Advertisement

Quantitative Phosphoproteomic Analysis of T-Cell Receptor Signaling

  • Nagib Ahsan
  • Arthur R. Salomon
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1584)

Abstract

TCR signaling critically depends on protein phosphorylation across many proteins. Localization of each phosphorylation event relative to the T-cell receptor (TCR) and canonical T-cell signaling proteins will provide clues about the structure of TCR signaling networks. Quantitative phosphoproteomic analysis by mass spectrometry provides a wide-scale view of cellular phosphorylation networks. However, analysis of phosphorylation by mass spectrometry is still challenging due to the relative low abundance of phosphorylated proteins relative to all proteins and the extraordinary diversity of phosphorylation sites across the proteome. Highly selective enrichment of phosphorylated peptides is essential to provide the most comprehensive view of the phosphoproteome. Optimization of phosphopeptide enrichment methods coupled with highly sensitive mass spectrometry workflows significantly improves the sequencing depth of the phosphoproteome to over 10,000 unique phosphorylation sites from complex cell lysates. Here we describe a step-by-step method for phosphoproteomic analysis that has achieved widespread success for identification of serine, threonine, and tyrosine phosphorylation. Reproducible quantification of relative phosphopeptide abundance is provided by intensity-based label-free quantitation. An ideal set of mass spectrometry analysis parameters is also provided that optimize the yield of identified sites. We also provide guidelines for the bioinformatic analysis of this type of data to assess the quality of the data and to comply with proteomic data reporting requirements.

