A comparison of MS/MS‐based, stable‐isotope‐labeled, quantitation performance on ESI‐quadrupole TOF and MALDI‐TOF/TOF mass spectrometers

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The peptide‐based quantitation accuracy and precision of LC‐ESI (QSTAR Elite) and LC‐MALDI (4800 MALDI TOF/TOF) were compared by analyzing identical Escherichia coli tryptic digests containing iTRAQ‐labeled peptides of defined abundances (1:1, 2.5:1, 5:1, and 10:1). Only 51.4% of QSTAR spectra were used for quantitation by ProteinPilot Software versus 66.7% of LC‐MALDI spectra. The average protein sequence coverages for LC‐ESI and LC‐MALDI were 24.0 and 18.2% (14.9 and 8.4 peptides per protein), respectively. The iTRAQ‐based expression ratios determined by ProteinPilot from the 57 467 ESI‐MS/MS and 26 085 MALDI‐MS/MS spectra were analyzed for measurement accuracy and reproducibility. When the relative abundances of peptides within a sample were increased from 1:1 to 10:1, the mean ratios calculated on both instruments differed by only 0.7–6.7% between platforms. In the 10:1 experiment, up to 64.7% of iTRAQ ratios from LC‐ESI MS/MS spectra failed S/N thresholds and were excluded from quantitation, while only 0.1% of the equivalent LC‐MALDI iTRAQ ratios were rejected. Re‐analysis of an archived LC‐MALDI sample set stored for 5 months generated 3715 MS/MS spectra for quantitation, compared with 3845 acquired originally, and the average ratios differed by only 3.1%. Overall, MS/MS‐based peptide quantitation performance of offline LC‐MALDI was comparable with on‐line LC‐ESI, which required threefold less time. However, offline LC‐MALDI allows the re‐analysis of archived HPLC‐separated samples.
Funding Information
  • Genome Canada
  • Genome British Columbia