gel-Based Versus Gel-Free Proteomics: A Review

Baggerman, Geert, Vierstraete, Evy, De Loof, Arnold, Schoofs, Liliane·2005·Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening

Abstract

With the sequencing of the genome of over 150 organisms, the field of biology has been revolutionised. Instead of studying one gene or protein at the time, it is now possible to study the effect of physiological or pathological changes on the expression of all genes or proteins in the organism. Proteomics aims at the simultaneous analysis of all proteins expressed by a cell, tissue or organism in a specific physiological condition. Because proteins are the effector molecules in all organisms, it is evident that changes in the physiological condition of an organism will be reflected by changes in protein expression and/or processing. Since the formulation of the concept of proteomics in the mid 90's proteomics has relied heavily on 2 dimensional gel electrophoresis (2DGE) for the separation and visualization of proteins. 2DGE, however, has a number of inherent drawbacks. 2DGE is costly, fairly insensitive to low copy proteins and cannot be used for the entire proteome. Therefore, over the years, several gel-free proteomics techniques have been developed to either fill the gaps left by 2DGE or to entirely abolish the gel based techniques. This review summarizes the most important gel-free and gel-based proteomics techniques and compares their advantages and drawbacks.

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 · 10.2174/138620705774962490

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 158

Metadata

Authors
Baggerman, G., Vierstraete, E., De Loof, A., & Schoofs, L.
Venue
Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening
Published
2005-12-01
Volume
8
Issue
8
Pages
669-677
ISSN
1386-2073 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1989926783
Cited by
158
References
0
FWCI
3.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Gel-Based Versus Gel-Free Proteomics: A Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2174/138620705774962490
The paper
Baggerman, G., Vierstraete, E., De Loof, A., & Schoofs, L. (2005). Gel-Based Versus Gel-Free Proteomics: A Review. Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening. https://doi.org/10.2174/138620705774962490

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.