Title |
Spatially Resolved Proteome Mapping of Laser Capture Microdissected Tissue with Automated Sample Transfer to Nanodroplets*
|
---|---|
Published in |
Molecular and Cellular Proteomics, June 2018
|
DOI | 10.1074/mcp.tir118.000686 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Ying Zhu, Maowei Dou, Paul D Piehowski, Yiran Liang, Fangjun Wang, Rosalie K Chu, William B Chrisler, Jordan N Smith, Kaitlynn C Schwarz, Yufeng Shen, Anil K Shukla, Ronald J Moore, Richard D Smith, Wei-Jun Qian, Ryan T Kelly |
Abstract |
Current mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics approaches are ineffective for mapping protein expression in tissue sections with high spatial resolution due to the limited overall sensitivity of conventional workflows. Here we report an integrated and automated method to advance spatially resolved proteomics by seamlessly coupling laser capture microdissection (LCM) with a recently developed nanoliter-scale sample preparation system termed nanoPOTS (Nanodroplet Processing in One pot for Trace Samples). The workflow is enabled by prepopulating nanowells with DMSO, which serves as a sacrificial capture liquid for microdissected tissues. The DMSO droplets efficiently collect laser-pressure catapulted LCM tissues as small as 20 µm in diameter with success rates >87%. We also demonstrate that tissue treatment with DMSO can significantly improve proteome coverage, likely due to its ability to dissolve lipids from tissue and enhance protein extraction efficiency. The LCM-nanoPOTS platform was able to identify 180, 695, and 1827 protein groups on average from 12-µm-thick rat brain cortex tissue sections with diameters of 50, 100, and 200 µm, respectively. We also analyzed 100-µm-diameter sections corresponding to 10-18 cells from three different regions of rat brain and comparatively quantified ~1000 proteins, demonstrating the potential utility for high-resolution spatially resolved mapping of protein expression in tissues. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 16 | 43% |
Canada | 2 | 5% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 5% |
Australia | 1 | 3% |
Spain | 1 | 3% |
France | 1 | 3% |
Mexico | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 13 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 20 | 54% |
Scientists | 15 | 41% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 25% |
Researcher | 17 | 18% |
Student > Master | 11 | 11% |
Professor | 5 | 5% |
Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 5% |
Other | 12 | 13% |
Unknown | 22 | 23% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 26 | 27% |
Chemistry | 14 | 15% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 13% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
Neuroscience | 4 | 4% |
Other | 11 | 11% |
Unknown | 24 | 25% |