GNPS 01212021_Chelomics-versus-native-metabolomics_benchmarking_data
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
INSTRUMENT(S): Q Exactive
ORGANISM(S): Escherichia Coli (ncbitaxon:562) Not Applicable
SUBMITTER: 
Pieter C. Dorrestein
PROVIDER: MSV000086744 | GNPS | Thu Jan 21 15:27:00 GMT 2021
REPOSITORIES: GNPS
Similar Datasets
Project description:Description I. Exp Design 1. Type of experiment: Comparison of native versus cultured RPE cells 2. Experimental factors: Native RPE versus ARPE-19 cells grown in different culture conditions 3. How many hybridizations in exp: 20 4. If a common reference used for all the hybs: no 5. Quality control steps: three independent arrays for each condition, and five different donor globes for native RPE 6. Description: The expression profile of ARPE-19 cells grown under different culture conditions were compared to morphologically normal native macular RPE cells that were laser capture microdissected from 5 donors. II. Samples used, extract prep, and labeling 1. Biosource: Human donor globes from NDRI and Sierra Eye and Tissue Bank, and ARPE-19 cells. 2. Manipulations: Human donor globes were cryopreserved, and morphologically normal RPE cells from the macula were laser capture micodissected. ARPE-19 cells were grown on different matrices (subconfluent culture density in presence of serum, confluent culture density in presence of serum, confluent culture density with serum withdrawn medium, differentiated (grown for 2.5 months) in serum, and differentiated (grown for 2.5 months) and then serum withdrawn medium). 3. Extract preparation: Total RNA from cells were extracted with the RNeasy kit (Qiagen) using the manufacturer's instructions. 4. Labeling protocol: Total RNA from cells was reverse transcribed with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP, and second strand cDNA was labeled with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP. 5. No external controls were added. III. Hybridization procedures and parameters 1. Sample, array type, batch and serial # used 2. Hybridization protocol: Hybridization was carried out using the manufacturer's recommendations. Arrays were prehybridized with Microhyb solution containing denatured Cot-1 DNA and poly dA at 42oC for two hours. Hybridization was carried out at 42oC overnight using a hybridization oven set at 8-10 rpm. Arrays were washed twice at 50oC for 20 minutes using 2x SSC, 1%SDS and once at room temperature for 15 minutes using 0.5x SSC, 1%SDS. IV. Measurement data and specifications of data processing 1,2. Arrays were exposed to a phosphorimaging screen for 3 days and scanned at 50 mm resolution with a BioRad FX Pro-Plus phosphorimager. TIFF images from the phosphorimager were exported into ResGen Pathways 3 software for analysis. 3. Data processing: A gene was expressed if its background subtracted intensity was greater than 1.4 fold background. The data were normalized using a simple global scaling procedure, and Cluster/Treeview and Statistical Analysis of Microarrays (SAM version 1.12) programs were used for analysis. Keywords: other
2004-10-13 | GSE1836 | GEO
Project description:Description I. Exp Design 1. Type of experiment: Comparison of native versus cultured RPE cells 2. Experimental factors: Native RPE versus ARPE-19 cells grown in different culture conditions 3. How many hybridizations in exp: 20 4. If a common reference used for all the hybs: no 5. Quality control steps: three independent arrays for each condition, and five different donor globes for native RPE 6. Description: The expression profile of ARPE-19 cells grown under different culture conditions were compared to morphologically normal native macular RPE cells that were laser capture microdissected from 5 donors. II. Samples used, extract prep, and labeling 1. Biosource: Human donor globes from NDRI and Sierra Eye and Tissue Bank, and ARPE-19 cells. 2. Manipulations: Human donor globes were cryopreserved, and morphologically normal RPE cells from the macula were laser capture micodissected. ARPE-19 cells were grown on different matrices (subconfluent culture density in presence of serum, confluent culture density in presence of serum, confluent culture density with serum withdrawn medium, differentiated (grown for 2.5 months) in serum, and differentiated (grown for 2.5 months) and then serum withdrawn medium). 3. Extract preparation: Total RNA from cells were extracted with the RNeasy kit (Qiagen) using the manufacturer's instructions. 4. Labeling protocol: Total RNA from cells was reverse transcribed with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP, and second strand cDNA was labeled with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP. 5. No external controls were added. III. Hybridization procedures and parameters 1. Sample, array type, batch and serial # used 2. Hybridization protocol: Hybridization was carried out using the manufacturer's recommendations. Arrays were prehybridized with Microhyb solution containing denatured Cot-1 DNA and poly dA at 42oC for two hours. Hybridization was carried out at 42oC overnight using a hybridization oven set at 8-10 rpm. Arrays were washed twice at 50oC for 20 minutes using 2x SSC, 1%SDS and once at room temperature for 15 minutes using 0.5x SSC, 1%SDS. IV. Measurement data and specifications of data processing 1,2. Arrays were exposed to a phosphorimaging screen for 3 days and scanned at 50 mm resolution with a BioRad FX Pro-Plus phosphorimager. TIFF images from the phosphorimager were exported into ResGen Pathways 3 software for analysis. 3. Data processing: A gene was expressed if its background subtracted intensity was greater than 1.4 fold background. The data were normalized using a simple global scaling procedure, and Cluster/Treeview and Statistical Analysis of Microarrays (SAM version 1.12) programs were used for analysis.
