Characterisation of the variation of mouse brain proteome by two-dimensional electrophoresis

Journal of Proteomics

Volumn 74, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 894-901

  Földi, István ^a   Müller, Géza ^a   Penke, Botond ^a   Janáky, Tamás ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SZEGED   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Brain proteome; Mouse strain; Two dimensional electrophoresis; Variation

Indexed keywords

PROTEOME;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; MALE; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN VARIANT; PROTEOMICS; TWO DIMENSIONAL ELECTROPHORESIS;

ANIMALS; BRAIN; ELECTROPHORESIS, GEL, TWO-DIMENSIONAL; MALE; MICE; MICE, INBRED C3H; PROTEOME; PROTEOMICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

ANIMALIA; MUS;

EID: 79955475798     PISSN: 18743919     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2011.03.006     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Papassotiropoulos A., Fountoulakis M., Dunckley T., Stephan D.A., Reiman E.M. Genetics, transcriptomics, and proteomics of Alzheimer's disease. J Clin Psychiatry 2006, 67:652-670.
2. Bayes A., Grant S.G. Neuroproteomics: understanding the molecular organisation and complexity of the brain. Nat Rev Neurosci 2009, 10:635-646.
3. O'Farrell P.H. High resolution two-dimensional electrophoresis of proteins. J Biol Chem 1975, 250:4007-4021.
4. Klose J. Protein mapping by combined isoelectric focusing and electrophoresis of mouse tissues. A novel approach to testing for induced point mutations in mammals. Humangenetik 1975, 26:231-243.
5. Gorg A., Drews O., Luck C., Weiland F., Weiss W. 2-DE with IPGs. Electrophoresis 2009, 30(Suppl 1):S122-S132.
6. Clark B.N., Gutstein H.B. The myth of automated, high-throughput two-dimensional gel analysis. Proteomics 2008, 8:1197-1203.
7. Gevaert K., Van Damme P., Ghesquiere B., Impens F., Martens L., Helsens K., et al. A la carte proteomics with an emphasis on gel-free techniques. Proteomics 2007, 7:2698-2718.
8. Forni M. Laboratory animal science: a resource to improve the quality of science. Vet Res Commun 2007, 31(Suppl 1):43-47.
9. Nagy S., Adamicza Á., Boros M., Jánossy T., Kaszaki J., Szabó A., et al. Animal experiments in medicine. Handbook for medical students 2007, University of Szeged.
10. van der Worp H.B., Howells D.W., Sena E.S., Porritt M.J., Rewell S., O'Collins V., et al. Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies?. PLoS Med 2010, 7:e1000245.
11. Hunt S.M., Thomas M.R., Sebastian L.T., Pedersen S.K., Harcourt R.L., Sloane A.J., et al. Optimal replication and the importance of experimental design for gel-based quantitative proteomics. J Proteome Res 2005, 4:809-819.
12. Molloy M.P., Brzezinski E.E., Hang J., McDowell M.T., VanBogelen R.A. Overcoming technical variation and biological variation in quantitative proteomics. Proteomics 2003, 3:1912-1919.
13. Horgan G.W. Sample size and replication in 2D gel electrophoresis studies. J Proteome Res 2007, 6:2884-2887.
14. Karp N.A., Spencer M., Lindsay H., O'Dell K., Lilley K.S. Impact of replicate types on proteomic expression analysis. J Proteome Res 2005, 4:1867-1871.
15. Karp N.A., McCormick P.S., Russell M.R., Lilley K.S. Experimental and statistical considerations to avoid false conclusions in proteomics studies using differential in-gel electrophoresis. Mol Cell Proteomics 2007, 6:1354-1364.
16. Marengo E., Robotti E., Bobba M. Multivariate statistical tools for the evaluation of proteomic 2D-maps: recent achivements and applications. Curr Proteomics 2007, 4:53-66.
17. Lamberty Y., Gower A.J. Age-related changes in spontaneous behavior and learning in NMRI mice from middle to old age. Physiol Behav 1992, 51:81-88.
18. Moskophidis D., Lehmann-Grube F. The immune response of the mouse to lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus. III. Differences of numbers of cytotoxic T lymphocytes in spleens of mice of different strains. Cell Immunol 1983, 77:279-289.
19. Steele K.E., Davis K.J., Stephan K., Kell W., Vogel P., Hart M.K. Comparative neurovirulence and tissue tropism of wild-type and attenuated strains of Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus administered by aerosol in C3H/HeN and BALB/c mice. Vet Pathol 1998, 35:386-397.
20. Rabilloud T., Strub J.M., Luche S., van Dorsselaer A., Lunardi J. A comparison between Sypro Ruby and ruthenium II tris (bathophenanthroline disulfonate) as fluorescent stains for protein detection in gels. Proteomics 2001, 1:699-704.
21. Lenth R.V. Computer software 2006-9 Retrieved 01 28. http://www.stat.uiowa.edu/~rlenth/Power.
22. Karp N.A., Lilley K.S. Maximising sensitivity for detecting changes in protein expression: experimental design using minimal. CyDyes 2005, 5:3105-3115.
23. Asirvatham V.S., Watson B.S., Sumner L.W. Analytical and biological variances associated with proteomic studies of Medicago truncatula by two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Proteomics 2002, 2:960-968.
24. Winkler W., Zellner M., Diestinger M., Babeluk R., Marchetti M., Goll A., et al. Biological variation of the platelet proteome in the elderly population and its implication for biomarker research. Mol Cell Proteomics 2008, 7:193-203.
25. Zhang X., Guo Y., Song Y., Sun W., Yu C., Zhao X., et al. Proteomic analysis of individual variation in normal livers of human beings using difference gel electrophoresis. Proteomics 2006, 6:5260-5268.
26. Karp N.A., Feret R., Rubtsov D.V., Lilley K.S. Comparison of DIGE and post-stained gel electrophoresis with both traditional and SameSpots analysis for quantitative proteomics. Proteomics 2008, 8:948-960.
27. Kang Y., Techanukul T., Mantalaris A., Nagy J.M. Comparison of three commercially available DIGE analysis software packages: minimal user intervention in gel-based proteomics. J Proteome Res 2009, 8:1077-1084.
28. Karp N.A., Lilley K.S. Investigating sample pooling strategies for DIGE experiments to address biological variability. Proteomics 2009, 9:388-397.