↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Artifacts to avoid while taking advantage of top‐down mass spectrometry based detection of protein S‐thiolation
Published in
PROTEOMICS, April 2014
DOI 10.1002/pmic.201300450
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Bottom-up MS studies typically employ a reduction and alkylation step that eliminates a class of PTM, S-thiolation. Given that molecular oxygen can mediate S-thiolation from reduced thiols, which are abundant in the reducing intracellular milieu, we investigated the possibility that some S-thiolation modifications are artifacts of protein preparation. Cu/Zn-superoxide dismutase (SOD1) was chosen for this case study as it has a reactive surface cysteine residue, which is readily cysteinylated in vitro. The ability of oxygen to generate S-thiolation artifacts was tested by comparing purification of SOD1 from postmortem human cerebral cortex under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. S-thiolation was ∼50% higher in aerobically processed preparations, consistent with oxygen-dependent artifactual S-thiolation. The ability of endogenous small molecule disulfides (e.g. cystine) to participate in artifactual S-thiolation was tested by blocking reactive protein cysteine residues during anaerobic homogenization. A 50-fold reduction in S-thiolation occurred indicating that the majority of S-thiolation observed aerobically was artifact. Tissue-specific artifacts were explored by comparing brain- and blood-derived protein, with remarkably more artifacts observed in brain-derived SOD1. Given the potential for such artifacts, rules of thumb for sample preparation are provided. This study demonstrates that without taking extraordinary precaution, artifactual S-thiolation of highly reactive, surface-exposed, cysteine residues can result.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 25%
Chemistry 8 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 19%
Neuroscience 4 13%
Computer Science 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 2 6%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 April 2014.
All research outputs
#22,493,761
of 27,521,156 outputs
Outputs from PROTEOMICS
#3,395
of 4,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,603
of 242,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PROTEOMICS
#50
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,521,156 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 4,180 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 242,577 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 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.