Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
and especially the determination of the real combination of modi-
fi cations present on a single protein species, will develop
considerably in the future.
References
1. Santoni V, Molloy M, Rabilloud T (2000)
Membrane proteins and proteomics: un amour
impossible? Electrophoresis 21:1054-1070
2. Rabilloud T (2009) Membrane proteins and
proteomics: love is possible, but so diffi cult.
Electrophoresis 30(Suppl 1):S174-S180
3. Santoni V, Rabilloud T, Doumas P et al (1999)
Towards the recovery of hydrophobic proteins
on two-dimensional electrophoresis gels.
Electrophoresis 20:705-711
4. Santoni V, Kieffer S, Desclaux D et al (2000)
Membrane proteomics: use of additive main
effects with multiplicative interaction model to
classify plasma membrane proteins according
to their solubility and electrophoretic proper-
ties. Electrophoresis 21:3329-3344
5. Petrak J, Ivanek R, Toman O et al (2008) Deja
vu in proteomics. A hit parade of repeatedly
identifi ed differentially expressed proteins.
Proteomics 8:1744-1749
6. Wang P, Bouwman FG, Mariman EC (2009)
Generally detected proteins in comparative
proteomics—a matter of cellular stress
response? Proteomics 9:2955-2966
7. Nesvizhskii AI, Aebersold R (2005)
Interpretation of shotgun proteomic data: the
protein inference problem. Mol Cell
Proteomics 4:1419-1440
8. Li YF, Arnold RJ, Li Y et al (2009) A bayesian
approach to protein inference problem in shot-
gun
12. Saravanan RS, Rose JK (2004) A critical evalu-
ation of sample extraction techniques for
enhanced proteomic analysis of recalcitrant
plant tissues. Proteomics 4:2522-2532
13. Sarry JE, Kuhn L, Ducruix C et al (2006) The
early responses of Arabidopsis thaliana cells to
cadmium exposure explored by protein and
metabolite profi ling analyses. Proteomics
6:2180-2198
14. Villiers F, Ducruix C, Hugouvieux V et al
(2011) Investigating the plant response to
cadmium exposure by proteomic and metabo-
lomic approaches. Proteomics 11:1650-1663
15. Tanou G, Job C, Belghazi M et al (2011)
Proteomic signatures uncover hydrogen per-
oxide and nitric oxide cross-talk signaling net-
work in citrus plants. J Proteome Res
9:5994-6006
16. Catusse J, Meinhard J, Job C et al (2011)
Proteomics reveals potential biomarkers of seed
vigor in sugarbeet. Proteomics 11:1569-1580
17. Hackett M (2008) Science, marketing and
wishful thinking in quantitative proteomics.
Proteomics 8:4618-4623
18. Celis JE (2004) Gel-based proteomics: what
does MCP expect? Mol Cell Proteomics 3:949
19. Wilkins MR, Appel RD, Van Eyk JE et al
(2006) Guidelines for the next 10 years of pro-
teomics. Proteomics 6:4-8
20. Corbett JM, Dunn MJ, Posch A et al (1994)
Positional reproducibility of protein spots in
2-dimensional polyacrylamide-gel electropho-
resis using immobilized ph gradient isoelectric-
focusing in the fi rst dimension—an
interlaboratory comparison. Electrophoresis
15:1205-1211
21. Blomberg A, Blomberg L, Norbeck J et al
(1995) Interlaboratory reproducibility of yeast
protein-patterns analyzed by immobilized Ph
gradient 2-dimensional gel-electrophoresis.
Electrophoresis 16:1935-1945
22. Paulovich AG, Billheimer D, Ham AJ et al
(2010) Interlaboratory study characterizing a
yeast performance standard for benchmarking
LC-MS platform performance. Mol Cell
Proteomics 9:242-254
23. Tabb DL, Vega-Montoto L, Rudnick PA et al
(2010) Repeatability and reproducibility in
proteomics.
J
Comput
Biol
16:1183-1193
9. Grobei MA, Qeli E, Brunner E et al (2009)
Deterministic protein inference for shotgun
proteomics data provides new insights into
Arabidopsis pollen development and function.
Genome Res 19:1786-1800
10. Choe LH, Lee KH (2003) Quantitative and
qualitative measure of intralaboratory two-
dimensional protein gel reproducibility and
the effects of sample preparation, sample load,
and
image
analysis.
Electrophoresis
24:3500-3507
11. Zhou SB, Bailey MJ, Dunn MJ et al (2005) A
quantitative investigation into the losses of
proteins at different stages of a two-
dimensional gel electrophoresis procedure.
Proteomics 5:2739-2747
