Proteomic Interrogation of Human Chromatin
2011

Proteomic Analysis of Chromatin Proteins

Sample size: 1900 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Mariana P. Torrente, Barry M. Zee, Nicolas L. Young, Richard C. Baliban, Gary LeRoy, Christodoulos A. Floudas, Sandra B. Hake, Benjamin A. Garcia

Primary Institution: Princeton University

Hypothesis

What are the biological specificity and proteomic extent of different chromatin extraction methods?

Conclusion

The study identified over 1,900 proteins in chromatin preparations, highlighting the trade-off between biological specificity and broadness of characterization in chromatin purification methods.

Supporting Evidence

  • Over 1,900 unique proteins were identified from chromatin preparations.
  • Approximately 25% of the proteins were purified across all three methods.
  • Histone proteins were among the most abundant proteins identified.
  • Post-translational modifications were detected on many chromatin proteins.
  • Different extraction methods yielded distinct subsets of chromatin proteins.
  • Proteins involved in DNA processes were the most common in the identified proteins.
  • Some proteins were found to be enriched in either euchromatin or heterochromatin fractions.
  • Statistical analysis confirmed significant differences in histone modifications between chromatin types.

Takeaway

Scientists looked at different ways to extract proteins from chromatin and found many proteins that help package DNA and control gene activity.

Methodology

Mass spectrometry-based proteomics was used to analyze proteins from chromatin-enriched fractions obtained through different extraction methods.

Potential Biases

Potential contamination from non-nuclear proteins may affect the specificity of the identified chromatin proteins.

Limitations

The study's findings may be influenced by the presence of contaminant proteins and the crude nature of the biochemical fractionation methods.

Participant Demographics

HeLa S3 cells were used for the experiments.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.05

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0024747

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication