10.12.2012 Views

Protein Protocols Protein Protocols

Protein Protocols Protein Protocols

Protein Protocols Protein Protocols

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

538 Stone and Williams<br />

(while maintaining a constant gradient time program) eventually, the linear flow velocity<br />

on the column will be reduced to such an extent that optimal resolution will be lost (3–5).<br />

At this point, the column diameter needs to be decreased so that a more optimal linear<br />

flow velocity can be maintained at a lower flowrate. In general, the sensitivity of detection<br />

is increased as the wavelength is decreased with the practical limit in 0.05% TFA being<br />

about 210 nm. Finally, an important determinant of sensitivity (that is often overlooked) is<br />

the path length of the flow cell. For instance, an HP1090 equipped with a 0.6-cm path length<br />

cell provides (at the same flowrate) a threefold increase in sensitivity over that afforded<br />

by a Michrom UMA System equipped with a 0.2-cm path length cell.<br />

2. If the transit time (i.e., peak delay) between the detector and the fraction collector is too<br />

long, closely eluting peaks will be pooled together. The reason is that if a second peak is<br />

detected by the Isco Model 2150 Peak Separator while it is “counting down” the peak<br />

delay for the first peak, the two peaks will be pooled together. Although our experience is<br />

this phenomenon seldom occurs with a peak delay of 6 s (at a flowrate of 75 µL/min),<br />

which corresponds to a “dead volume” of about 7.5 µL, it often occurs if the peak delay<br />

exceeds about 15 s. To our knowledge, no commercial peak detector is currently available<br />

that can simultaneously track more than one peak.<br />

3. The procedure we use to evaluate C-18 reverse-phase columns is to determine the relative<br />

number of peaks that are detected at a given slope sensitivity during the fractionation of an<br />

aliquot of a large-scale tryptic digest of transferrin (3–5).<br />

4. For high-sensitivity work, the baseline may be “balanced” (after running the first blank<br />

run) by adding a small volume of 20% TFA (i.e., typically 10 to 100 µL) to either buffer A<br />

or B as needed (5).<br />

5. Because filtering HPLC solvents may result in their contamination (6), we recommend<br />

they be made with HPLC-grade water and acetonitrile, and that they not be filtered prior<br />

to use.<br />

6. Provided the fractions are tightly capped within a few hours of collection (to prevent<br />

loss of acetonitrile owing to evaporation), the acetonitrile is extremely effective at preventing<br />

microbial growth and peptide loss owing to adsorption. Under these conditions,<br />

we have often successfully sequenced peptide fractions that have been stored for longer<br />

than a year.<br />

7. Provided that samples of both the modified and unmodified protein are available,<br />

comparative HPLC peptide mapping provides an extremely facile means of rapidly<br />

identifying peptides that contain posttranslational modifications. In the case of proteins<br />

that have been expressed in E. coli, the latter can often serve as the unmodified control,<br />

since relatively few posttranslational modifications occur in this organism. Certainly, the<br />

first attempt at comparative HPLC peptide mapping should be with enzymes, such as<br />

trypsin or lysyl endopeptidase, that have high specificity, and the digests should be<br />

separated using acetonitrile gradients in 0.05% TFA. Although elution position (as detected<br />

by absorbance at 210 nm) provides a sensitive criterion to detect subtle alterations in<br />

structure, the value of comparative HPLC peptide mapping can be further enhanced by<br />

multiwavelength monitoring and, especially, by on-line or off-line mass spectrometry of<br />

the resulting peptide -fractions (see Chapter 8, which details the off-line use of<br />

MALDI-MS for analyzing peptides). If comparative peptide mapping fails to reveal any<br />

significant changes, it is often worthwhile running the same digest in the pH 6.0 phosphate-buffered<br />

system. At this higher pH, some changes, such as deamidation of asparagine<br />

and glutamine, produce a larger effect on elution position than at pH 2.0, where<br />

ionization of the side-chain carboxyl groups would be suppressed. Another possible reason<br />

for failing to detect differences on comparative HPLC is that the peptide(s) containing the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!