Key words

Immunoaffinity purification Label-free quantitation Phosphoproteomics T-Cell signaling Tyrosine phosphorylation Mass spectrometry 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support from NIH grant R01 AI083636 and NIH grant P30 GM110759. In addition, this research is based in part upon work conducted using the Rhode Island NSF/EPSCoR Proteomics Share Resource Facility, which is supported in part by the National Science Foundation EPSCoR Grant No. 1004057, National Institutes of Health Grant No. 1S10RR027027, a Rhode Island Science and Technology Advisory Council grant, and the Division of Biology and Medicine, Brown University.Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Ahsan N, Huang Y, Tovar-Mendez A, Swatek KN, Zhang J, Miernyk JA, Xu D, Thelen JJ (2013) A versatile mass spectrometry-based method to both identify kinase client-relationships and characterize signaling network topology. J Proteome Res 12:937–948CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Larsen MR, Graham ME, Robinson PJ, Roepstorff P (2004) Improved detection of hydrophilic phosphopeptides using graphite powder microcolumns and mass spectrometry: evidence for in vivo doubly phosphorylated dynamin I and dynamin III. Mol Cell Proteomics 3:456–465CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Steen, H., Stensballe, A., Jensen, O.N. (2007) Phosphopeptide purification by IMAC with Fe(III) and Ga(III). CSH Protoc 2007, pdb prot4607Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thingholm TE, Jorgensen TJ, Jensen ON, Larsen MR (2006) Highly selective enrichment of phosphorylated peptides using titanium dioxide. Nat Protoc 1:1929–1935CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jayasundera KB, Iliuk AB, Nguyen A, Higgins R, Geahlen RL, Tao WA (2014) Global phosphoproteomics of activated B cells using complementary metal ion functionalized soluble nanopolymers. Anal Chem 86:6363–6371CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hunter T, Sefton BM (1980) Transforming gene product of Rous sarcoma virus phosphorylates tyrosine. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 77:1311–1315CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lemeer S, Heck AJ (2009) The phosphoproteomics data explosion. Curr Opin Chem Biol 13:414–420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hunter, T. (1998) The Croonian Lecture 1997. The phosphorylation of proteins on tyrosine: its role in cell growth and disease. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 353, 583–605.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zoumaro-Djayoon AD, Heck AJ, Munoz J (2012) Targeted analysis of tyrosine phosphorylation by immuno-affinity enrichment of tyrosine phosphorylated peptides prior to mass spectrometric analysis. Methods 56:268–274Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boersema PJ, Foong LY, Ding VM, Lemeer S, van Breukelen B, Philp R, Boekhorst J, Snel B, den Hertog J, Choo AB, Heck AJ (2010) In-depth qualitative and quantitative profiling of tyrosine phosphorylation using a combination of phosphopeptide immunoaffinity purification and stable isotope dimethyl labeling. Mol Cell Proteomics 9:84–99Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Di Palma S, Zoumaro-Djayoon A, Peng M, Post H, Preisinger C, Munoz J, Heck AJ (2013) Finding the same needles in the haystack? A comparison of phosphotyrosine peptides enriched by immuno-affinity precipitation and metal-based affinity chromatography. J Proteomics 91:331–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rikova K, Guo A, Zeng Q, Possemato A, Yu J, Haack H, Nardone J, Lee K, Reeves C, Li Y, Hu Y, Tan Z, Stokes M, Sullivan L, Mitchell J, Wetzel R, Macneill J, Ren JM, Yuan J, Bakalarski CE, Villen J, Kornhauser JM, Smith B, Li D, Zhou X, Gygi SP, Gu TL, Polakiewicz RD, Rush J, Comb MJ (2007) Global survey of phosphotyrosine signaling identifies oncogenic kinases in lung cancer. Cell 131:1190–1203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rush J, Moritz A, Lee KA, Guo A, Goss VL, Spek EJ, Zhang H, Zha XM, Polakiewicz RD, Comb MJ (2005) Immunoaffinity profiling of tyrosine phosphorylation in cancer cells. Nat Biotechnol 23:94–101Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Salomon AR, Ficarro SB, Brill LM, Brinker A, Phung QT, Ericson C, Sauer K, Brock A, Horn DM, Schultz PG, Peters EC (2003) Profiling of tyrosine phosphorylation pathways in human cells using mass spectrometry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:443–448Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    van der Mijn JC, Labots M, Piersma SR, Pham TV, Knol JC, Broxterman HJ, Verheul HM, Jimenez CR (2015) Evaluation of different phospho-tyrosine antibodies for label-free phosphoproteomics. J Proteomics 127:259–263CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ji Q, Ding Y, Salomon AR (2015) SRC homology 2 domain-containing leukocyte phosphoprotein of 76 kDa (SLP-76) N-terminal tyrosine residues regulate a dynamic signaling equilibrium involving feedback of proximal T-cell receptor (TCR) signaling. Mol Cell Proteomics 14:30–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Helou YA, Nguyen V, Beik SP, Salomon AR (2013) ERK positive feedback regulates a widespread network of tyrosine phosphorylation sites across canonical T cell signaling and actin cytoskeletal proteins in Jurkat T cells. PLoS One 8:e69641Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Helou, Y.A., Petrashen, A.P., Salomon, A.R. (2015) Vav1 regulates T-cell activation through a feedback mechanism and crosstalk between the T-cell receptor and CD28. J Proteome Res 14:2963-75Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Helou YA, Salomon AR (2015) Protein networks and activation of lymphocytes. Curr Opin Immunol 33:78–85CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sjolin-Goodfellow H, Frushicheva MP, Ji Q, Cheng DA, Kadlecek TA, Cantor AJ, Kuriyan J, Chakraborty AK, Salomon AR, Weiss A (2015) The catalytic activity of the kinase ZAP-70 mediates basal signaling and negative feedback of the T cell receptor pathway. Sci Signal 8:ra49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ong SE, Blagoev B, Kratchmarova I, Kristensen DB, Steen H, Pandey A, Mann M (2002) Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture, SILAC, as a simple and accurate approach to expression proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics 1:376–386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ross PL, Huang YN, Marchese JN, 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 DJ (2004) Multiplexed protein quantitation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using amine-reactive isobaric tagging reagents. Mol Cell Proteomics 3:1154–1169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thompson A, Schafer J, Kuhn K, Kienle S, Schwarz J, Schmidt G, Neumann T, Johnstone R, Mohammed AK, 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
  24. 24.
    Yu K, Salomon AR (2010) HTAPP: high-throughput autonomous proteomic pipeline. Proteomics 10:2113–2122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yu K, Salomon AR (2009) PeptideDepot: flexible relational database for visual analysis of quantitative proteomic data and integration of existing protein information. Proteomics 9:5350–5358CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Perkins DN, Pappin DJ, Creasy DM, Cottrell JS (1999) Probability-based protein identification by searching sequence databases using mass spectrometry data. Electrophoresis 20:3551–3567CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ma B, Zhang K, Hendrie C, Liang C, Li M, Doherty-Kirby A, Lajoie G (2003) PEAKS: powerful software for peptide de novo sequencing by tandem mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 17:2337–2342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Licklider LJ, Thoreen CC, Peng J, Gygi SP (2002) Automation of nanoscale microcapillary liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry with a vented column. Anal Chem 74:3076–3083CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Elias JE, Gygi SP (2007) Target-decoy search strategy for increased confidence in large-scale protein identifications by mass spectrometry. Nat Methods 4:207–214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chambers MC, Maclean B, Burke R, Amodei D, Ruderman DL, Neumann S, Gatto L, Fischer B, Pratt B, Egertson J, Hoff K, Kessner D, Tasman N, Shulman N, Frewen B, Baker TA, Brusniak MY, Paulse C, Creasy D, Flashner L, Kani K, Moulding C, Seymour SL, Nuwaysir LM, Lefebvre B, Kuhlmann F, Roark J, Rainer P, Detlev S, Hemenway T, Huhmer A, Langridge J, Connolly B, Chadick T, Holly K, Eckels J, Deutsch EW, Moritz RL, Katz JE, Agus DB, MacCoss M, Tabb DL, Mallick P (2012) A cross-platform toolkit for mass spectrometry and proteomics. Nat Biotechnol 30:918–920CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Beausoleil SA, Villen J, Gerber SA, Rush J, Gygi SP (2006) A probability-based approach for high-throughput protein phosphorylation analysis and site localization. Nat Biotechnol 24:1285–1292Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Demirkan G, Yu K, Boylan JM, Salomon AR, Gruppuso PA (2011) Phosphoproteomic profiling of in vivo signaling in liver by the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1). PLoS One 6:e21729CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Smith CA, Want EJ, O'Maille G, Abagyan R, Siuzdak G (2006) XCMS: processing mass spectrometry data for metabolite profiling using nonlinear peak alignment, matching, and identification. Anal Chem 78:779–787CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Storey JD (2003) The positive false discovery rate: a Bayesian interpretation and the q-value. Ann Stat 31:2013–2035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Storey JD, Tibshirani R (2003) Statistical significance for genomewide studies. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:9440–9445CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Oberg AL, Mahoney DW (2012) Statistical methods for quantitative mass spectrometry proteomic experiments with labeling. BMC Bioinformatics 13(Suppl 16):7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Biology and Medicine, Alpert Medical SchoolBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA
  2. 2.Center for Cancer Research and Development, Proteomics Core FacilityRhode Island HospitalProvidenceUSA
  3. 3.Department of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and BiochemistryBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations