HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Macarthur, D.J. Articles by Jacques, N.A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Macarthur, D.J. Articles by Jacques, N.A.

Proteome Analysis of Oral Pathogens

Institute of Dental Research, Westmead Centre for Oral Health, PO Box 533, Wentworthville, NSW 2145, Australia;

View larger version (55K): [in a new window]   Figure 1. An example of the use of 2-DE differential display to show changes in phenotype. Cellular proteins extracted from S. gordonii grown in a chemostat were focused on IPG strips over the pI range 5.5 to 6.7 before being separated in the 2nd dimension on 12-18% acrylamide gels by SDS-PAGE. The protein circled in the inset was down-regulated as the environmental pH increased from (A) pH 6.5 to (B) pH 7.0 and (C) pH 7.5.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Figure 2. Protocol for protein identification with the use of mass spectral data from a MALDI-TOF mass spectrometer. (A) The protein spot of interest on a 2-DE gel (indicated by arrow) is excised either by hand or by a robotic sampler. (B) Tryptic digestion of protein spot and transfer of peptides to a MALDI-TOF target plate. (C) Ions are generated by the firing of a laser at a target plate and a fingerprint spectrum of the relative masses of peptide ions calculated based on the time difference between the laser firing and the arrival of the ions at a detector. (D) The protein is identified by access to a database containing a theoretical digest of proteins from either the organism of interest or one that is closely related. The theoretical masses are compared with the experimentally observed masses, with accurate protein identification dependent on the total percentage of the sequence covered by the matching peptides and the size of the original protein.