• Larry Fowler
  • Wieslaw Furmaga
Part of the Molecular Pathology Library book series (MPLB, volume 2)


“Omics” is a term designating a complete analysis of biological systems in which entire metabolic pathways are studied. “Omics” changes the methodological approach from small-scale research of one gene, one protein, or one metabolic reaction to the large comprehensive level of synthetic study in which the entire genome, protein composition, or metabolic pathway is studied simultaneously. The main breakthrough to the “omics era” was a confirmation of the complete human genome sequence. Entering this new research territory was possible because of an improvement in scientific instrumentation that has been able to perform high-sensitivity testing at high-throughput mode. The software-directed, “walk-away” DNA and protein microarray or highly sensitive, operator-friendly mass spectrometry have become a driving force for omics research.

These instruments become data factories that produce enormous amounts of information, transcending the capacity of the human brain. The need to store and analyze such a large amount of data has stimulated the advancement of new bioinformatics tools that contribute significantly to the development of “omics” disciplines. Despite its short history, this comprehensive methodology has proved its effectiveness by advancing our understanding of physiological and pathological processes, which brings hope for more accurate diagnosis and treatment of diseases.1


High Performance Liquid Chromatography Protein Identification Imaging Mass Spectrometry Proteomics Investigation Instrumental Sensitivity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Gygi SP, Rochon Y, Franza BR, Aebersold R. Correlation between protein and mRNA abundance in yeast. Mol Cell Biol. 1999;19:1720–1730.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karin DR. Proteomics and cancer diagnosis: the potential of mass spectrometry. Clin Biochem. 2004;37:579–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Patterson DS. Proteomics: beginning to realize its promise? Arthritis Rheum. 2004;12:3741–3744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Check E. Proteomics and cancer: running before we can walk? Nature. 2004;429:496–497.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Petricoin FE III, Ardekani MA, Hitt AB, et al. Use of proteomics patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer. Lancet. 2002;359:572–577.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Conrads TP, Fusaro VA, Ross S, et al. High resolution serum proteomic features for ovarian cancer detection. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2004;11:163–178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderson NL, Anderson NG. The human plasma proteome: history, character and diagnostic prospects. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2002;1:845–867.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Diamandis E. Analysis of serum proteomics pattern for early cancer diagnosis: drawing attention to potential problems. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:353–356.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lowenthal MS, Mehta AI, Frogale K, et al. Analysis of albumin-associated peptides and proteins from ovarian cancer patients. Clin Chem. 2005;51:1933–1945.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gillette MA, Mani DR, Carr SA. Place of pattern in proteomics biomarker discovery. J Proteome Res. 2005;4:1143–1154.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matthiesen R. Methods, algorithms and tools in computational proteomics: a practical point of view. Proteomics. 2007;7:2815–2832.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henzel WJ, Stults JT, Wong SC, et al. Identifying proteins from two-dimensional gels by molecular mass searching of peptide fragments in protein sequence databases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993;90:5011–5015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mann M, Wilm M. Error-tolerant identification of peptides in sequence databases by peptide sequence tags. Anal Chem. 1994; 66:4390–4399.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eng JK, McCormack AL, Yates JR. An approach to correlate tandem mass spectral data of peptides with amino acid sequences in a protein database. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 1994;5:976–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hjero K. Protein identification by PMF. Methods Mol Biol. 2006;367:61–76.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hjero K, Hojrup P. Calibration of matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight peptide mass fingerprinting spectra. Methods Mol Biol. 2006;367:49–60.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Matthiesen R, Bunkenborg J, Stensballe A, Jensen ON. Database independent, database-dependent and extended interpretation of peptide mass spectra in VEMS V2.0. Proteomics. 2004;4:2583–2593.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Craig R, Cortens JC, Fenyo D, Beavis RC. Using annotated peptide mass spectrum libraries for protein identification. J Proteome Res. 2006;5:1843–1849.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Matthiesen R. Extracting monoisotopic single-charge peaks from liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry. Methods Mol Biol. 2006;367:37–48.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moritz B, Meyer HE. Approaches for the quantify cation of protein concentration ratios. Proteomics. 2003;3:2208–2220.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Consoli L, Damerval C. Quantification of individual zein isoforms resolved by two-dimensional electrophoresis: genetic variability in 45 maize inbred lines. Electrophoresis. 2001;22:2983–2989.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Thiedea B, Höhenwarterb W, Kraha A, et al. Peptide mass fingerprinting. Methods. 2005;35:237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Godovac-Zimmermann J, Kleiner O, Brown RL, Drukier KA. Perspectives in spicing up proteomics with splicing. Proteomics. 2005;5:699–709.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Karas M, Bachnann D, Bahr U, Hillenkamp F. Matrix-assisted ultraviolet laser desorption of non-volatile compounds. Int J Mass Spectrom Ion Process. 1987;78:53–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Burtis AC, Ashwood RE, Burns D. Tietz Textbook of Clinical Chemistry and Molecular Diagnosis, 4th edn. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2006:170.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Loboda AV, Krutchinsky AN, Bromirski M, et al A tandem quadrupole/time-of-flight mass spectrometer with a matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization source: design and performance. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom 2000;14:1047–1057.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chaurand P, Caprioli MR. Direct profiling and imaging of peptides and proteins from mammalian cells and tissue sections by mass spectrometry. Electrophoresis. 2002;23:3125–3135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Groseclose MR, Andersson M, Hardesty WM, Caprioli RM. Identification of proteins directly from tissue: in situ tryptic digestions coupled with imaging mass spectrometry. J Mass Spectrom. 2007;42:254–262.