A method to prevent cross contamination during 2-DE by β-amyloid peptides
ABSTRACT A method for the efficient decontamination of aluminium oxide ceramic 2-DE focusing trays from β-amyloid peptides (Aβ) is reported. As these contaminations were resistant to the standard cleaning procedures, additional harsh cleaning steps were necessary for their efficient removal. Our observations suggest that specific surface properties affect the degree of adsorption of the Aβ-peptides. "Surface catalysed amyloid aggregation" in the aluminium oxide ceramic trays is proposed as a possible underlying mechanism for the occurrence of proteinase K-resistant forms of Aβ.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In this study, we report a detailed analysis of the different variants of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides in the brains and the cerebrospinal fluid from APP23 transgenic mice, expressing amyloid precursor protein with the Swedish familial Alzheimer disease mutation, at different ages. Using one- and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis, immunoblotting, and mass spectrometry, we identified the Aβ peptides Aβ(1-40), -(1-42), -(1-39), -(1-38), -(1-37), -(2-40), and -(3-40) as well as minor amounts of pyroglutamate-modified Aβ (Aβ(N3pE)) and endogenous murine Aβ in brains from 24-month-old mice. Chemical modifications of the N-terminal amino group of Aβ were identified that had clearly been introduced during standard experimental procedures. To address this issue, we additionally applied amyloid extraction in ultrapure water. Clear differences between APP23 mice and Alzheimer disease (AD) brain samples were observed in terms of the relative abundance of specific variants of Aβ peptides, such as Aβ(N3pE), Aβ(1-42), and N-terminally truncated Aβ(2/3-42). These differences to human AD amyloid were also noticed in a related mouse line transgenic for human wild type amyloid precursor protein. Taken together, our findings suggest different underlying molecular mechanisms driving the amyloid deposition in transgenic mice and AD patients.Journal of Biological Chemistry 07/2011; 286(39):33747-58. DOI:10.1074/jbc.M111.246561 · 4.60 Impact Factor