The majority of protein mass identified in an IP-MS experiment consists of nonspecific proteins. Thus, one of the key challenges of an IP-MS experiment is the interpretation of which proteins are high-confidence interactors vs. nonspecific interactors. To demonstrate the crucial parameters used in the evaluation of data quality the study analyzed triplicate immunoprecipitations from 5 mg of HeLa nuclear extract utilizing a bead only control. The first internal check to ensure that an IP-MS experiment is reliable is whether the bait protein ranks as one of the highest enriched proteins identified by both fold-change over control and SAINT probability. In this case, the bait DYRK1A ranked among the top three enriched proteins over the control (Figure 2A,B). In a nuclear interactome study of DYRK1A utilizing four independent antibodies, an FC-A cutoff of >3.00 and SAINT probability cutoff >0.7 provided a stringent cutoff for identification of both novel and previously validated interactors22. When applied to this experiment, a clear separation could be seen between the high-confidence interactors and >95% of copurified proteins identified as nonspecific (Figure 2A,B). Applying both a fold change enrichment and probability threshold increases stringency by requiring a consistently high enrichment of protein IDs across biological replicates.
In addition to statistical scoring, the CRAPome analysis workflow also maps previously reported interactions onto bait-prey data23. While this mapping can be useful for thresholding high and low-confidence interactions, previously reported interactions can score poorly by FC-A and SAINT probabilities, potentially indicating that many known interactions of a given bait may exist only in specific cell types, contexts, or organelles. For the example DYRK1A dataset, iREF interactor FC-A values were as low as 0.45, representing a very low enrichment over control (Figure 2C). To avoid inflation of false positives, statistical thresholding should be performed in a manner that prioritizes stringency over reduction of false negatives. It should be noted that the detection of these interactions was independent of protein abundance (Figure 2C). Calculated absolute copy number of each iREF interaction within HeLa cells showed no correlation to the detection levels of an interaction partner by IP-MS24.
Cytoscape serves as an effective tool for visualizing multiple layers of interaction data19. In the DYRK1A immunoprecipitation experiment described here, the combined use of FC-A > 3.0 and SAINT > 0.9 reduced the list of high-confidence interactors to six proteins (Figure 2D). However, when applying an FC-A cutoff of > 3.0 in isolation, eight additional proteins were added to the network. These additional protein interactors have high connectivity with the interactors already in the network, suggesting they are associated in similar complexes or functional roles. To this end, evidence from the STRING-DB of protein-protein interactions was integrated into this network as blue dashed lines20. While this single-bait, triplicate experiment provides a limited sample of the full DYRK1A interaction network, the use of additional baits, replicates, and integration of large public data sets can be used to expand the network of high-confidence interactions. The statistical cutoffs will thus be specific to each individual experiment and will need to be evaluated thoroughly.

Figure 1: Representative proteomics workflow for subcellular IP-MS. Cells are grown in either 4 L round bottom flasks or 15 cm tissue culture dishes and harvested at the same time for subcellular fractionation. Cells are fractionated into a cytosolic, nuclear, and a nuclear pellet, and immunoprecipitations are done from 1−10 mg of nuclear lysate using one or multiple antibodies recognizing the same bait. Filter aided sample prep (FASP) and offline sample cleanup are performed prior to single shot mass spectrometry. A downstream computational pipeline is used to process data into interpretable interaction data. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Representative data for a single-bait single-antibody IP-MS experiment. (A) FC-A and SAINT probability output from CRAPome analysis workflow for an optimal experiment using a single antibody for the kinase DYRK1A (n = 3). Beads-only controls were used for comparison. Red solid lines represent cutoffs set at FC-A > 3.00 and SAINT > 0.7. (B) MaxQuant protein abundance estimates (iBAQ) output vs. log2 ratio of protein abundance in DYRK1A IP to control, colored by the adjusted p value range from empirical Bayes analysis of the label-free intensities. (C) FC-A and estimated copy number of proteins listed as interacting proteins in the iRef database23,24. (D) Cytoscape network visualization of DYRK1A interactors. Blue nodes = FC-A > 3.00, SAINT > 0.7. Orange nodes = FC-A > 3.00. Black edges = proteins identified as interactors in IPMS experiment. Blue dashed edge = SAINT interaction between prey protein (confidence > .150). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Protease inhibitor (PI) mixture |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| Sodium Metabisulfite | 1 mM |
| Benzamidine | 1 mM |
| Dithiothreitol (DTT) | 1 mM |
| Phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride (PMSF) | 0.25 mM |
|
| Phosphatase Inhibitor (PhI) mixture |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| Microcystin LR | 1 µM |
| Sodium Orthovanadate | 0.1 mM |
| Sodium fluoride | 5 mM |
|
| Subcellular fractionation Buffers: |
|
| Buffer A pH 7.9 |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| HEPES | 10 mM |
| MgCl2 | 1.5 mM |
| KCl | 10 mM |
|
| Buffer B pH 7.9 |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| HEPES | 20 mM |
| MgCl2 | 1.5 mM |
| NaCl | 420 mM |
| Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) | 0.4 mM |
| Glycerol | 25% (v/v) |
|
| Buffer C pH 7.9 |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| HEPES | 20 mM |
| MgCl2 | 2 mM |
| KCl | 100 mM |
| Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) | 0.4 mM |
| Glycerol | 20% (v/v) |
|
| Immunoprecipitation Buffers: |
|
| IP Buffer 1 |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| HEPES | 20 mM |
| KCl | 150 mM |
| EDTA | 0.1 mM |
| NP-40 | 0.1% (v/v) |
| Glycerol | 10% (v/v) |
|
| IP Buffer 2 |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| HEPES | 20 mM |
| KCl | 500 mM |
| EDTA | 0.1 mM |
| NP-40 | 0.1% (v/v) |
| Glycerol | 10% (v/v) |
|
| SDS Alkylation Buffer pH 8.5 |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| SDS | 4% (v/v) |
| Chloroacetamide | 40 mM |
| TCEP | 10 mM |
| Tris | 100 mM |
|
| UA pH 8.5 |
| Reagent | Final Concentration |
| Urea | 8 M |
| Tris | 0.1 M |
| * use HPLC grade H2O |
Table 1: Buffer compositions
Supplemental Coding Files. Please click here to download this file.