Abstract
Membrane proteins account for 70–80% of all pharmaceutical targets emphasizing their clinical relevance. Identification of new, differentially expressed membrane proteins reflecting distinct disease properties is thus of high importance. Unfortunately, isolation and analysis of membrane-bound proteins is hampered by their relative low abundance in total cell lysates, their frequently large size and their hydrophobic properties. We thus aimed to identify protocols that allow for highly efficient isolation and purification of membrane-bound proteins for subsequent protein profiling. We present a comparative study of different membrane protein extraction methods that vary in total protein yield between 0.02 and 4.8 mg using constant cell pellets of the colorectal carcinoma cell line SW620. We also demonstrate by means of polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS–PAGE) and Western blot analysis that the majority of commercial membrane extraction kits harbor a substantial cytosolic contamination of their membranous fraction. Based on purity of membranous fraction, protein yield, time and costs, we show superiority of two commercial extraction kits for downstream proteome analyses of membrane proteins.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254
Carter P, Smith L, Ryan M (2004) Identification and validation of cell surface antigens for antibody targeting in oncology. Endocr Relat Cancer 11:659–687
Chen JQ, Contreras RG, Wang R, Fernandez SV, Shoshani L, Russo LH, Cereijido M, Russo J (2006) Sodium/potassium ATPase (Na + , K +-ATPase) and ouabain/related cardiac glycosides: a new paradigm for development of anti- breast cancer drugs? Breast Cancer Res Treat 96:1–15
Corsten MF, Hofstra L, Narula J, Reutelingsperger CP (2006) Counting heads in the war against cancer: defining the role of annexin A5 imaging in cancer treatment and surveillance. Cancer Res 66:1255–1260
Dissemond J, Busch M, Kothen T, Mors J, Weimann TK, Lindeke A, Goos M, Wagner SN (2004) Differential downregulation of endoplasmic reticulum-residing chaperones calnexin and calreticulin in human metastatic melanoma. Cancer Lett 203:225–231
Ellis JA, Jackman MR, Luzio JP (1992) The post-synthetic sorting of endogenous membrane proteins examined by the simultaneous purification of apical and basolateral plasma membrane fractions from Caco-2 cells. Biochem J 283(Pt 2):553–560
Helenius A, Simons K (1975) Solubilization of membranes by detergents. Biochim Biophys Acta 415:29–79
Hopkins AL, Mason JS, Overington JP (2006) Can we rationally design promiscuous drugs? Curr Opin Struct Biol 16:127–136
Kenis H, Hofstra L, Reutelingsperger CP (2007) Annexin A5: shifting from a diagnostic towards a therapeutic realm. Cell Mol Life Sci 64:2859–2860
Mijatovic T, Ingrassia L, Facchini V, Kiss R (2008) Na +/K + -ATPase alpha subunits as new targets in anticancer therapy. Expert Opin Ther Targets 12:1403–1417
Overington JP, Al-Lazikani B, Hopkins AL (2006) How many drug targets are there? Nat Rev Drug Discov 5:993–996
Sanders CR, Myers JK (2004) Disease-related misassembly of membrane proteins. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 33:25–51
Santoni V, Molloy M, Rabilloud T (2000) Membrane proteins and proteomics: un amour impossible? Electrophoresis 21:1054–1070
Tanford C, Reynolds JA (1976) Characterization of membrane proteins in detergent solutions. Biochim Biophys Acta 457:133–170
Wallin E, von Heijne G (1998) Genome-wide analysis of integral membrane proteins from eubacterial, archaean, and eukaryotic organisms. Protein Sci 7:1029–1038
Wehbi NK, Dugger AL, Bonner RB, Pitha JV, Hurst RE, Hemstreet GP 3rd (2002) Pan-cadherin as a high level phenotypic biomarker for prostate cancer. J Urol 167:2215–2221
Zhang L, Ashendel CL, Becker GW, Morre DJ (1994) Isolation and characterization of the principal ATPase associated with transitional endoplasmic reticulum of rat liver. J Cell Biol 127:1871–1883
Acknowledgments
We’d like to thank Dr. Britta Fritzsche and M.Sc. Timo Gemoll for experimental advice and Katja Klempt-Gießing for technical assistance.
Competing interests statement
The authors declare no competing interests.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bünger, S., Roblick, U.J. & Habermann, J.K. Comparison of five commercial extraction kits for subsequent membrane protein profiling. Cytotechnology 61, 153–159 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10616-009-9249-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10616-009-9249-1