Display options
Share it on

Comp Funct Genomics. 2005;6(1):2-16. doi: 10.1002/cfg.449.

Construction, verification and experimental use of two epitope-tagged collections of budding yeast strains.

Comparative and functional genomics

Russell Howson, Won-Ki Huh, Sina Ghaemmaghami, James V Falvo, Kiowa Bower, Archana Belle, Noah Dephoure, Dennis D Wykoff, Jonathan S Weissman, Erin K O'Shea

Affiliations

  1. Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California at San Francisco, 600 16th Street, Genentech Hall, San Francisco, CA 94143-2240, USA.

PMID: 18629296 PMCID: PMC2448600 DOI: 10.1002/cfg.449

Abstract

A major challenge in the post-genomic era is the development of experimental approaches to monitor the properties of proteins on a proteome-wide level. It would be particularly useful to systematically assay protein subcellular localization, post-translational modifications and protein-protein interactions, both at steady state and in response to environmental stimuli. Development of new reagents and methods will enhance our ability to do so efficiently and systematically. Here we describe the construction of two collections of budding yeast strains that facilitate proteome-wide measurements of protein properties. These collections consist of strains with an epitope tag integrated at the C-terminus of essentially every open reading frame (ORF), one with the tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag, and one with the green fluorescent protein (GFP) tag. We show that in both of these collections we have accurately tagged a high proportion of all ORFs (approximately 75% of the proteome) by confirming expression of the fusion proteins. Furthermore, we demonstrate the use of the TAP collection in performing high-throughput immunoprecipitation experiments. Building on these collections and the methods described in this paper, we hope that the yeast community will expand both the quantity and type of proteome level data available.

References

  1. Science. 2000 Sep 8;289(5485):1760-3 - PubMed
  2. Yeast. 1998 Jul;14(10):953-61 - PubMed
  3. Nature. 2003 May 15;423(6937):241-54 - PubMed
  4. Nature. 2003 Mar 13;422(6928):198-207 - PubMed
  5. Science. 2001 Dec 14;294(5550):2364-8 - PubMed
  6. Science. 1995 Oct 20;270(5235):467-70 - PubMed
  7. Science. 2003 Jul 4;301(5629):71-6 - PubMed
  8. Nat Biotechnol. 1996 Dec;14(13):1675-80 - PubMed
  9. Science. 2001 Sep 14;293(5537):2101-5 - PubMed
  10. Science. 1999 Nov 5;286(5442):1153-5 - PubMed
  11. Nature. 2003 Oct 16;425(6959):686-91 - PubMed
  12. Nature. 2003 Oct 16;425(6959):737-41 - PubMed
  13. Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Apr;19(4):2817-27 - PubMed
  14. Nat Genet. 2000 May;25(1):58-62 - PubMed
  15. Yeast. 1998 Jan 30;14(2):115-32 - PubMed
  16. Nature. 2003 Mar 13;422(6928):208-15 - PubMed
  17. Science. 1997 Oct 24;278(5338):680-6 - PubMed

Publication Types