TY - JOUR
T1 - Feasibility of phosphoproteomics on leftover samples after rna extraction with guanidinium thiocyanate
AU - Rolfs, Frank
AU - Piersma, Sander R.
AU - Dias, Mariana Paes
AU - Jonkers, Jos
AU - Jimenez, Connie R.
N1 - Funding Information:
ported by a fellowship from the German Research Foundation (DFG) to F. R. and by grants from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO-Middelgroot project 91116017 to C. R. J.), the Dutch Cancer Society (KWF project VU2013-6423), the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie
Funding Information:
grant (agreement 722729), and the Oncode Institute, which is partly financed by KWF.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Inc.. All rights reserved.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - In daily practice, different types of biomolecules are usually extracted for large-scale "omics" analysis with tailored protocols. However, when sample material is limited, an allin- one strategy is preferable. Although lysis of cells and tissues with urea is widely used for phosphoproteomic applications, DNA, RNA, and proteins can be simultaneously extracted from small samples using acid guanidinium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform (AGPC). Use ofAGPC for mass spectrometry-based phosphoproteomics was reported but has not yet been thoroughly evaluated against a classical phosphoproteomic protocol. Herewecompared urea- with AGPC-based protein extraction, profiling phosphorylations in the DNA damage response pathway after ionizing irradiation of U2OS cells as proof of principle. On average we identified circa 9000 phosphosites per sample with both extraction methods. Moreover, we observed high similarity of phosphosite characteristics (e.g., 94% shared class 1 identifications) and deduced kinase activities (e.g., ATM, ATR, CHEK1/2, PRKDC). We furthermore extended our comparison to murine and human tissue samples yielding similar and highly correlated results for both extraction protocols. AGPC-based sample extraction can thus replace common cell lysates for phosphoproteomic workflows andmay thus be an attractive way to obtain input material for multiple omics workflows, yielding several data types from a single sample.
AB - In daily practice, different types of biomolecules are usually extracted for large-scale "omics" analysis with tailored protocols. However, when sample material is limited, an allin- one strategy is preferable. Although lysis of cells and tissues with urea is widely used for phosphoproteomic applications, DNA, RNA, and proteins can be simultaneously extracted from small samples using acid guanidinium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform (AGPC). Use ofAGPC for mass spectrometry-based phosphoproteomics was reported but has not yet been thoroughly evaluated against a classical phosphoproteomic protocol. Herewecompared urea- with AGPC-based protein extraction, profiling phosphorylations in the DNA damage response pathway after ionizing irradiation of U2OS cells as proof of principle. On average we identified circa 9000 phosphosites per sample with both extraction methods. Moreover, we observed high similarity of phosphosite characteristics (e.g., 94% shared class 1 identifications) and deduced kinase activities (e.g., ATM, ATR, CHEK1/2, PRKDC). We furthermore extended our comparison to murine and human tissue samples yielding similar and highly correlated results for both extraction protocols. AGPC-based sample extraction can thus replace common cell lysates for phosphoproteomic workflows andmay thus be an attractive way to obtain input material for multiple omics workflows, yielding several data types from a single sample.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85106370047&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/J.MCPRO.2021.100078
DO - 10.1016/J.MCPRO.2021.100078
M3 - Article
C2 - 33819647
SN - 1535-9476
VL - 20
JO - Molecular and Cellular Proteomics
JF - Molecular and Cellular Proteomics
M1 - 100078
ER -