2010-06-05 | E-GEOD-1836 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:transcription profiling of native and introduced populations of common ragweed in four treatments to identify candidate genes involved in invasion
2013-03-01 | E-MTAB-1350 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Statin-induced gene expression differences observed in LCLs may be influenced by their transformation, and thus differ from those observed in native B-cells. To assess this possibility, we prepared LCLs and purified B-cells from the same donors, and compared mRNA profiles after 24hr incubation with simvastatin (2µM) or sham buffer.
2013-11-12 | GSE51444 | GEO
Project description:I. Exp Design 1. Type of experiment: Comparison of native versus cultured RPE cells 2. Experimental factors: Native RPE versus ARPE-19 cells grown on different matrices 3. How many hybridizations in exp: 21 4. If a common reference used for all the hybs: no 5. Quality control steps: three independent arrays for each condition 6. Description: The expression profile of ARPE-19 cells grown on different matrices were compared to morphologically normal native macular RPE cells that were laser capture microdissected from 3 donors. II. Samples used, extract prep, and labeling 1. Biosource: Human donor globes from NDRI (63, 71, 74 years old) and ARPE-19 cells. 2. Manipulations: Human donor globes were cryopreserved, and morphologically normal RPE cells from the macula were laser capture micodissected. ARPE-19 cells were grown on different matrices (plastic, Matrigel, collagen I, collagen IV, laminin, and fibronectin). 3. Extract preparation: Total RNA from cells were extracted with the RNeasy kit (Qiagen) using the manufacturer’s instructions. 4. Labeling protocol: Total RNA from cells was reverse transcribed with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP, and second strand cDNA was labeled with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP. 5. No external controls were added. III. Hybridization procedures and parameters 1. Sample, array type, batch and serial # used 2. Hybridization protocol: Hybridization was carried out using the manufacturer’s recommendations. Arrays were prehybridized with Microhyb solution containing denatured Cot-1 DNA and poly dA at 42oC for two hours. Hybridization was carried out at 42oC overnight using a hybridization oven set at 8-10 rpm. Arrays were washed twice at 50oC for 20 minutes using 2x SSC, 1%SDS and once at room temperature for 15 minutes using 0.5x SSC, 1%SDS. IV. Measurement data and specifications of data processing 1,2. Arrays were exposed to a phosphorimaging screen for 3 days and scanned at 50 mm resolution with a BioRad FX Pro-Plus phosphorimager. TIFF images from the phosphorimager were exported into ResGen Pathways 3 software for analysis. 3. Data processing: A gene was expressed if its background subtracted intensity was greater than 1.4 fold background. The data were normalized using a simple global scaling procedure, and Cluster/Treeview and Statistical Analysis of Microarrays (SAM version 1.12) programs were used for analysis. Keywords: other
2003-10-15 | GSE741 | GEO
Project description:I. Exp Design 1. Type of experiment: Comparison of native versus cultured RPE cells 2. Experimental factors: Native RPE versus ARPE-19 cells grown on different matrices 3. How many hybridizations in exp: 21 4. If a common reference used for all the hybs: no 5. Quality control steps: three independent arrays for each condition 6. Description: The expression profile of ARPE-19 cells grown on different matrices were compared to morphologically normal native macular RPE cells that were laser capture microdissected from 3 donors. II. Samples used, extract prep, and labeling 1. Biosource: Human donor globes from NDRI (63, 71, 74 years old) and ARPE-19 cells. 2. Manipulations: Human donor globes were cryopreserved, and morphologically normal RPE cells from the macula were laser capture micodissected. ARPE-19 cells were grown on different matrices (plastic, Matrigel, collagen I, collagen IV, laminin, and fibronectin). 3. Extract preparation: Total RNA from cells were extracted with the RNeasy kit (Qiagen) using the manufacturerâs instructions. 4. Labeling protocol: Total RNA from cells was reverse transcribed with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP, and second strand cDNA was labeled with 33P-dCTP and 33P-dATP. 5. No external controls were added. III. Hybridization procedures and parameters 1. Sample, array type, batch and serial # used 2. Hybridization protocol: Hybridization was carried out using the manufacturerâs recommendations. Arrays were prehybridized with Microhyb solution containing denatured Cot-1 DNA and poly dA at 42oC for two hours. Hybridization was carried out at 42oC overnight using a hybridization oven set at 8-10 rpm. Arrays were washed twice at 50oC for 20 minutes using 2x SSC, 1%SDS and once at room temperature for 15 minutes using 0.5x SSC, 1%SDS. IV. Measurement data and specifications of data processing 1,2. Arrays were exposed to a phosphorimaging screen for 3 days and scanned at 50 mm resolution with a BioRad FX Pro-Plus phosphorimager. TIFF images from the phosphorimager were exported into ResGen Pathways 3 software for analysis. 3. Data processing: A gene was expressed if its background subtracted intensity was greater than 1.4 fold background. The data were normalized using a simple global scaling procedure, and Cluster/Treeview and Statistical Analysis of Microarrays (SAM version 1.12) programs were used for analysis.
