131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33011348)
1. Adding polyvinylpyrrolidone to low level protein samples significantly improves peptide recovery in FASP digests: An inexpensive and simple modification to the FASP protocol.
Tremblay TL; Hill JJ
J Proteomics; 2021 Jan; 230():104000. PubMed ID: 33011348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Modified filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) method increases peptide and protein identifications for shotgun proteomics.
Ni MW; Wang L; Chen W; Mou HZ; Zhou J; Zheng ZG
Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom; 2017 Jan; 31(2):171-178. PubMed ID: 27794190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of In-Solution, FASP, and S-Trap Based Digestion Methods for Bottom-Up Proteomic Studies.
Ludwig KR; Schroll MM; Hummon AB
J Proteome Res; 2018 Jul; 17(7):2480-2490. PubMed ID: 29754492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Filter-Aided Sample Preparation for Proteome Analysis.
Wiśniewski JR
Methods Mol Biol; 2018; 1841():3-10. PubMed ID: 30259475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quick 96FASP for high throughput quantitative proteome analysis.
Yu Y; Bekele S; Pieper R
J Proteomics; 2017 Aug; 166():1-7. PubMed ID: 28669814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Improving Proteome Coverage and Sample Recovery with Enhanced FASP (eFASP) for Quantitative Proteomic Experiments.
Erde J; Loo RR; Loo JA
Methods Mol Biol; 2017; 1550():11-18. PubMed ID: 28188519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Filter Aided Sample Preparation - A tutorial.
Wiśniewski JR
Anal Chim Acta; 2019 Dec; 1090():23-30. PubMed ID: 31655642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of protein and peptide fractionation approaches in protein identification and quantification from Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Deng L; Handler DCL; Multari DH; Haynes PA
J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci; 2021 Jan; 1162():122453. PubMed ID: 33279813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Reliable FASP-based procedures for optimal quantitative proteomic and phosphoproteomic analysis on samples from acute myeloid leukemia patients.
Hernandez-Valladares M; Aasebø E; Mjaavatten O; Vaudel M; Bruserud Ø; Berven F; Selheim F
Biol Proced Online; 2016; 18():13. PubMed ID: 27330413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Enhanced FASP (eFASP) to increase proteome coverage and sample recovery for quantitative proteomic experiments.
Erde J; Loo RR; Loo JA
J Proteome Res; 2014 Apr; 13(4):1885-95. PubMed ID: 24552128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Filter-Aided Sample Preparation: The Versatile and Efficient Method for Proteomic Analysis.
Wiśniewski JR
Methods Enzymol; 2017; 585():15-27. PubMed ID: 28109427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of two FFPE preparation methods using label-free shotgun proteomics: Application to tissues of diverticulitis patients.
Quesada-Calvo F; Bertrand V; Longuespée R; Delga A; Mazzucchelli G; Smargiasso N; Baiwir D; Delvenne P; Malaise M; De Pauw-Gillet MC; De Pauw E; Louis E; Meuwis MA
J Proteomics; 2015 Jan; 112():250-61. PubMed ID: 25218866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparative reevaluation of FASP and enhanced FASP methods by LC-MS/MS.
Nel AJ; Garnett S; Blackburn JM; Soares NC
J Proteome Res; 2015 Mar; 14(3):1637-42. PubMed ID: 25619111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Protein identification and quantification from riverbank grape, Vitis riparia: Comparing SDS-PAGE and FASP-GPF techniques for shotgun proteomic analysis.
George IS; Fennell AY; Haynes PA
Proteomics; 2015 Sep; 15(17):3061-5. PubMed ID: 25929842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Quantitative Evaluation of Filter Aided Sample Preparation (FASP) and Multienzyme Digestion FASP Protocols.
Wiśniewski JR
Anal Chem; 2016 May; 88(10):5438-43. PubMed ID: 27119963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of six sample preparation procedures for qualitative and quantitative proteomics analysis of milk fat globule membrane.
Yang Y; Anderson E; Zhang S
Electrophoresis; 2018 Sep; 39(18):2332-2339. PubMed ID: 29644703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of different digestion methods for proteomic analysis of isolated cells and FFPE tissue samples.
Pirog A; Faktor J; Urban-Wojciuk Z; Kote S; Chruściel E; Arcimowicz Ł; Marek-Trzonkowska N; Vojtesek B; Hupp TR; Al Shboul S; Brennan PM; Smoleński RT; Goodlett DR; Dapic I
Talanta; 2021 Oct; 233():122568. PubMed ID: 34215064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of FASP, SP3, and iST Protocols for Proteomic Sample Preparation in the Low Microgram Range.
Sielaff M; Kuharev J; Bohn T; Hahlbrock J; Bopp T; Tenzer S; Distler U
J Proteome Res; 2017 Nov; 16(11):4060-4072. PubMed ID: 28948796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of Sample Preparation Strategies for Human Milk and Plasma Proteomics.
Milkovska-Stamenova S; Wölk M; Hoffmann R
Molecules; 2021 Nov; 26(22):. PubMed ID: 34833908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Label-Free Quantitative Analysis of Mitochondrial Proteomes Using the Multienzyme Digestion-Filter Aided Sample Preparation (MED-FASP) and "Total Protein Approach".
Wiśniewski JR
Methods Mol Biol; 2017; 1567():69-77. PubMed ID: 28276014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