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lemaire R, Menguellet S, Stauber J, et al. Specific MALDI imaging and profiling for biomarker hunting and validation: fragment of the 11S proteasome activator complex, Reg alpha fragment, is a new potential ovary cancer biomarker. J Proteome Res. 2007;6: 4127–4134.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stoeckli M, Farmer TB, Caprioli RM. Automated mass spectrometry imaging with a matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight instrument. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 1999;10:67–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Poetz O, Schwenk MJ, Kramer S, et al. Protein microarrays: catching the proteome. Mech Ageing Dev. 2005;126:161–170.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Petricoin E, Paweletz C, Liotta L. Clinical applications of proteomics: proteomic pattern diagnostics. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2002;7:433–440.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Petricoin EF, Ardekani AM, Hitt BA, et al. Use of proteomic patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer. Lancet. 2002;359:572–577.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Petricoin EI, Ornstein D, Paweletz C, et al. Serum proteomic patterns for detection of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1576–1578.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhang L, Rosenzweig J, Wang Y, Chan D. Proteomics and bioinformatics approaches for identification of serum biomarkers to detect breast cancer. Clin Chem. 2002;48:1296–1304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rodland DK. Proteomics and cancer diagnosis: the potential of mass spectrometry. Clin Biochem. 2004;37:579–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Reinders J, Lewandrowski U, Moebius J, et al. Challenges in mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Proteomics. 2004;4:3686–3703.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schrader W, Klein WH. Liquid chromatography/Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (LC-FTICR MS): an early overview. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2004;379:1013–1024.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Page JS, Masselon CD. Smith RD. FTICR mass spectrometry for qualitative and quantitative bioanalysis. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2004;15:3–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Takats Z, Kobliha V, Sevcik K, et al. Characterization of DESI-FTICR mass spectrometry: from ECD to accurate mass tissue analysis. J Mass Spectrom. 2008;43:196–203.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Johnson RS, Davis MT, Taylor JA, Patterson SD. Informatics for protein identification by mass spectrometry. Methods 2005;35:223–236.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schmidt F, Schmid M, Jungblut PR, et al. Iterative data analysis is the key for exhaustive analysis of peptide mass fingerprints from proteins separated by two-dimensional electrophoresis. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2004;14:943–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Papayannopoulos IA. The analysis of progressive spectra yields information about the amino acid sequence for the chosen peptide. Mass Spectrom Rev. 1995;14:49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Apweiler R, Bairoch A, Wu CH. Protein sequence databases. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2004;8:76–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Thiedea B, Höhenwarterb W, Kraha A, et al. Peptide mass fingerprinting. Methods. 2005;35:237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Tabb LD, Smith LL, Breci AL, et al. Statistical characterization of ion trap tandem mass spectra from doubly charged tryptic peptides. Anal Chem. 2003;75:1155–1163.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Shadforth I, Crowther D, Bessant C. Protein and peptide identification algorithms using MS for use in high-throughput, automated pipelines. Proteomics. 2005;5:4082–4095.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gygi SP, Corthals GL, Zhang Y, et al. Evaluation of two dimensional gel electrophoresis-based proteome analysis technology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000;97:9390–9395.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lopez-Ferrer D, Martinez-Bartolome S, Villar M, Campillos M. Statistical model for large scale peptide identification in databases from tandem mass spectra using SEQUEST. Anal Chem. 2004;76:6853–6860.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Beausoleil SA, Villen J, Gerber SA, Ruch J, Gygi SP. A probability-base approach for high throughput protein phosphorylation analysis and site localization. Nat Biotechnol. 2006;24:1285–1292.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kleiner O, Price DA, Ossetrova N, et al. Ultra-high sensitivity multi-photon detection imaging in proteomics analyses. Proteomics. 2005;5(9):2322–2330.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Listgarten J, Emili A. Statistical and computational methods for comparative proteomic profiling using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2005;4:419–434.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mann M. Analysis of protein phosphorylation using mass spectrometry: deciphering the phosphoproteome. Trends Biotechnol. 2002;20:261–268.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    MacCoss MJ. Shotgun identification of protein modifications from protein complexes and lens tissue. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99:7900–7905.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mirza SP, Olivier M. Methods and approaches for the comprehensive characterization and quantification of cellular proteomes using mass spectrometry. Physiol Genomics. 2008;33:3–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Goshe MB, Conrads TP, Panisko EA, Angell NH, Veenstra TD, Smith RD. Phosphoprotein isotope-coded affinity tag approach for isolating and quantitating phosphopeptides in proteome-wide analyses. Anal Chem. 2001;73:2578–2586.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Galvani M, Hamdan M, Herbert B, Righetti GP. Alkylation kinetics of proteins in preparation for two-dimensional maps: a matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization - mass spectrometry investigation. Electrophoresis. 2001;22:2058–2065.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Cox DM, Zhong F, Du M, Duchoslav E, Sakuma T, McDermott JC. Multiple reaction monitoring as a method for identifying protein posttranslational modifications. J Biomol Tech. 2005; 16(2):83–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Rotheneder H, Geymayer S, Haidweger E. Transcription factors of the Sp1 family: interaction with E2F and regulation of the murine thymidine kinase promoter. J Mol Biol. 1999;293:1005–1015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Yu C, Dong X. Computational analyses of high-throughput protein-protein interaction data. Curr Protein Peptide Sci. 2003;4:159–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Zhu H, Klemic JF, Chang S, Bertone P, Casamayor A, Klemic K.G, Smith D, Gerstein M, Reed MA, Snyder M. Analysis of yeast protein kinases using protein chips. Nat Gene. 2000;26:283–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Larry Fowler
    • 1
  • Wieslaw Furmaga
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PathologyUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA

Personalised recommendations