A comparison of relative quantification with isobaric tags on a subset of the murine hepatic proteome using electrospray ionization quadrupole time-of-flight and matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization tandem time-of-flight

Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry

Volumn 22, Issue 20, 2008, Pages 3137-3146

  Scheri, Richard C ^a   Lee, Junga ^a   Curtis, Lawrence R ^a   Barofsky, Douglas F ^a  

^a OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (ANOVA); DESORPTION; MASS SPECTROMETRY; MATRIX ALGEBRA; PROTEINS;

ABSOLUTE QUANTIFICATION; MALDI-TOF-TOF; MATRIX ASSISTED LASER DESORPTION IONIZATION; MATRIXASSISTED LASER DESORPTION-IONIZATION (MALDI); PEPTIDE PROTEINS; PROTEIN IDENTIFICATION; QUADRUPOLE/TIME OF FLIGHTS; RELATIVE QUANTIFICATION; SAMPLE COMPLEXITY; TIME-OF FLIGHT;

ELECTROSPRAY IONIZATION;

CHLORDECONE; CHOLESTEROL; DYES, REAGENTS, INDICATORS, MARKERS AND BUFFERS; PROTEOME;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BLOOD; C57BL MOUSE; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ELECTROSPRAY MASS SPECTROMETRY; FACTUAL DATABASE; LIVER; MALE; MASS SPECTROMETRY; MOLECULAR GENETICS; MOUSE; SPECTROFLUOROMETRY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ANIMALS; CHLORDECONE; CHOLESTEROL; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DATABASES, FACTUAL; INDICATORS AND REAGENTS; LIVER; MALE; MICE; MICE, INBRED C57BL; MOLECULAR SEQUENCE DATA; PROTEOME; SPECTROMETRY, FLUORESCENCE; SPECTROMETRY, MASS, ELECTROSPRAY IONIZATION; SPECTROMETRY, MASS, MATRIX-ASSISTED LASER DESORPTION-IONIZATION;

EID: 58149189418     PISSN: 09514198     EISSN: 10970231     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rcm.3719     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Carpenter HM, Curtis LR. Drug Metab. Dispos. 1989; 17: 131.
2. Carpenter HM, Curtis LR. Drug Metab. Dispos. 1991; 19: 673.
3. Lee J, Scheri RC, Curtis LR. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2008; in press.
4. Julka S, Regnier F. J. Proteome Res. 2004; 3: 350.
5. Kolkman A, Dirksen EHC, Slijper M, Heck AJ. Mol. Cell Proteomics 2005; 4: 255.
6. Ong SE, Foster LJ, Mann M. Methods 2003; 29: 124.
7. Schmidt A, Kellerman J, Lottspeich F. Proteomics 2005; 5: 4.
8. Gygi SP, Rist B, Gerber SA, et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 1999; 17: 994.
9. Ross PL, Huang YN, Marchese JN, et al. Mol. Cell Proteomics 2004; 3: 1154.
10. Aggarwal K, Choe LH, Lee KL. Proteomics 2005; 5: 2297.
11. Hu J, Qian J, Borisov O, Sanquiang P, et al. Proteomics 2006; 6: 4321.
12. Glen G, Gan CS, Hamdy FC, et al. J. Proteome Res. 2008; 7: 897.
13. DeSouza L, Dielh G, et al. J. Proteome Res. 2006; 4: 377.
14. Reinders Y, Schulz I, Graf R, Sickmann A. J. Proteome Res. 2006; 5: 589.
15. Wiese S, Reidegeld KA, Meyer HE, Warscheid B. Proteomics 2007; 7: 340.
16. Scheri RC. Ph.D. Dissertation, Oregon State University, 2008. 17. Available: http://oregonstate.edu/research/ori/animal/use.html.
17. Applied Biosystems Inc., Framington, MA, version 3.6.
18. Matrix Science, London, UK, version 2.2.
19. Proteome Software, Inc., Portland, OR, version 1.6.
20. Statistical Graphics Corp., Herndon, VA, version 5.1.
21. Insightful Corp., Seattle, WA, version 8.0.
22. Biemann K. Biomed. Environ. Mass Spectrom. 1988; 16: 99.
23. Van der Boom F, Düssmann H, Uhlenbrock H, et al. Mol. Biol. Cell. 2007; 18: 1507.