Advertisement

Proteomics pp 185-198 | Cite as

Relative Protein Quantification Using Tandem Mass Tag Mass Spectrometry

  • Lichao Zhang
  • Joshua E. Elias
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1550)

Abstract

Measuring protein changes over time or following stimuli is one of the important tasks of proteomics. In the past decade, several strategies have been developed for the relative quantification of proteins using mass spectrometry (MS). Isobaric labeling strategies for relative quantitative proteomics allow for parallel multiplexing of quantitative experiments. With this technique, multiple peptide samples are chemically labeled with isobaric chemical tag variants and each variant has the same molecular structure and mass. Each variant, however, is designed to produce a unique “reporter ion” when fragmented inside a mass spectrometer. Once peptide samples are labeled, combined, and analyzed using MS, differentially labeled peptides are indistinguishable in a first, MS spectrum of intact peptides. However, since each tag variant contains a labile component with different mass, “reporter ions” can be generated and recorded in a subsequent MS2 spectrum. Intensities from each variant are recorded to represent the relative abundances of the peptide in each sample. Isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation (iTRAQ) and tandem mass tags (TMT) are commercially available reagents for performing this technique. Here, we describe the general workflow of relative quantification of proteins using TMT by MS2, or an additional MS3 spectrum.

Key words

Mass spectrometry Quantification Tandem mass tag 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Lihua Jiang from Stanford University and Dr. Xiaoyue Jiang from Thermo Scientific for helpful discussions about TMT methods on Obitrap Fusion Tribrid Mass Spectrometer and data processing using Proteome Discoverer.

References

  1. 1.
    Oda Y, Huang K, Cross F, Cowburn D, Chait B (1999) Accurate quantitation of protein expression and site-specific phosphorylation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96:6591–6596CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thompson A, Schafer J, Kuhn K, Kienle S, Schwarz J, Schmidt G, Neumann T, Hamon C (2003) Tandem mass tags: a novel quantification strategy for comparative analysis of complex protein mixtures by MS/MS. Anal Chem 75:1895–1904CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gygi S, Rist B, Gerber S, Turecek F, Gelb M, Aebersold R (1999) Quantitative analysis of complex protein mixtures using isotope-coded affinity tags. Nat Biotechnol 17:994–999CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ross P, Huang Y, Marchese J, Williamson B, Parker K, Hattan S, Khainovski N, Pillai S, Dey S, Daniels S, Purkayastha S, Juhasz P, Martin S, Bartlet-Jones M, He F, Jacobson A, Pappin D (2004) Multiplexed protein quantitation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using amine-reactive isobaric tagging reagents. Mol Cell Proteomics 3:1154–1169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ting L, Rad R, Gygi SP, Haas W (2011) MS3 eliminates ratio distortion in isobaric multiplexed quantitative proteomics. Nat Methods 8:937–940CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McAlister GC, Nusinow DP, Jedrychowski MP, Wuehr M, Huttlin EL, Erickson BK, Rad R, Haas W, Gygi SP (2014) MultiNotch MS3 enables accurate, sensitive, and multiplexed detection of differential expression across cancer cell line proteomes. Anal Chem 86:7150–7158CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rappsilber J, Mann M, Ishihama Y (2007) Protocol for micro-purification, enrichment, pre-fractionation and storage of peptides for proteomics using StageTips. Nat Protoc 2:1896–1906CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang Y, Yang F, Gritsenko MA, Wang Y, Clauss T, Liu T, Shen Y, Monroe ME, Lopez-Ferrer D, Reno T, Moore RJ, Klemke RL, Camp DG II, Smith RD (2011) Reversed-phase chromatography with multiple fraction concatenation strategy for proteome profiling of human MCF10A cells. Proteomics 11:2019–2026CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stark G, Stein W, Moore S (1960) Reactions of cyanate present in aqueous urea with amino acids and proteins. J Biol Chem 235:3177–3181Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical & Systems BiologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemical & Systems BiologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations