Timothy W. Sikorski

Bio: Timothy W. Sikorski is an academic researcher from Harvard University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Transcription factor II E & Transcription factor II D. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 6 publications receiving 433 citations.

Online nanoflow reversed phase-strong anion exchange-reversed phase liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry platform for efficient and in-depth proteome sequence analysis of complex organisms.

Abstract: The dynamic range of protein expression in complex organisms coupled with the stochastic nature of discovery-driven tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) analysis continues to impede comprehensive sequence analysis and often provides only limited information for low-abundance proteins. High-performance fractionation of proteins or peptides prior to mass spectrometry analysis can mitigate these effects, though achieving an optimal combination of automation, reproducibility, separation peak capacity, and sample yield remains a significant challenge. Here we demonstrate an automated nanoflow 3-D liquid chromatography (LC)-MS/MS platform based on high-pH reversed phase (RP), strong anion exchange (SAX), and low-pH reversed phase (RP) separation stages for analysis of complex proteomes. We observed that RP-SAX-RP outperformed RP-RP for analysis of tryptic peptides derived from Escherichia coli and enabled identification of proteins present at a level of 50 copies per cell in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, corresponding to an estimated detection limit of 500 amol, from 40 μg of total lysate on a low-resolution 3-D ion trap mass spectrometer. A similar study performed on a LTQ-Orbitrap yielded over 4000 unique proteins from 5 μg of total yeast lysate analyzed in a single, 101 fraction RP-SAX-RP LC-MS/MS acquisition, providing an estimated detection limit of 65 amol for proteins expressed at 50 copies per cell.

Protein Analysis by Shotgun/Bottom-up Proteomics

Abstract: According to Genome Sequencing Project statistics (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/static/gpstat.html), as of Feb 16, 2012, complete gene sequences have become available for 2816 viruses, 1117 prokaryotes, and 36 eukaryotes.1–2 The availability of full genome sequences has greatly facilitated biological research in many fields, and has greatly contributed to the growth of proteomics. Proteins are important because they are the direct bio-functional molecules in the living organisms. The term “proteomics” was coined from merging “protein” and “genomics” in the 1990s.3–4 As a post-genomic discipline, proteomics encompasses efforts to identify and quantify all the proteins of a proteome, including expression, cellular localization, interactions, post-translational modifications (PTMs), and turnover as a function of time, space and cell type, thus making the full investigation of a proteome more challenging than sequencing a genome. There are possibly 100,000 protein forms encoded by the approximate 20,235 genes of the human genome,5 and determining the explicit function of each form will be a challenge. The progress of proteomics has been driven by the development of new technologies for peptide/protein separation, mass spectrometry analysis, isotope labeling for quantification, and bioinformatics data analysis. Mass spectrometry has emerged as a core tool for large-scale protein analysis. In the past decade, there has been a rapid advance in the resolution, mass accuracy, sensitivity and scan rate of mass spectrometers used to analyze proteins. In addition, hybrid mass analyzers have been introduced recently (e.g. Linear Ion Trap-Orbitrap series6–7) which have significantly improved proteomic analysis. “Bottom-up” protein analysis refers to the characterization of proteins by analysis of peptides released from the protein through proteolysis. When bottom-up is performed on a mixture of proteins it is called shotgun proteomics,8–10 a name coined by the Yates lab because of its analogy to shotgun genomic sequencing.11 Shotgun proteomics provides an indirect measurement of proteins through peptides derived from proteolytic digestion of intact proteins. In a typical shotgun proteomics experiment, the peptide mixture is fractionated and subjected to LC-MS/MS analysis. Peptide identification is achieved by comparing the tandem mass spectra derived from peptide fragmentation with theoretical tandem mass spectra generated from in silico digestion of a protein database. Protein inference is accomplished by assigning peptide sequences to proteins. Because peptides can be either uniquely assigned to a single protein or shared by more than one protein, the identified proteins may be further scored and grouped based on their peptides. In contrast, another strategy, termed ‘top-down’ proteomics, is used to characterize intact proteins (Figure 1). The top-down approach has some potential advantages for PTM and protein isoform determination and has achieved notable success. Intact proteins have been measured up to 200 kDa,12 and a large scale study has identified more than 1,000 proteins by multi-dimensional separations from complex samples.13 However, the top-down method has significant limitations compared with shotgun proteomics due to difficulties with protein fractionation, protein ionization and fragmentation in the gas phase. By relying on the analysis of peptides, which are more easily fractionated, ionized and fragmented, shotgun proteomics can be more universally adopted for protein analysis. In fact, a hybrid of bottom-up and top-down methodologies and instrumentation has been introduced as middle-down proteomics.14 Essentially, middle-down proteomics analyzes larger peptide fragments than bottom-up proteomics, minimizing peptide redundancy between proteins. Additionally the large peptide fragments yield similar advantages as top-down proteomics, such as gaining further insight into post-translational modifications, without the analytical challenges of analyzing intact proteins. Shotgun proteomics has become a workhorse for the analysis of proteins and their modifications and will be increasingly combined with top-down methods in the future. Figure 1 Proteomic strategies: bottom-up vs. top-down vs. middle-down. The bottom-up approach analyzes proteolytic peptides. The top-down method measures the intact proteins. The middle-down strategy analyzes larger peptides resulted from limited digestion or ... In the past decade shotgun proteomics has been widely used by biologists for many different research experiments, advancing biological discoveries. Some applications include, but are not limited to, proteome profiling, protein quantification, protein modification, and protein-protein interaction. There have been several reviews nicely summarizing mass spectrometry history,15 protein quantification with mass spectrometry,16 its biological applications,5,17–26 and many recent advances in methodology.27–32 In this review, we try to provide a full and updated survey of shotgun proteomics, including the fundamental techniques and applications that laid the foundation along with those developed and greatly improved in the past several years.

ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling: genetics, genomics and mechanisms

Abstract: Macromolecular assemblies that regulate chromatin structure using the energy of ATP hydrolysis have critical roles in development, cancer, and stem cell biology. The ATPases of this family are encoded by 27 human genes and are usually associated with several other proteins that are stable, non-exchangeable subunits. One fundamental mechanism used by these complexes is thought to be the movement or exchange of nucleosomes to regulate transcription. However, recent genetic studies indicate that chromatin remodelers may also be involved in regulating other aspects of chromatin structure during many cellular processes. The SWI/SNF family in particular appears to have undergone a substantial change in subunit composition and mechanism coincident with the evolutionary advent of multicellularity and the appearance of linking histones. The differential usage of this greater diversity of mammalian BAF subunits is essential for the development of specific cell fates, including the progression from pluripotency to multipotency to committed neurons. Recent human genetic screens have revealed that BRG1, ARID1A, BAF155, and hSNF5 are frequently mutated in tumors, indicating that BAF complexes also play a critical role in the initiation or progression of cancer. The mechanistic bases underlying the genetic requirements for BAF and other chromatin remodelers in development and cancer are relatively unexplored and will be a focus of this review.

The RNA polymerase II CTD coordinates transcription and RNA processing

Abstract: The C-terminal domain (CTD) of the RNA polymerase II largest subunit consists of multiple heptad repeats (consensus Tyr1-Ser2-Pro3-Thr4-Ser5-Pro6-Ser7), varying in number from 26 in yeast to 52 in vertebrates. The CTD functions to help couple transcription and processing of the nascent RNA and also plays roles in transcription elongation and termination. The CTD is subject to extensive post-translational modification, most notably phosphorylation, during the transcription cycle, which modulates its activities in the above processes. Therefore, understanding the nature of CTD modifications, including how they function and how they are regulated, is essential to understanding the mechanisms that control gene expression. While the significance of phosphorylation of Ser2 and Ser5 residues has been studied and appreciated for some time, several additional modifications have more recently been added to the CTD repertoire, and insight into their function has begun to emerge. Here, we review findings regarding modification and function of the CTD, highlighting the important role this unique domain plays in coordinating gene activity.