• Candida Vaz
  • Vivek TanavdeEmail author


Study of the complete proteins from a source and the techniques implied to study these proteins and their interactions is the fundamental of proteomics. The three-dimensional map of the proteins and their interactions delineates their importance and functioning in an organism. These studies are initiated at the protein level sometimes tracing back to their genes. The alternative splicing phenomenon in the eukaryotes selectively enriches the proteome diversity. Structural proteomics takes into consideration the three-dimensional structure of proteins helping in the structure-based rational drug designing procedure. On the other hand, the functional proteomics is largely focused on understanding the protein expression at the cellular level, protein modifications, protein interactions, signalling and disease mechanisms. The field has gained momentum with the advent of technology where different techniques such as X-ray, NMR, mass spectroscopy, HPLC and two-dimensional PAGE have resulted in the generation of enormous experimental data.

It is difficult to keep up with the colossal amount of experimental data generated through various protein detection methods. The analysis done through bioinformatics procedures involving algorithms, databases and pipelines for computational analysis enables faster and accurate analysis done over a couple of days. Through databases and resource portals, data management, storage and sharing have made it easier for researchers to obtain and collate data accelerating proteomics research.

This chapter is an effort to describe in detail the various dimensions of the proteomics studies covering the structural and functional aspects. A brief overview of all the techniques involved in studying the proteome is given facilitating the reader to incorporate the ideas in their research planning. The immense importance of the domain in biomarker discovery and elucidation of protein-protein/drug interactions.

Proteomics in combination with other complementary technologies like genomics and transcriptomics (a systems-level approach) has an enormous potential to answer several unanswered questions in biology.


