Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of main label-based proteomic quantitative techniques

From: Proteomics: a powerful tool to study plant responses to biotic stress

Quantification technique Labeling level Multiplexing capability Reaction localization Amino acid residue MSn Characteristic References
15N labeling Protein 2-plex In vivo and in vitro All MS1 Expensive; need metabolically active cells [193]
SILAC Protein 5-plex In vivo and in vitro Lys, Arg MS1 Applicable to active cells; arginine can be converted into proline during cell division [193]
CTAP Protein 2-plex In vivo and in vitro Lys MS1 Expensive; low multiplexing capability; need stable expression of exogenous enzymes [194]
18O labeling Peptide 2-plex In vitro C-terminal MS1 Enzyme-mediated back-exchange of 18O with 16O [195]
ICAT Protein/peptide 2-plex In vitro Cys MS1 Does not support labels without cysteine-containing peptides [196]
ICPL Protein/peptide 4-plex In vitro Lys MS1 Support clinical samples; need complex computational analysis [197]
TMT Peptide 10-plex In vitro N-terminal, Lys MS2 Expensive; wide application range [198]
iTRAQ Peptide 8-plex In vitro N-terminal, Lys MS2 High throughout, strong stability; expensive [199]
DiLeu Peptide 12-plex In vitro N-terminal and ε-amino group of the lysine side chains MS2 Wide application range [200]
IPTL Peptide 3-plex In vitro Employs SA (for N-terminal) and dimethyl (for C-terminal lysine) tagging MS2 Wide application range [201]
  1. SILAC stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture, CTAP cell-selective labeling with amino acid precursors, ICAT isotope-coded affinity tag, ICPL isotope-coded protein labeling, TMT tandem mass tag, iTRAQ isobaric tag for relative and absolute quantification, DiLeu N,N-dimethyl leucine, IPTL isobaric peptide termini labeling