Biophysical Characterization of Proteins in the Post-genomic Era of Proteomics*

  1. Kenneth E. Neet§ and
  2. J. Ching Lee
  1. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Finch University of Health Sciences/Chicago Medical School, North Chicago, Illinois 60064
  2. Department of Human Biological Chemistry and Genetics, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas 77555-1055
  1. §To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Finch UHS/Chicago Medical School, 3333 Green Bay Rd., N. Chicago, IL 60064. Email: neetk{at}finchcms.edu

Abstract

Proteomics focuses on the high throughput study of the expression, structure, interactions, and, to some extent, function of large numbers of proteins. A true understanding of the functioning of a living cell also requires a quantitative description of the stoichiometry, kinetics, and energetics of each protein complex in a cellular pathway. Classical molecular biophysical studies contribute to understanding of these detailed properties of proteins on a smaller scale than does proteomics in that individual proteins are usually studied. This perspective article deals with the role of biophysical methods in the study of proteins in the proteomic era. Several important physical biochemical methods are discussed briefly and critiqued from the standpoint of information content and data acquisition. The focus is on conformational changes and macromolecular assembly, the utility of dynamic and static structural data, and the necessity to combine experimental approaches to obtain a full functional description. The conclusions are that biophysical information on proteins is a useful adjunct to “standard” proteomic methods, that data can be obtained by high throughput technology in some instances, but that hypothesis-driven experimentation may frequently be required.

Footnotes

  • Published, MCP Papers in Press, June 24, 2002, DOI 10.1074/mcp.R200003-MCP200

  • 1 The abbreviations used are: CD, circular dichroism; ECD, extracellular domain; NGF, nerve growth factor.

  • * This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grants NS24380 (to K. E. N.), NS36700 (to K. E. N.), and GM-45579 (to J. C. L.) and by Robert A. Welch Foundation Grants E-013 and E-1238 (to J. C. L.). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

    • Received June 19, 2002.
« Previous | Next Article »Table of Contents
  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
Advertisement