2010-06-05 | E-GEOD-741 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:RNAs are often studied in non-native sequence contexts to facilitate structural studies. However, seemingly innocuous changes to an RNA sequence may perturb the native structure and generate inaccurate or ambiguous structural models. To facilitate the investigation of native RNA secondary structure by selective 2′ hydroxyl acylation analyzed by primer extension (SHAPE), we engineered an approach that couples minimal enzymatic steps to RNA chemical probing and mutational profiling (MaP) reverse transcription (RT) methods - a process we call template switching and mutational profiling (Switch-MaP). In Switch-MaP, RT templates and additional library sequences are added post-probing through ligation and template switching, capturing reactivities for every nucleotide. For a candidate SAM-I riboswitch, we compared RNA structure models generated by the Switch-MaP approach to those of traditional primer-based MaP, including RNAs with or without appended structure cassettes. Primer-based MaP masked reactivity data in the 5′ and 3′ ends of the RNA, producing ambiguous ensembles inconsistent with the conserved SAM-I riboswitch secondary structure. Structure cassettes enabled unambiguous modeling of an aptamer construct but introduced non-native interactions in the full-length riboswitch. In contrast, Switch-MaP provided reactivity data for each nucleotide in each RNA and enabled unambiguous modeling of secondary structure, consistent with the conserved SAM-I fold. Switch-MaP is an alternative approach to primer-based and cassette-based chemical probing methods that precludes primer masking and the formation of alternative secondary structures due to non-native sequence elements.
2024-12-26 | GSE274121 | GEO
Project description:Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons detect sensory inputs and are crucial for pain processing. They are often studied in vitro as dissociated cell cultures with the assumption that this reasonably represents in vivo conditions. However, to our knowledge, no study has directly compared genome-wide transcriptomes of DRG tissue in vivo versus in vitro, or between laboratories and culturing protocols. Comparing RNA sequencing-based transcriptomes of native to cultured (4 days in vitro) human or mouse DRG, we found that the overall expression levels of many ion channels and GPCRs specifically expressed in neurons are markedly lower although still expressed in culture. This suggests that most pharmacological targets expressed in vivo are present under the condition of dissociated cell culture, but with changes in expression levels. The reduced relative expression for neuronal genes in human DRG cultures is likely accounted for by increased expression of genes in fibroblast-like and other proliferating cells, consistent with their mitotic status in these cultures. We found that the expression of a subset of genes typically expressed in neurons increased in human and mouse DRG cultures relative to the intact ganglion, including genes associated with nerve injury or inflammation in preclinical models such as BDNF, MMP9, GAL, and ATF3. We also found a striking upregulation of a number of inflammation-associated genes in DRG cultures, although many were different between mouse and human. Our findings suggest an injury-like phenotype in DRG cultures that has important implications for the use of this model system for pain drug discovery. Related datasets : Human datasets are present in the dbGaP study id phs001158.v3.p1 . Use the sample attribute "Project id" to determine which samples In that were used for thie project "Pharmacological target focused transcriptomic analysis of native versus cultured human and mouse dorsal root ganglia"
2019-11-26 | GSE140964 | GEO
Project description:This dataset contains native mass spectrometry data for the purified AflR-DBD (DNA-binding domain) protein. The experiment was performed to determine the accurate molecular mass of the protein using native electrospray ionization conditions. The protein was analyzed in 150 mM ammonium acetate buffer using a Q Exactive UHMR mass spectrometer with nanoESI ionization.
2025-08-08 | PXD067110 |
Project description:A comprehensive transcriptomic and proteomic characterization of native HUVEC and HUVEC grown on collagen-coated Xellulin and collagen-coated conventional cell culture plastic from six donors, a total of 28 samples/libraries in 3 groups (1) Native HUVEC freshly isolated from six umbilical cords and then propagated (passage 0) (2) Ten samples of HUVEC passage 1 cultured on Xell-Discs Xellulin (3) twelve samples HUVEC passage 1 cultured in standard plastic cell culture
2016-11-30 | E-MTAB-4747 | biostudies-arrayexpress