Abstract
Methods in mass spectrometry have evolved in recent years, facilitating proteomic analyses that were previously beyond the limits of the technology. Transgenic mouse models, coupled with mass spectrometry proteomics, have served as valuable platform for elucidating the in vivo function of individual genes and proteins. Here we discuss the methods we have recently employed to characterize protein–protein interactions and posttranslational modifications in tagged knock-in mouse models. These methods can be broadly applied to other systems for various applications in both basic and translational science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsSpringer Nature is developing a new tool to find and evaluate Protocols. Learn more
References
Dunham WH, Mullin M, Gingras AC (2012) Affinity-purification coupled to mass spectrometry: basic principles and strategies. Proteomics 12(10):1576–1590
Schnutgen F et al (2011) Resources for proteomics in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nat Methods 8(2):103–104
Cui X et al (2011) Targeted integration in rat and mouse embryos with zinc-finger nucleases. Nat Biotechnol 29(1):64–67
Hockemeyer D et al (2011) Genetic engineering of human pluripotent cells using TALE nucleases. Nat Biotechnol 29(8):731–734
Jinek M et al (2013) RNA-programmed genome editing in human cells. eLife 2:e00471
Mali P et al (2013) RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339(6121):823–826
Wang H et al (2013) One-step generation of mice carrying mutations in multiple genes by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome engineering. Cell 153(4):910–918
Bantscheff M, Lemeer S, Savitski MM, Kuster B (2012) Quantitative mass spectrometry in proteomics: critical review update from 2007 to the present. Anal Bioanal Chem 404(4):939–965
Wu CC, MacCoss MJ, Howell KE, Matthews DE, Yates JR III (2004) Metabolic labeling of mammalian organisms with stable isotopes for quantitative proteomic analysis. Anal Chem 76(17):4951–4959
Kruger M et al (2008) SILAC mouse for quantitative proteomics uncovers kindlin-3 as an essential factor for red blood cell function. Cell 134(2):353–364
Rauniyar N, McClatchy DB, Yates JR III (2013) Stable isotope labeling of mammals (SILAM) for in vivo quantitative proteomic analysis. Methods 61(3):260–268
Krijgsveld J et al (2003) Metabolic labeling of C. elegans and D. melanogaster for quantitative proteomics. Nat Biotechnol 21(8):927–931
Savas JN, Toyama BH, Xu T, Yates JR III, Hetzer MW (2012) Extremely long-lived nuclear pore proteins in the rat brain. Science 335(6071):942
Huttlin EL et al (2009) Discovery and validation of colonic tumor-associated proteins via metabolic labeling and stable isotopic dilution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106(40):17235–17240
Bateman RJ et al (2006) Human amyloid-beta synthesis and clearance rates as measured in cerebrospinal fluid in vivo. Nat Med 12(7):856–861
Mawuenyega KG et al (2010) Decreased clearance of CNS beta-amyloid in Alzheimer’s disease. Science 330(6012):1774
Ong SE et al (2002) Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture, SILAC, as a simple and accurate approach to expression proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics 1(5):376–386
Wang X, Huang L (2008) Identifying dynamic interactors of protein complexes by quantitative mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics 7(1):46–57
Rao A, Richards TL, Simmons D, Zahniser NR, Sorkin A (2012) Epitope-tagged dopamine transporter knock-in mice reveal rapid endocytic trafficking and filopodia targeting of the transporter in dopaminergic axons. FASEB J 26(5):1921–1933
Dey A et al (2012) Loss of the tumor suppressor BAP1 causes myeloid transformation. Science 337(6101):1541–1546
Zanivan S, Krueger M, Mann M (2012) In vivo quantitative proteomics: the SILAC mouse. Methods Mol Biol 757:435–450
Phu L et al (2011) Improved quantitative mass spectrometry methods for characterizing complex ubiquitin signals. Mol Cell Proteomics 10(5):M110 003756
Sheng Z et al (2012) Ser1292 autophosphorylation is an indicator of LRRK2 kinase activity and contributes to the cellular effects of PD mutations. Sci Transl Med 4(164):164ra161
Haas W et al (2006) Optimization and use of peptide mass measurement accuracy in shotgun proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics 5(7):1326–1337
Perkins DN, Pappin DJ, Creasy DM, Cottrell JS (1999) Probability-based protein identification by searching sequence databases using mass spectrometry data. Electrophoresis 20(18):3551–3567
Bakalarski CE et al (2008) The impact of peptide abundance and dynamic range on stable-isotope-based quantitative proteomic analyses. J Proteome Res 7(11):4756–4765
Huttlin EL, Hegeman AD, Harms AC, Sussman MR (2007) Comparison of full versus partial metabolic labeling for quantitative proteomics analysis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol Cell Proteomics 6(5):860–881
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following collaborators for applications of the in vivo proteomics technology and for helpful discussions and assistance at various stages of the project: Lilian Phu, Daisy Bustos, Corey Bakalarski, Haitao Zhu, Kim Newton, and Vishva Dixit.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Dey, A., Wu, J., Kirkpatrick, D.S. (2014). Interrogation of In Vivo Protein–Protein Interactions Using Transgenic Mouse Models and Stable Isotope Labeling. In: Wajapeyee, N. (eds) Cancer Genomics and Proteomics. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1176. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0992-6_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0992-6_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-0991-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-0992-6
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols