有什么不同?DeCyderTM与SameSpotsTM的二维DIGE图像分析。

IF 1.2 Q2 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Vanessa Schnaars, Marvin Dörries, Michael Hutchins, Lars Wöhlbrand, Ralf Rabus
{"title":"有什么不同?DeCyderTM与SameSpotsTM的二维DIGE图像分析。","authors":"Vanessa Schnaars,&nbsp;Marvin Dörries,&nbsp;Michael Hutchins,&nbsp;Lars Wöhlbrand,&nbsp;Ralf Rabus","doi":"10.1159/000494083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The efficiency and reproducibility of two-dimensional difference gel electrophoresis (2D DIGE) depends on several crucial steps: (i) adequate number of replicate gels, (ii) accurate image acquisition, and (iii) statistically confident protein abundance analysis. The latter is inherently determined by the image analysis system. Available software solutions apply different strategies for consecutive image alignment and protein spot detection. While DeCyderTM performs spot detection on single gels prior to the alignment of spot maps, SameSpotsTM completes image alignment in advance of spot detection. In this study, the performances of DeCyderTM and SameSpotsTM were compared considering all protein spots detected in 2D DIGE resolved proteomes of three different environmental bacteria with minimal user interference. Proteome map-based analysis by SameSpotsTM allows for fast and reproducible abundance change determination, avoiding time-consuming, manual spot matching. The different raw spot volumes, determined by the two software solutions, did not affect calculated abundance changes. Due to a slight factorial difference, minor abundance changes were very similar, while larger differences in the case of major abundance changes did not impact biological interpretation in the studied cases. Overall, affordable fluorescent dyes in combination with fast CCD camera-based image acquisition and user-friendly image analysis still qualify 2D DIGE as a valuable tool for quantitative proteomics.</p>","PeriodicalId":16370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology","volume":"28 3","pages":"128-136"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000494083","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What's the Difference? 2D DIGE Image Analysis by DeCyderTM versus SameSpotsTM.\",\"authors\":\"Vanessa Schnaars,&nbsp;Marvin Dörries,&nbsp;Michael Hutchins,&nbsp;Lars Wöhlbrand,&nbsp;Ralf Rabus\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000494083\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The efficiency and reproducibility of two-dimensional difference gel electrophoresis (2D DIGE) depends on several crucial steps: (i) adequate number of replicate gels, (ii) accurate image acquisition, and (iii) statistically confident protein abundance analysis. The latter is inherently determined by the image analysis system. Available software solutions apply different strategies for consecutive image alignment and protein spot detection. While DeCyderTM performs spot detection on single gels prior to the alignment of spot maps, SameSpotsTM completes image alignment in advance of spot detection. In this study, the performances of DeCyderTM and SameSpotsTM were compared considering all protein spots detected in 2D DIGE resolved proteomes of three different environmental bacteria with minimal user interference. Proteome map-based analysis by SameSpotsTM allows for fast and reproducible abundance change determination, avoiding time-consuming, manual spot matching. The different raw spot volumes, determined by the two software solutions, did not affect calculated abundance changes. Due to a slight factorial difference, minor abundance changes were very similar, while larger differences in the case of major abundance changes did not impact biological interpretation in the studied cases. Overall, affordable fluorescent dyes in combination with fast CCD camera-based image acquisition and user-friendly image analysis still qualify 2D DIGE as a valuable tool for quantitative proteomics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology\",\"volume\":\"28 3\",\"pages\":\"128-136\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000494083\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000494083\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/11/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000494083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/11/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

二维差异凝胶电泳(2D DIGE)的效率和可重复性取决于几个关键步骤:(i)足够数量的复制凝胶,(ii)准确的图像采集,(iii)统计上可靠的蛋白质丰度分析。后者是由图像分析系统固有地决定的。现有的软件解决方案适用于连续图像对齐和蛋白质斑点检测的不同策略。DeCyderTM在斑点图对齐之前对单个凝胶进行斑点检测,而SameSpotsTM在斑点检测之前完成图像对齐。在本研究中,比较了DeCyderTM和SameSpotsTM的性能,考虑了在三种不同环境细菌的2D DIGE分解蛋白质组中检测到的所有蛋白点,并且用户干扰最小。SameSpotsTM基于蛋白质组图的分析允许快速和可重复的丰度变化测定,避免耗时的人工点匹配。由两种软件解决方案确定的不同原始点体积并不影响计算出的丰度变化。由于轻微的因子差异,微小的丰度变化非常相似,而在主要丰度变化的情况下,较大的差异并不影响所研究病例的生物学解释。总体而言,价格合理的荧光染料与基于CCD相机的快速图像采集和用户友好的图像分析相结合,仍然使2D DIGE成为定量蛋白质组学的宝贵工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What's the Difference? 2D DIGE Image Analysis by DeCyderTM versus SameSpotsTM.

The efficiency and reproducibility of two-dimensional difference gel electrophoresis (2D DIGE) depends on several crucial steps: (i) adequate number of replicate gels, (ii) accurate image acquisition, and (iii) statistically confident protein abundance analysis. The latter is inherently determined by the image analysis system. Available software solutions apply different strategies for consecutive image alignment and protein spot detection. While DeCyderTM performs spot detection on single gels prior to the alignment of spot maps, SameSpotsTM completes image alignment in advance of spot detection. In this study, the performances of DeCyderTM and SameSpotsTM were compared considering all protein spots detected in 2D DIGE resolved proteomes of three different environmental bacteria with minimal user interference. Proteome map-based analysis by SameSpotsTM allows for fast and reproducible abundance change determination, avoiding time-consuming, manual spot matching. The different raw spot volumes, determined by the two software solutions, did not affect calculated abundance changes. Due to a slight factorial difference, minor abundance changes were very similar, while larger differences in the case of major abundance changes did not impact biological interpretation in the studied cases. Overall, affordable fluorescent dyes in combination with fast CCD camera-based image acquisition and user-friendly image analysis still qualify 2D DIGE as a valuable tool for quantitative proteomics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology
Journal of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology 生物-生物工程与应用微生物
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: We are entering a new and exciting era of microbiological study and application. Recent advances in the now established disciplines of genomics, proteomics and bioinformatics, together with extensive cooperation between academic and industrial concerns have brought about an integration of basic and applied microbiology as never before.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信