Proteomics Proteogenomics Protein diversity Drug discovery 


  1. Abbott, A. (1999). A post-genomic challenge: Learning to read patterns of protein synthesis. Nature, 402(6763), 715–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alwine, J. C., Kemp, D. J., & Stark, G. R. (1977). Method for detection of specific RNAs in agarose gels by transfer to diazobenzyloxymethyl-paper and hybridization with DNA probes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 74(12), 5350–5354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, L., & Seilhamer, J. (1997). A comparison of selected mRNA and protein abundances in human liver. Electrophoresis, 18(3–4), 533–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Audagnotto M., & Dal Peraro M. (2017 Mar 31). Protein post-translational modifications: In silico prediction tools and molecular modeling. Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal, 15:307–319. doi: eCollection 2017. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berman, H. M. (2008). The Protein Data Bank: A historical perspective. Acta Crystallographica A, 64(Pt 1), 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blackstock, W. P., & Weir, M. P. (1999). Proteomics: Quantitative and physical mapping of cellular proteins. Trends in Biotechnology, 17(3), 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradford, M. M. (1976). A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry, 72, 248–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burnette, W. N. (1981). “Western blotting”: Electrophoretic transfer of proteins from sodium dodecyl sulfate--polyacrylamide gels to unmodified nitrocellulose and radiographic detection with antibody and radioiodinated protein A. Analytical Biochemistry, 112(2), 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colledge, M., & Scott, J. D. (1999). AKAPs: From structure to function. Trends in Cell Biology, 9(6), 216–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Costa, T. R. D., Ignatiou, A., & Orlova, E. V. (2017). Structural analysis of protein complexes by cryo electron microscopy. Methods in Molecular Biology, 1615, 377–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Castro, E., et al. (2006). ScanProsite: Detection of PROSITE signature matches and ProRule-associated functional and structural residues in proteins. Nucleic Acids Research, 34(Web Server issue), W362–W365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gasteiger, E., et al. (2003). ExPASy: The proteomics server for in-depth protein knowledge and analysis. Nucleic Acids Research, 31(13), 3784–3788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ghaemmaghami, S., et al. (2003). Global analysis of protein expression in yeast. Nature, 425(6959), 737–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ghorbani, M., Ghorbani, F., & Karimi, H. (2016). Bioinformatics tools for protein analysis. IJSRST, 2(4).
  15. Gupta, N., et al. (2007). Whole proteome analysis of post-translational modifications: Applications of mass-spectrometry for proteogenomic annotation. Genome Research, 17(9), 1362–1377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gupta, N., et al. (2008). Comparative proteogenomics: Combining mass spectrometry and comparative genomics to analyze multiple genomes. Genome Research, 18(7), 1133–1142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gygi, S. P., et al. (1999a). Correlation between protein and mRNA abundance in yeast. Molecular and Cellular Biology, 19(3), 1720–1730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gygi, S. P., et al. (1999b). Quantitative analysis of complex protein mixtures using isotope-coded affinity tags. Nature Biotechnology, 17(10), 994–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Haynes, P. A., & Yates, J. R., 3rd. (2000). Proteome profiling-pitfalls and progress. Yeast, 17(2), 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hillenkamp, F., et al. (1991). Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry of biopolymers. Analytical Chemistry, 63(24), 1193A–1203A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ho, C. S., et al. (2003). Electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry: Principles and clinical applications. Clinical Biochemist Review, 24(1), 3–12.Google Scholar
  22. Ideker, T., et al. (2001a). Integrated genomic and proteomic analyses of a systematically perturbed metabolic network. Science, 292(5518), 929–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ideker, T., Galitski, T., & Hood, L. (2001b). A new approach to decoding life: Systems biology. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 2, 343–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ilari, A., & Savino, C. (2008). Protein structure determination by x-ray crystallography. Methods in Molecular Biology, 452, 63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. James, P. (1997). Protein identification in the post-genome era: The rapid rise of proteomics. Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics, 30(4), 279–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kirschner, M. (1999). Intracellular proteolysis. Trends in Cell Biology, 9(12), M42–M45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Klose, J. (1975). Protein mapping by combined isoelectric focusing and electrophoresis of mouse tissues. A novel approach to testing for induced point mutations in mammals. Humangenetik, 26(3), 231–243.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Kohler, G., & Milstein, C. (2005). Continuous cultures of fused cells secreting antibody of predefined specificity. 1975. Journal of Immunology, 174(5), 2453–2455.Google Scholar
  29. Krishna, R. G., & Wold, F. (1993). Post-translational modification of proteins. Advances in Enzymology and Related Areas of Molecular Biology, 67, 265–298.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Laemmli, U. K. (1970). Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature, 227(5259), 680–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lequin, R. M. (2005). Enzyme immunoassay (EIA)/enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Clinical Chemistry, 51(12), 2415–2418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lowry, O. H., et al. (1951). Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 193(1), 265–275.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Margreitter, C., Petrov, D., & Zagrovic, B. (2013). Vienna-PTM web server: A toolkit for MD simulations of protein post-translational modifications. Nucleic Acids Res, 41(Web Server issue), W422–W426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Melton, L. (2004). Protein arrays: Proteomics in multiplex. Nature, 429(6987), 101–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Newman, A. (1998). RNA splicing. Current Biology, 8(25), R903–R905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Farrell, P. H. (1975). High resolution two-dimensional electrophoresis of proteins. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 250(10), 4007–4021.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Pappin, D. J., Hojrup, P., & Bleasby, A. J. (1993). Rapid identification of proteins by peptide-mass fingerprinting. Current Biology, 3(6), 327–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Price, P. (1991). Standard definitions of terms relating to mass spectrometry: A report from the committee on measurements and standards of the American society for mass spectrometry. Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2(4), 336–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rout, M. P., et al. (2000). The yeast nuclear pore complex: Composition, architecture, and transport mechanism. Journal of Cell Biology, 148(4), 635–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sampath, P., Lee, Q. Y., & Tanavde, V. (2011). Identifying translationally regulated genes during stem cell differentiation. Current Protocols in Stem Cell Biology, Chapter 1, Unit1B 8.Google Scholar
  41. Schirmer, E. C., Yates, J. R., 3rd, & Gerace, L. (2003). MudPIT: A powerful proteomics tool for discovery. Discovery Medicine, 3(18), 38–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. UniProt, C. (2015). UniProt: A hub for protein information. Nucleic Acids Research, 43(Database issue), D204–D212.Google Scholar
  43. Wasinger, V. C., et al. (1995). Progress with gene-product mapping of the Mollicutes: Mycoplasma genitalium. Electrophoresis, 16(7), 1090–1094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wuthrich, K. (2001). The way to NMR structures of proteins. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 8(11), 923–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bioinformatics InstituteAgency for Science Technology and Research (A*STAR)SingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Division of Biological and Life Sciences, School of Arts and SciencesAhmedabad UniversityAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations