| Title |
Efficient recovery of glycosaminoglycan oligosaccharides from polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis combined with mass spectrometry analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00216-016-0052-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pierre-Edouard Bodet, Isabelle Salard, Cédric Przybylski, Florence Gonnet, Cathy Gomila, Jèrôme Ausseil, Régis Daniel |
| Abstract |
To promote efficient separation and structural analysis of glycosaminoglycan oligosaccharides, we developed a straightforward method that combined gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry (MS). Potential limitations of this approach (e.g., low extraction yields and weak compatibility with MS) were resolved by developing an active extraction procedure that yielded a quantitative amount of sulfated oligosaccharides from excised gel bands. The compatibility of obtained oligosaccharides for subsequent MS analysis was ensured using a single, simple clean-up step on a mixed C18/graphite carbon solid-phase column that was fully effective for polymerization degrees ranging from di- to dodecasaccharides. The reported combination of carbohydrates-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis with MS was successfully applied to glucosamino- (heparin) and galactosamino- (dermantan sulfate) glycans, demonstrating the potential of our method for structural analysis of bioactive sulfated carbohydrates extracted from biological matrices. Graphical Abstract ᅟ. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 29% |
| Researcher | 2 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 21% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 7% |
| Engineering | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#6,612
of 9,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,009
of 318,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#87
of 196 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,624 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,956 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 196 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.