Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCasey, T.
dc.contributor.authorKhan, J.
dc.contributor.authorBringans, S.
dc.contributor.authorKoudelka, T.
dc.contributor.authorTakle, P.
dc.contributor.authorDowns, R.
dc.contributor.authorLivk, A.
dc.contributor.authorSyme, Robert
dc.contributor.authorTan, Kar-Chun
dc.contributor.authorLipscombe, R.
dc.date.accessioned2017-03-17T08:29:03Z
dc.date.available2017-03-17T08:29:03Z
dc.date.created2017-02-19T19:31:47Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationCasey, T. and Khan, J. and Bringans, S. and Koudelka, T. and Takle, P. and Downs, R. and Livk, A. et al. 2017. Analysis of reproducibility for proteome coverage and quantitation using isobaric mass tags (iTRAQ and TMT). Journal of Proteome Research. 16: pp. 384-392.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/50901
dc.identifier.doi10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b01154
dc.description.abstract

This study aimed to compare the depth and reproducibility of total proteome and differentially expressed protein coverage in technical duplicates and triplicates using iTRAQ 4-plex, iTRAQ 8-plex, and TMT 6-plex reagents. The analysis was undertaken because comprehensive comparisons of isobaric mass tag reproducibility have not been widely reported in the literature. The highest number of proteins was identified with 4-plex, followed by 8-plex and then 6-plex reagents. Quantitative analyses revealed that more differentially expressed proteins were identified with 4-plex reagents than 8-plex reagents and 6-plex reagents. Replicate reproducibility was determined to be =69% for technical duplicates and =57% for technical triplicates. The results indicate that running an 8-plex or 6-plex experiment instead of a 4-plex experiment resulted in 26 or 39% fewer protein identifications, respectively. When 4-plex spectra were searched with three software tools?ProteinPilot, Mascot, and Proteome Discoverer?the highest number of protein identifications were obtained with Mascot. The analysis of negative controls demonstrated the importance of running experiments as replicates. Overall, this study demonstrates the advantages of using iTRAQ 4-plex reagents over iTRAQ 8-plex and TMT 6-plex reagents, provides estimates of technical duplicate and triplicate reproducibility, and emphasizes the value of running replicate samples.

dc.relation.urihttp://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.jproteome.5b01154
dc.titleAnalysis of reproducibility for proteome coverage and quantitation using isobaric mass tags (iTRAQ and TMT)
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.source.volume16
dcterms.source.startPage384
dcterms.source.endPage392
dcterms.source.issn1535-3893
dcterms.source.titleJournal of Proteome Research
curtin.departmentCentre for Crop Disease Management
curtin.accessStatusFulltext not available


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record