Which metaproteome? The impact of protein extraction bias on metaproteomic analyses.

Culture-independent techniques such as LC-MS/MS-based metaproteomic analyses are being increasingly utilized for the study of microbial composition and function in complex environmental samples. Although several studies have documented the many challenges and sources of bias that must be considered in these types of analyses, none have systematically characterized the effect of protein extraction bias on the biological interpretation of true environmental biofilm metaproteomes. In this study, we compared three protein extraction methods commonly used in the analyses of environmental samples [guanidine hydrochloride (GuHCl), B-PER, sequential citrate-phenol (SCP)] using nano-LC-MS/MS and an environmental marine biofilm to determine the unique biases introduced by each method and their effect on the interpretation of the derived metaproteomes. While the protein extraction efficiencies of the three methods ranged from 2.0 to 4.3%, there was little overlap in the sequence (1.9%), function (8.3% of total assigned protein families) and origin of the identified proteins from each extract. Each extraction method enriched for different protein families (GuHCl - photosynthesis, carbohydrate metabolism; B-PER - membrane transport, oxidative stress; SCP - calcium binding, structural) while 23.7-45.4% of the identified proteins lacked SwissProt annotations. Taken together, the results demonstrated that even the most basic interpretations of this complex microbial assemblage (species composition, ratio of prokaryotic to eukaryotic proteins, predominant functions) varied with little overlap based on the protein extraction method employed. These findings demonstrate the heavy influence of protein extraction on biofilm metaproteomics and provide caveats for the interpretation of such data sets when utilizing single protein extraction methods for the description of complex microbial assemblages.

[1]  E. Delong,et al.  Integrated metatranscriptomic and metagenomic analyses of stratified microbial assemblages in the open ocean , 2011, The ISME Journal.

[2]  L. Ranjard,et al.  Metaproteomics: A New Approach for Studying Functional Microbial Ecology , 2007, Microbial Ecology.

[3]  A. Krogh,et al.  Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden Markov model: application to complete genomes. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[4]  V. O’Flaherty,et al.  Optimisation of protein extraction and 2‐DE for metaproteomics of microbial communities from anaerobic wastewater treatment biofilms , 2009, Electrophoresis.

[5]  Paul Wilmes,et al.  Metaproteomics Provides Functional Insight into Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment , 2008, PloS one.

[6]  Christine L. Sun,et al.  Community Genomic and Proteomic Analyses of Chemoautotrophic Iron-Oxidizing “Leptospirillum rubarum” (Group II) and “Leptospirillum ferrodiazotrophum” (Group III) Bacteria in Acid Mine Drainage Biofilms , 2009, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[7]  Gary J. Vora,et al.  Method development for metaproteomic analyses of marine biofilms. , 2012, Analytical chemistry.

[8]  K. Riedel,et al.  Environmental proteomics: Analysis of structure and function of microbial communities , 2010, Proteomics.

[9]  Maron Pierre-Alain,et al.  Protein Extraction and Fingerprinting Optimization of Bacterial Communities in Natural Environment , 2007, Microbial Ecology.

[10]  K. Laukens,et al.  Preparation of protein extracts from recalcitrant plant tissues: An evaluation of different methods for two‐dimensional gel electrophoresis analysis , 2005, Proteomics.

[11]  B. Erickson,et al.  Experimental approach for deep proteome measurements from small-scale microbial biomass samples. , 2008, Analytical chemistry.

[12]  Emanuel Schmid,et al.  Soil metaproteomics – Comparative evaluation of protein extraction protocols , 2012, Soil biology & biochemistry.

[13]  W Wesley Dowd,et al.  Challenges for biological interpretation of environmental proteomics data in non-model organisms. , 2012, Integrative and comparative biology.

[14]  K. Reardon,et al.  Environmental proteomics: applications of proteome profiling in environmental microbiology and biotechnology. , 2008, Briefings in functional genomics & proteomics.

[15]  M. Rillig,et al.  Improving soil protein extraction for metaproteome analysis and glomalin‐related soil protein detection , 2009, Proteomics.

[16]  W. Hurkman,et al.  Solubilization of plant membrane proteins for analysis by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. , 1986, Plant physiology.

[17]  Eoin L. Brodie,et al.  Direct cellular lysis/protein extraction protocol for soil metaproteomics. , 2010, Journal of proteome research.

[18]  L. Zhang,et al.  HPLC-MS/MS shotgun proteomic research of deer antlers with multiparallel protein extraction methods. , 2010, Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences.

[19]  Xi Jinghui,et al.  Evaluation of extraction procedures for 2-DE analysis of aphid proteins. , 2013, Journal of separation science.

[20]  Vincent J. Denef,et al.  Systems Biology: Functional analysis of natural microbial consortia using community proteomics , 2009, Nature Reviews Microbiology.

[21]  Paul Wilmes,et al.  Metaproteomics: studying functional gene expression in microbial ecosystems. , 2006, Trends in microbiology.