2016
DOI: 10.1007/s10974-016-9443-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comprehensive analysis of tropomyosin isoforms in skeletal muscles by top-down proteomics

Abstract: Mammalian skeletal muscles are heterogeneous in nature and are capable of performing various functions. Tropomyosin (Tpm) is a major component of the thin filament in skeletal muscles and plays an important role in controlling muscle contraction and relaxation. Tpm is known to consist of multiple isoforms resulting from different encoding genes and alternative splicing, along with post-translational modifications. However, a systematic characterization of Tpm isoforms in skeletal muscles is still lacking. Ther… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
26
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
2
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, bottom-up MS may suffer from the introduction of artifacts from lengthy sample preparation, limited protease choice for full protein sequence coverage, and loss of proteoform information in convoluted peptide pools.- 17,18 In contrast to the bottom-up approach, top-down MS analyzes intact proteins directly with minimum sample preparation, which provides an overview of major proteoforms 19 and minimizes sample artifacts. 20 However, the large size of mAbs (~150 kDa) together with intra-and inter-chain disulfide bonds restrict efficient fragmentation of intact proteins, and therefore only~15-35% bond cleavage can be achieved in top-down MS/MS analysis. [21][22][23][24] In addition to bottom-up and top-down approaches, middle-down MS is also commonly used in the characterization of mAbs by analyzing subunits derived from limited protein proteolysis or disulfide bond reduction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, bottom-up MS may suffer from the introduction of artifacts from lengthy sample preparation, limited protease choice for full protein sequence coverage, and loss of proteoform information in convoluted peptide pools.- 17,18 In contrast to the bottom-up approach, top-down MS analyzes intact proteins directly with minimum sample preparation, which provides an overview of major proteoforms 19 and minimizes sample artifacts. 20 However, the large size of mAbs (~150 kDa) together with intra-and inter-chain disulfide bonds restrict efficient fragmentation of intact proteins, and therefore only~15-35% bond cleavage can be achieved in top-down MS/MS analysis. [21][22][23][24] In addition to bottom-up and top-down approaches, middle-down MS is also commonly used in the characterization of mAbs by analyzing subunits derived from limited protein proteolysis or disulfide bond reduction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The isoform Tpm 1.1 (a-Tpm, TPM1 gene product) is expressed in cardiac and skeletal muscles, Tpm 2.2 (b-Tpm, TPM2 gene product), is expressed in fast and slow skeletal muscles, and Tpm 3.1 (g-Tpm, TPM3 gene) is expressed only in slow skeletal muscles (15,16).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This function allows users to perform manual correction of charge states and isotopic masses of fragment ions for comprehensive characterization of sequence variations and PTM sites . The software also offers quantitative tools to evaluate the relative abundances of different proteoforms under various experimental conditions …”
Section: Informatics Tools For Proteoform Identificationmentioning
confidence: 99%